If you took one long-haul flight each year for the past decade, the world would eventually pay about $25,000 for it. You won’t see this charge on your credit card, but the cost shows up somewhere—maybe as a hotter field with less rice, a stronger hurricane, or a factory forced to close on days that are too hot to work. This estimate comes from a Nature study published in March 2026 by researchers at Stanford and the University of California, Berkeley. They created a new way to link damage from specific emissions to certain places and years.

That $25,000 figure is based on the social cost of carbon, a dollar estimate of the harm caused by releasing one ton of carbon dioxide into the air. While it might seem abstract, it is one of the most important numbers in American policy. It helps decide if a fuel-economy rule is worth it and influences permits for pipelines and power plants. Over the last four presidential administrations, this number has been raised, lowered, removed, and brought back. What we think a ton of carbon costs today affects how much the country is willing to do about climate change in the future.

What Is the Social Cost of Carbon?

Think of the cost of carbon like a garbage bill, the metaphor the authors of the Nature study use. When you put trash on the curb, someone has to pick it up, haul it away, and store it somewhere. You pay for that service. Carbon dioxide works the same way, except no one sends an invoice—it’s more like using a credit card, the bill for which your children or great-grandchildren will eventually pay.

Carbon dioxide stays in the atmosphere for centuries, quietly heating the planet, damaging crops, intensifying storms, and wearing down economies. Somebody, somewhere, eventually pays. The social cost of carbon is an attempt to figure out how much.

The number comes from combining climate science with economics. Researchers model how one extra ton of CO₂ affects global temperatures over the next century or two, then estimate how those temperature changes damage human health, farm yields, labor productivity, property, and economic growth. They add up the losses and express them in today’s dollars.

Two technical choices drive almost every disagreement about the final number:

• Global versus domestic damages. Should the United States count the damage that occurs in India, Brazil, or Bangladesh from American emissions? Carbon mixes in the atmosphere — a ton released in Ohio warms the planet the same as a ton released in Mumbai — so the economic case for global accounting is strong. The political case for domestic-only accounting is that the US government works for Americans.
• The discount rate. This is the trickiest piece. Economists “discount” future damages to express them in present-day dollars. A higher discount rate makes future harm look cheap today; a lower one makes it look expensive. Using a 7% discount rate, $1 trillion in climate damage in 2100 is worth only about $4 billion today. Using 3%, the same damage is worth about $86 billion. Same science, same damage, twenty times the present value.

That second choice, how much weight to give your grandchildren’s losses compared to your own savings, is where climate economics becomes a moral question.

A Short History of a Disputed Number

2008: A Court Forces the Issue

Federal agencies ignored carbon pricing for most of the modern regulatory era. That changed after the Center for Biological Diversity sued the Bush administration over weak fuel-economy standards for light trucks and SUVs. In 2008, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that assigning zero value to carbon emissions in cost-benefit analyses was “arbitrary and capricious.” The court stated: “the value of carbon emissions reduction is certainly not zero.”

That decision created a legal obligation. If federal agencies wanted to write rules that survived court review, they had to put a price on carbon. They just did not yet have one they could agree on.

2009–2016: The Obama Administration Sets the Framework

In 2009, President Obama convened an Interagency Working Group of federal economists and scientists. In 2010, the group published its first official estimate of the social cost of carbon: $21 per ton of CO₂.

In the following years, as climate models were updated, the estimate rose, reaching about $50 per ton (2020 dollars) by the end of the Obama years. This value was based on a 3% discount rate and global damages.

That framework, which involved interagency process and peer-reviewed models with global scope, was used in more than 65 federal rules and 81 subrules between 2008 and 2016. It shaped appliance efficiency standards, power plant emission limits, fuel-economy requirements, and rules governing methane leaks from oil and gas infrastructure. A higher social cost of carbon justified stricter rules. A lower one did not.

2017–2020: The First Trump Administration Rewrites the Math

Within months of taking office, President Trump signed Executive Order 13783, disbanding the Interagency Working Group and withdrawing its estimates. The Trump EPA recalculated the social cost of carbon by counting only US damages and raising the discount rate to 3%-7%. As a result, Obama’s $52 per ton estimate fell to between $1 and $7 per ton.

That lower number was, as Resources for the Future explained, “too low to make climate policies economically justifiable.” Rules that had provided a cost-benefit analysis supporting strict emissions rules under Obama suddenly no longer did so. The Clean Power Plan, the centerpiece of Obama’s climate policy, was repealed partly on the grounds that the climate benefits recalculated with the lower number no longer exceeded the costs. According to Scientific American, the change in the social cost of carbon was “determinative” in at least half a dozen petroleum-sector rollbacks during the first Trump term. Simply, it gave emitters an easy out.

2021–2024: Biden Restores, Then Raises, The Price Sharply

Biden reinstated the working group and set an interim value of about $51 per ton, adjusted for inflation. Legal challenges from some states were dismissed.

In November 2023, EPA set a new central estimate for the social cost of carbon: $190 per ton for 2020 emissions, rising to $230 by 2030 and $308 by 2050. This increase drew on updated climate science, new economic models, a lower discount rate of 2%, and two decades of scientific progress clarifying warming’s impact on economic growth, climate-driven mortality, and previously understated risks.

Other governments took note. Canada adopted the updated EPA number in 2023. Germany adapted the underlying model for its own analyses in 2024.

2025: The Second Trump Administration Tries to Erase It

On his first day back in office, January 20, 2025, President Trump signed Executive Order 14154, “Unleashing American Energy,” which disbanded the Interagency Working Group, withdrew its estimates, and directed EPA to consider eliminating the social cost of carbon from federal permitting and regulatory decisions entirely. The order called the metric “marked by logical deficiencies, a poor basis in empirical science, politicization, and the absence of a foundation in legislation.”

In March 2025, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced the agency would “overhaul” the social cost of carbon. In May 2025, a follow-up executive memorandum directed federal agencies to stop factoring climate-related economic damage into their regulations and permitting decisions, except where statute requires it.

Where agencies are still legally obligated to put a number on it, the administration has settled on an interim estimate of as little as $1 per ton of CO₂, a return to the first Trump administration’s methodology, with domestic-only damages and higher discount rates. The companion social cost of methane dropped from $1,470 per ton to $58. In July 2025, the White House guidance went further, instructing agencies that any required analysis  should be limited to “the minimum consideration required to meet a statutory requirement” and, where possible, should not be monetized at all. The practical effect: $1 per ton on paper, $0 in most decisions.

The cycle is now in its third full reversal since 2008. Each time the number changes, so does the federal government’s willingness to regulate emissions.

What the New Research Adds

The new study in Nature does something the federal estimates have never done well: it separates past damage from future damage, and it assigns both to specific emitters. Their framework treats every ton of CO₂ as an asset that pays out negative returns; it’s a garbage bill that keeps accruing interest. Using that framework, they found three things that reshape the conversation.

A ton of CO₂ emitted in 1990 has already caused about $180 in global damages by 2020. That same ton will cause an additional $1,840 in damages between now and 2100 — 10 times more.  Using the authors’ conservative assumptions, which use a 2% discount rate with damages capped at 2100, the social cost of carbon for a ton emitted today is approximately $1,013. That is more than five times the Biden EPA’s $190 estimate, and higher estimates are possible under longer time horizons or lower discount rates.

Settling the bill for climate damage that has already happened would only cover a small fraction of the damage still to come from the same emissions. Past payments do not clear past debts.

Individuals and Corporations Run Up the Carbon Bill

The study also puts numbers on the kinds of choices that fill everyday life.

• One extra long-haul flight per year for a decade produces roughly $25,000 in future discounted damages by 2100.
• Switching from a meat-heavy to a vegetarian diet for a decade avoids about $6,000 in future damages.
• Installing and using a heat pump for a decade results in an additional $6,000 in avoided damage.
• Cutting driving by 10%, another $6,000 less future cost.

At the corporate scale, the numbers are staggering. Emissions from Saudi Aramco’s fossil fuel production between 1988 and 2015 are estimated to cause $64 trillion in cumulative discounted damages through 2100. ExxonMobil’s comparable share: $29 trillion. These are bigger than the annual GDP of most countries.

Today’s Cost, Tomorrow’s Reality

The social cost of carbon can feel like a number on a page in a regulatory document. It is not. It is a bridge between the world you are living in now and the world you will inherit.

When the federal government uses a low social cost of carbon, or no number at all, it writes rules that allow more emissions. More emissions mean a hotter atmosphere, which means stronger storms, longer fire seasons, lower crop yields, higher air conditioning bills, and more days when outdoor work becomes dangerous. Those consequences do not arrive as a lump sum in 2100.

They arrive gradually, starting now, and compounding in the form of flood and wildfire damage, biodiversity loss, and even defense spending to prevent immigration. The Nature researchers emphasize that their estimates are almost certainly too low because GDP damage functions do not capture losses of biodiversity, loss of cultural homelands, harm to mental health, or many slow-moving impacts such as sea level rise.

When the federal government uses a high social cost of carbon, it writes rules that prevent emissions. Those rules have costs today, sometimes real ones, paid by workers in fossil fuel industries, by consumers adjusting to new standards, by companies retooling their operations. The social cost of carbon does not eliminate those costs. It weighs them against costs that will otherwise fall on other people, in other places, at other times. That weighing is a choice about who counts.

The history traced here is, in that sense, a history of that choice, and none of those decisions are final. Courts have repeatedly ruled that federal agencies cannot treat the value of carbon-emissions reductions as zero. The 2008 ruling that gave rise to this framework is still on the books. Whatever the current administration does, the legal obligation to account for climate damages in cost-benefit analysis remains, and the science underpinning the newer, higher estimates continues to strengthen.

The post The Price Tag on a Ton of Carbon: What It Is, Why It Keeps Changing, and What It Means for Your Future appeared first on Earth911.

The average American discards roughly 82 pounds of clothing and textiles each year — and most of it lands in a landfill. According to the EPA, more than 17 million tons of textiles were generated as municipal solid waste in 2018, a figure the U.S. Government Accountability Office confirmed was more than 50% higher than in 2000 due largely to the rise of fast fashion. And the recycling rate for clothing and footwear? Just 13%.

Denim is one of the most salvageable things in that waste stream. Because authentic jeans are made mostly from cotton, a natural, biodegradable fiber, they can be recycled into building insulation, pet bed inserts, and thermal packaging, or given a second life through resale and creative reuse.

Here are five ways to put your worn-out jeans to work, and have some fun doing it.

1. Your unwanted denim can be turned into insulation.

Cotton Incorporated’s Blue Jeans Go Green program has been recycling denim into insulation since 2006. Since then, the program has collected more than 5 million pieces of denim and diverted over 2,290 tons of textile waste from landfills. That recycled fiber gets processed into UltraTouch™ Denim Insulation by Bonded Logic — used in homes, thermal packaging, and pet bedding — with some insulation donated each year to building projects in communities in need.

The program accepts any denim item (jeans, jackets, skirts, shirts) that’s at least 90% cotton, in any condition. Drop off locations include Anthropologie, which has committed to diverting 10 tons through the program, and a rotating list of retail partners you can find on the Blue Jeans Go Green recycle page.

You can also mail denim directly to the program at Cotton’s Blue Jeans Go Green™ Program c/o Phoenix Fibers – CIMI, 400 East Ray Road, Chandler, AZ 85225 (a free prepaid label program ended in August 2025, so you’ll need to cover shipping).

Madewell’s denim trade-up program is one of the most practical ways to close the loop on old jeans, regardless of the brand. Drop any pair of jeans of any cut, color, or condition at a Madewell store and receive $20 off a full-priced pair of Madewell jeans. The program is year-round with no limit on how many pairs you bring in.

The program has collected more than 2.3 million preloved pieces. Gently worn jeans are resold through Madewell Forever, the brand’s resale platform with ThredUp; jeans beyond repair are recycled into housing insulation and sustainable packaging via the Blue Jeans Go Green partnership.

You can also mail in denim with a free Clean Out Kit or shipping label if you don’t have a Madewell nearby.

2. Turn your denim into a pair of shorts.

This is probably the easiest way to repurpose a pair of jeans. Even if you don’t sew, you can make long jeans into shorts. Get a pair of sharp scissors, figure out where you want to cut, and then enjoy your new shorts. Remember the old saying, “measure twice, and cut once.” If you’re a sewer (or good with a glue gun), check out this tutorial by Craft & Creativity for some adorable additions to cutoffs.

3. Upcycle your denim into a reusable bag.

One of my favorite ways to upcycle denim is by making reusable bags. You can use the bags as an adorable way to package a gift, as a purse, and as a reusable grocery carrier, just to name a few. I also found this creative phone charging bag. This is another project that could be done simply with a glue gun or, if you don’t have one, some craft glue.

4. Upcycle your denim into some sweet friendship bracelets.

One of my girls’ favorite projects is to upcycle material, including denim, into friendship bracelets. They are able to use their creativity and make each bracelet a special work of art. First, gather supplies like fun buttons, embroidery floss, and any other embellishments you may have on hand. Then cut the denim into strips.

Next is where the fun really begins. Let your kids use their imaginations to dream up some adorable ways to decorate their friendship bracelets. They could even begin by sketching out their ideas so you know how to help them make their vision a reality.

Your kiddos can wear their bracelets proudly and give them as gifts.

Need more ideas on how to upcycle your worn denim? Visit this helpful Pinterest board.

5. Make a craft supply holder with your unwanted jeans and some cans from the recycling bin.

This is a great idea for anyone who wants to organize their craft supplies in one spot. You could make it a kid-friendly craft supply holder by including washable markers, colored pencils, safety scissors and glue sticks. Add a handle and this could be a great way to bring craft supplies on the road with you. I found this example at 8Trends.com.

Denim scraps also work well as ties for garden plants, drawer liners, coasters (backed with felt), small coin pouches, and journal covers. Because denim frays attractively rather than looking ragged, even imperfect cuts tend to look intentional. There’s also a growing community of textile artists on Pinterest’s denim upcycle boards with ideas organized by skill level and material quantity.

Your old jeans are too valuable to throw away. If they’re still wearable, donate them to a local thrift store or trade them in at Madewell. If they’re worn out, recycle them through Blue Jeans Go Green — or cut them into something new. Use Earth911’s Recycling Search to find textile recycling drop-off spots near you.

Editor’s Note: Originally published by Wendy Gabriel on February 6, 2017, this article was updated in April 2026. Feature image courtesy of Shutterstock.com.

The post 5 Fun Ways To Recycle Your Jeans appeared first on Earth911.

Earth911 inspirations. Print them, post them, share your desire to help people think of the planet first, every day.

Today’s quote is from primatologist and anthropologist Jane Goodall: “The greatest danger to our future is apathy.”

This poster was originally published on May 17, 2019.

The post Earth911 Inspiration: The Greatest Danger to Our Future Is Apathy appeared first on Earth911.

Forty thousand miles of plastic waste wash through the global ocean every year, enough to wrap the Earth at the equator. But walk into the right store, and you can personally shorten that pipeline by a few feet, returning a pair of worn sneakers, a dead laptop, or a piece of furniture destined for the dumpster.

Some retailers have built genuine end-of-life infrastructure for the products they sell — not just a PR line, but real systems with documented results. The seven below have the numbers to back it up, updated for 2026.

Patagonia

Patagonia’s Worn Wear program remains one of the most comprehensive take-back systems in retail apparel. In 2025, customers made more than 137,000 trade-ins — almost 71,000 of them from return and warranty claims — and the online Shop Used feature launched in September 2024 has expanded the secondhand market significantly. Items deemed wearable are cleaned, repaired, and resold through Worn Wear; those beyond repair enter a recycling pipeline.

On the material innovation side, Patagonia partnered with Eastman in 2024 to process 8,000 pounds of pre- and post-consumer clothing waste through molecular recycling — breaking apparel down to chemical building blocks for reuse as new fiber. The brand has also moved aggressively on materials: by fall 2025, over 90 percent of Patagonia’s fabrics were recycled, organic, or traceable. Its 2025 Work in Progress Report disclosed that reducing hang tags by over 40 million pieces has avoided 170,000 pounds of packaging waste. The structural challenge — mechanically recycling blended fabrics — remains unsolved at industrial scale, and Patagonia acknowledges it openly.

Apple

Apple’s trade-in and recycling program sent 15.9 million devices to new owners through refurbishment schemes in 2024 alone. Devices that cannot be refurbished are processed by Daisy, Apple’s disassembly robot, which can now break down 36 models of iPhone into discrete components to recover aluminum, copper, rare earth elements, and other materials. A second robot, Dave, disassembles Taptic Engines to recover rare earth magnets, tungsten, and steel.

The material-recovery numbers are striking. In 2024, 24 percent of all materials shipped in Apple products came from recycled or renewable sources, up from 10 percent in 2019. Recycled aluminum accounted for 71 percent of the aluminum Apple purchased. The company avoided 6.2 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions by using recycled and low-carbon materials in 2024, according to its 2025 Environmental Progress Report. Apple has also surpassed 99 percent on its 2025 goal to use 100 percent recycled rare earth elements in all magnets and 100 percent recycled cobalt in all Apple-designed batteries. Customers can drop devices off at any Apple Store or ship for free.

Best Buy

Best Buy has collected 2.7 billion pounds of electronics and appliances since launching its recycling program in 2009, making it the nation’s largest retail collector of e-waste. The program accepts most consumer electronics at more than 1,000 stores regardless of where items were purchased, collecting more than 400 pounds of product every minute stores are open.

The program has expanded: a mail-in recycling service now lets customers without easy store access ship old tech in purpose-built boxes. A home haul-away service launched for customers who cannot transport large items. Best Buy requires all recycling partners to comply with rigorous environmental management standards and holds them to regulatory compliance and responsible workforce practices. TVs and monitors carry a $25 fee; most other electronics — phones, laptops, tablets, cables — are accepted free.

Nike

Nike’s original Reuse-a-Shoe program launched in 1995 to recycle worn athletic footwear into Nike Grind material for surfaces and new products has evolved into the Recycling + Donation (RAD) service, now available globally.

The program accepts athletic footwear and apparel from any brand and inspects each item to determine donation or recycling eligibility. Wearable items go to nonprofit partners including Soles4Souls for redistribution to communities in need; worn-out footwear is ground down into Nike Grind, which goes into playground surfaces, running tracks, and new Nike products.

Part of Nike’s Move to Zero initiative, targeting zero carbon and zero waste across the supply chain, the  Participating stores accept shoes of any brand — athletic footwear only; no cleats, boots, or sandals. Nike also runs Nike Refurbished, which cleans and resells gently worn or slightly imperfect footwear and apparel at select factory and community stores, extending product life before material recovery.

Staples

Staples pioneered national retail recycling in 2007 as the first U.S. retailer to offer a universal e-waste takeback program. Today the program accepts over 50 types of materials including computers, printers, phones, cables, batteries, crayons, and coffee machines from any brand. Since 2021, Staples has recycled 7,000 tons of e-waste and 19 million ink and toner cartridges, helping HP reach a milestone of 1 billion cartridges recycled.

Staples’ Easy Rewards program currently gives members 500 points (equivalent to $5 back) per month for tech recycling. Ink and toner cartridge recycling earns $2 per cartridge for members spending at least $30 on ink over the previous 180 days, up to a monthly limit. Staples uses certified recyclers whenever possible, and recycled toner material gets routed into road construction aggregate. The company accepts electronics in-store at customer service desks at all U.S. Staples locations.

IKEA

Furniture is the United States’ largest category of discarded household goods, with Americans throwing away approximately 12 million tons of it each year. IKEA’s Buyback & Resell program addresses the problem at the point of sale: customers fill out an online form, receive a value estimate, and bring gently used IKEA furniture to any participating store in exchange for store credit. Items that pass inspection enter the As-Is section for resale; those that cannot be resold are recycled under IKEA’s zero-waste-to-landfill policy.

The U.S. program now runs in 33 stores and, as of 2025, accepts more than 5,000 product types, including tables, chairs, storage units, lamps, and kids’ furniture among many. Globally, IKEA’s circular initiatives contributed to a 24.3 percent reduction in the company’s climate footprint while revenue grew 30.9 percent. Sofas, mattresses, and modified products are not accepted. IKEA Family members currently receive 50 percent more in store credit through May 2026.

REI

REI’s Re/Supply program sold nearly 1.4 million items of used outdoor gear in 2024, double the volume from 2019. The program accepts trade-ins of gently used REI-brand and name-brand gear including backpacks, sleeping bags, tents, and apparel. Members receive store credit; items are inspected, cleaned, and resold at a discount. Selling a used item through Re/Supply emits at least 50 percent less carbon than selling a new equivalent, even accounting for shipping, cleaning, and remerchandising.

REI also became the first major U.S. retailer to reach 90 percent operational waste diversion, achieving zero-waste certification in 2024 that audited and independently verified — ahead of Walmart and Target. Three of its distribution centers hold TRUE Zero Waste certification. In 2024, about 52 percent of the polyester and 45 percent of the nylon in REI Co-op products came from recycled sources. REI also charges brand partners a recycling fee to discourage individual plastic poly bags, and the majority of brands it carries have eliminated them as standard practice.

Related Reading

• Where Is the Circular Packaging Economy in 2026?
• How to Recycle Ink Cartridges
• Close the Loop: A Primer on Circular Economy
• How Patagonia Is Recycling Bottles into Jackets

Editor’s Note: Originally written by Sarah Lozanova on April 10, 2017, this article was substantially updated in April 2026.

The post 7 Retailers With Impressive Recycling Programs appeared first on Earth911.

More than 400,000 tons of release liner waste are generated in the United States every year — and the vast majority ends up in the landfill. You know these slick sheets: they’re the backing on address labels, shipping labels, postage stamps, and every sticker you’ve ever peeled. They look like paper, they tear like paper, but your recycling bin can’t process them like paper.

Label backing sheets, known in industry as release liners, are a hybrid material that confounds conventional recycling systems. Understanding why helps you avoid contaminating your curbside bin, and points toward where real solutions are emerging.

What Makes Release Liners So Hard to Recycle

The paper component of most label backing sheets is called glassine, a highly processed, translucent paper whose fibers have been flattened and aligned to create a smooth surface. Glassine has uses in food wrappers, pastry bags, and envelopes, but its compressed fibers yield very little usable pulp in the recycling process. The paper market runs on fiber strength, and glassine simply doesn’t have it.

The second problem is the coating. Release liners are treated with a release agent — almost always silicone — that prevents labels from permanently bonding to the backing. This silicone layer is what allows you to peel cleanly. It’s also what makes recycling nearly impossible at most facilities; the coating can’t be removed without specialized processing, and when it contaminates paper recycling streams, it degrades the quality of the resulting pulp and can jam machinery.

A third issue is material variation. Some liners use plastic film made from PET (#1 plastic) or polypropylene (#5 plastic) instead of paper as their base, adding another layer of complexity. Without knowing what type of liner you have, there’s no reliable way to route it into a specialized program.

Industry data suggests that historically only about 1–1.5% of liner waste has been recycled. More recent label industry reports put the overall global recycling rate at around 35%, but that figure is heavily skewed by industrial-scale programs in Europe and at large commercial facilities.

For the consumer peeling address labels at home, the recycling rate is effectively zero.

The Bottom Line for Consumers: Not Curbside

Label backing sheets from home use, such as the backing sheet from a page of address labels, the liner from a sheet of postage stamps, the wax paper-like sheet from a roll of stickers, do not belong in curbside recycling. Placing them in the recycling bin contaminates cleaner paper streams and does not help the material reach an appropriate end market.

The exception is if you can verify that your liner is an uncoated, matte paperboard with no silicone feel. That type may be recyclable as regular paper in some municipalities, but it’s uncommon for consumer label products. When in doubt, trash it — a wrong recycling choice is worse than no recycling choice.

Don’t put silicone-coated liners in composting either. The coating prevents biodegradation and will contaminate the compost.

The Label Industry Responds

The past two years have brought significant movement on release liner recycling, almost entirely at the commercial and industrial scale — so, still not helpful for curbside recycling but it promise more mail-in options.

The Tag and Label Manufacturers Institute launched its Liner Recycling Initiative (LRI) in 2024, partnering with paper mill Sustana Fiber. Sustana’s mills in De Pere, Wisconsin and Levis, Quebec can process white silicone-coated paper release liner and remove silicone alongside inks and other contaminants. The LRI is running regional pilots in Chicagoland and the Northeast U.S., with aggregation drop-off locations in Boston, Buffalo, Baltimore, Cincinnati, Wallingford CT, and three Canadian cities.

Avery Dennison’s AD Circular program, which connects commercial label brands and large businesses in the U.S. with vetted recycling providers for liner waste, is designed to kickstart a circular economy in label backing. The company has also partnered with Mitsubishi Chemical’s Polyester Film division for a closed-loop PET liner recycling program. These programs are designed for businesses generating consistent volumes of liner, not for household use.

UPM Raflatac’s RafCycle program provides a similar commercial liner recycling network in the U.S. and Canada, converting used liners into recycled paper, insulation material, and other products.

In 2025, labeling company SATO launched a recycling program at its Kitakami, Japan facility to recycle approximately 19 tons of silicone-coated release liners annually.

Sustainable Alternatives Are Growing

The most direct solution to the release liner problem is eliminating the liner altogether. Linerless label technology applies a special release coating directly to the face of the label, allowing rolls to wind without sticking to adjacent layers. These labels generate no backing waste, and rolls contain significantly more labels per roll, reducing material use and shipping weight.

For consumers who buy labels directly for home organizing, shipping, or small business use, EcoEnclose offers a patent-protected Zero Waste Release Liner made from 100% post-consumer waste that is curbside recyclable alongside regular paper. Their shipping labels, product labels, and sticker sheets use this liner. It’s the only liner of its kind currently available at consumer scale.

What You Can Do

• Do not put label backing sheets in curbside recycling or compost — silicone coatings contaminate both paper and compost streams.
• If you produce label liner regularly at a business, check the TLMI Liner Recycling Map at com for aggregation sites near the Northeast or Midwest U.S. pilots.
• Look for linerless label options when purchasing labels for shipping, home organization, or small business use. They cost roughly the same and eliminate the waste problem entirely.
• If sustainable sourcing matters to you, EcoEnclose‘s Zero Waste Liner products are curbside recyclable, a rare consumer-accessible option.
• Reuse intact backing sheets as non-stick craft surfaces, interleaving material, or temporary labels before discarding.

Related Earth911 Articles

• How to Recycle Paper
• Where Is The Circular Packaging Economy In 2026?
• How to Recycle Cardboard

The post Recycling Mystery: Label Backing Sheets appeared first on Earth911.

More Americans than ever think the environment is in bad shape, and they want the government to do something about it. According to a new Gallup poll released last week, only 35% of U.S. adults rate the overall quality of the environment as good or excellent. That’s the lowest number Gallup has recorded since it started asking the question in 2001.

It’s not just one or two things people are worried about. Drinking water, rivers and lakes, climate change, air pollution, endangered species. Concerns are on the rise across the board.

What People Are Most Worried About

Water is the top concern, and it has been for over two decades. More than half of Americans — 56% — say they worry “a great deal” about drinking water pollution. Another 53% say the same about the country’s fresh water supply. Half are deeply worried about pollution in rivers, lakes, and reservoirs.

Climate change isn’t far behind. A companion Gallup climate report finds that 44% of Americans worry “a great deal” about global warming, close to the all-time high of 46% recorded in 2020. Two out of three Americans say they worry at least “a fair amount.”

The poll also found that 57% of Americans now think the government is doing too little to protect the environment. That’s up from 50% just a year ago, a significant jump in a short time and in the face of an administration dedicated to dismantling U.S. environmental regulations.

While Democrats worry more than Republicans on nearly every issue, independent voters — often the key swing group in elections — have shifted sharply toward deep concern about the nation’s direction: 61% now say the government isn’t doing enough, up from 52% last year.

So What Has Congress Actually Done?

While public concern has been rising, the 119th Congress, which took office in January 2025 with Republicans in control of both chambers, has been rolling back environmental protections at a record pace.

The main tool has been the Congressional Review Act (CRA), a law that lets Congress cancel recently issued regulations with a simple majority vote. In 2025 alone, Congress passed 22 CRA resolutions into law, more than the total number of successful CRA rollbacks in the entire prior history of the law. Most targeted the EPA.

Among the protections eliminated: a rule charging oil and gas companies for methane pollution, standards regulating hazardous air emissions from rubber tire manufacturing, and California’s authority to set stricter vehicle emissions standards, overturned despite a determination by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office that those waivers weren’t even legally subject to repeal.

Meanwhile, pro-environment bills have gone nowhere. The Polluters Pay Climate Fund Act, which would require fossil fuel companies to pay into a $1 trillion climate fund, has gone undebated in committee since January 2025. The Clean Competition Act, a bipartisan carbon border adjustment that would reward cleaner American manufacturers, has also stalled.

The public says it wants more action on the environment. Congress has delivered less.

Tell Your Lawmakers How You Feel

The good news: this is exactly the kind of issue where public pressure can matter. Here’s how to make your voice heard:

• Find your senators and representative and contact them by phone or email.
• Check your lawmakers’ environmental voting records at the League of Conservation Voters Scorecard.
• Ask specifically whether they support fully funding the Land and Water Conservation Fund and passing the Clean Competition Act.
• Share the Gallup poll results with friends, neighbors, and on social media. Public awareness drives political action. Take a stand for the environment you want.

The post Most Americans Are Worried About the Environment. Is Congress? appeared first on Earth911.

Each year, the U.S. discards 38 to 40 percent of its food, a stubbornly high figure. Yet, other countries like the Czech Republic, Israel, and Denmark show promising solutions that American cities are beginning to adopt.

The global challenge is similarly daunting. The UN Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that about one-third of all food produced for people worldwide is lost or wasted each year. This is not just a moral issue, since so many people go hungry, but also a big climate problem. Project Drawdown lists cutting food waste as one of the top three ways to fight climate change. Some countries have been working on this for years and offer lessons for others.

Czech Republic: Rooted in Preservation Culture

Home-grown produce from backyard vegetable gardens supplements family meals throughout the Czech Republic. Residents tend fruit trees, greenhouses, and chicken coops. Many rent municipal allotment plots to use as supplemental gardens. Home composting is common and deeply normalized.

Czechs don’t just eat what their gardens yield—they savor the adventure! During mushroom and wild garlic season, families head outdoors to forage together. Extra produce finds a second life as jams or pickles, or gets frozen and fermented into tangy cabbage. Got leftover fruit? Send it to a local distillery for a splash of homemade liquor. Even stale bread avoids the bin, reborn as crispy breadcrumbs straight from your kitchen.

Apps like Nesnězeno let Czech restaurants, bakeries, cafés, and grocery stores sell extra food as discounted ‘rescue bags,’ priced 50 to 70% below retail — for pickup before closing. This connects surplus food with local buyers looking for a good deal. By the end of 2024, Nesnězeno had 1,487 partner businesses, a 132% increase from the year before, and had expanded across all Czech regions. Prague led with 239,000 rescued packages (41% of the total), followed by South Moravian and Pilsen, according to MediaGuru.

The app has been downloaded by more than 3 million users and has saved over 3 million packages of unsold meals overall.

The Czech Republic’s recycling rate for municipal waste went up from 32% in 2017 to 44% in 2021, just below the EU average. However, separating and collecting food waste is still inconsistent. A new national program for collecting kitchen animal-based waste, starting in 2026, aims to fix this.

Israel: Food Rescue as National Resilience

Food and water security in Israel are inseparable from politics. Leket Israel, the country’s largest food bank, pursues a mission of “food rescue” that serves Israelis regardless of background, coordinating with farms, packing houses, hotels, and catering operations to redirect surplus food to 200 nonprofits serving those in need.

Bustling outdoor food markets are traditional fixtures in Israeli cities, bringing consumers closer to the source of their food. In such busy places, edible food regularly ends up on the ground. Volunteers with Leket collect leftovers to distribute to people in need.

Leket released its 10th annual Food Waste and Rescue Report in late 2025. The report showed that Israel threw away 2.6 million tons of food, or 39% of what it produced, similar to the U.S. This wasted food was worth about $7 billion, or 1.3% of the country’s GDP. Still, there has been progress: food waste per person dropped 13.3% over the last ten years, from 300 kg to 260 kg per year. This improvement is thanks to more public awareness, serving food on individual plates in cafeterias, and more online food orders. But population growth and higher food prices have kept the total amount of wasted food high.

Leket and its partners now rescue about 45,000 tons of food each year, 2.25 times more than a decade ago. Still, this is only 5% of the food that could be saved in Israel. The Food Donation Encouragement Law, first passed in 2018, was updated in 2024 to give more legal protection to donors and require large public institutions to donate food.

In September 2025, Israel released its first national plan to cut food loss and waste, written by the Ministries of Environmental Protection and Agriculture. This was a big step toward better policy coordination. Israeli AgTech companies are also known worldwide for using technology to reduce food waste. For example, Sufresca makes edible coatings to keep produce fresh longer, and Taranis uses drones and AI to spot crop problems early.

Denmark: Culture as Infrastructure

In Denmark, people often leave free food in boxes on the sidewalk. Signs in front of homes might offer free apples or potatoes, or eggs for sale using the honor system. There are also Facebook groups in every major Danish city for dumpster diving, where people collect edible food that supermarkets throw away after the best-by date.

Supermarkets in Denmark lower prices on food that is close to its best-by date, especially baked goods, which are marked down every evening after 7 or 8 p.m. Food producers and supermarket chains work with groups like Too Good To Go and WeFood, Denmark’s first surplus food supermarket, to sell rescued food at big discounts. Chains like REMA 1000, Coop, and LIDL have also stopped offering bulk-buy discounts that encouraged people to buy more than they needed.

Too Good To Go started in Copenhagen in 2015 and has grown quickly. In 2023, the app saved 121.7 million meals worldwide, up 46% from 2022, and helped prevent about 362,000 tons of CO2 emissions. The app now works in over 17 countries and has more than 85 million users.

The WeFood surplus grocery network, which began as a single location in Copenhagen in 2016, has grown to six stores across Denmark. And a voluntary national commitment, “Denmark Against Food Waste,” united more than 25 food producers and retailers behind a shared goal of halving food waste by 2030. An independent third party measures and publishes annual progress.

What the U.S. Has Borrowed

Some of the ideas first used in these three countries are now catching on in the United States. However, there are still big challenges slowing progress.

Too Good To Go started in the U.S. in late 2020 and has been growing ever since. By mid-2025, the app was available in almost half of U.S. states, including cities such as Boston, Chicago, Denver, Los Angeles, New York, Portland, San Francisco, and Seattle. The number of meals saved grew by 67% each year. In 2024, Circle K convenience stores joined the app nationwide. Too Good To Go now also works with big chains like Whole Foods, Peet’s Coffee, and Just Salad.

Since 2020, most progress on food waste in the U.S. has happened at the state level. In 2024, 29 states introduced 100 distinct food waste bills, and 18 passed. California’s SB 1383, which started in 2022, brought organics collection to 94% of communities and rescued 217,000 tons of surplus food in 2023. Washington state also passed a major law in 2022, requiring businesses that generate large amounts of organic waste to compost or arrange for collection.

Federal legislation has moved slowly. As of 2024, 13 pending federal food waste bills were before Congress, including the bipartisan Food Date Labeling Act of 2023, which would standardize confusing “best by” and “sell by” date labeling  — but none had passed. The lack of national date-label standards is a key driver of household waste, as consumers discard food that is still safe to eat.

In 2015, the U.S. promised to cut food waste in half by 2030. But a 2025 study in Nature Food found that the amount of food wasted per person in 2022, at 328.5 pounds, was about the same as in 2016. The study said that no state is on track to meet the federal goal with current policies. It also pointed out that the U.S. focuses too much on recycling food waste instead of preventing or rescuing it. In contrast, Denmark and the Czech Republic work to keep food from becoming waste in the first place, while U.S. policy mostly deals with food after it’s already lost.

What You Can Do

• Download Too Good To Go or a similar app to save extra food from restaurants and grocery stores in your area.
• Volunteer at a local food bank to help get rescued food to people who need it. You’ll also learn more about food inequality in your community.
• Check out local CSAs and farmers’ markets to help cut down on food lost in big supply chains.
• Composting at home is a simple way to recycle food scraps. If you live in an apartment, see if your city has a compost drop-off program.
• Ask your supermarket to start marking down food that is close to its best-by date. This is common in Denmark but not in the U.S.
• Reach out to your congressional representatives and ask them to support the Food Date Labeling Act. Standardized date labels could make a big difference at the national level.
• Use the Earth911 recycling search tool to find recycling and food drop-off options near you.

Editor’s Note: Originally written by Chloe Skye on March 10, 2020, this article was substantially updated in April 2026.

The post 3 Countries’ Food Waste Strategies: What Can They Teach Us? appeared first on Earth911.

EarthDay.org encourages everyone to invest in the Earth. While that might mean buying stock in sustainable companies, it’s not the only way. Investing in our planet means everyone—governments, businesses, and individuals—doing their part. It’s about building a sustainable green economy, similar to how the world shifted from analog to digital after the space race. Even if you don’t own stocks, you can still support a green economy as a consumer, a citizen, and a community member.

“Everything has to be reinvented in a world of shrinking resources. So why not teach it? Why not embrace it? Why not say we’re going to the moon?” asked Kathleen Rogers, president and CEO of EarthDay.org, in 2022.

Consumers

It’s a common myth that companies only sell what consumers want. If that were true, advertising wouldn’t be such a huge industry. Still, consumers do have influence. If more people chose electric vehicles over SUVs, car companies would offer more EVs and fewer gas-guzzlers.

Consumers can learn more and pick sustainable options. Websites like this one offer tips for finding greener products, from mattresses to shampoo. Every small choice helps, but we can’t solve climate change just by shopping differently.

“We all have hard choices to make and can’t do everything right,” says Rogers. We just have to do the best we can, starting with the most obvious improvements.

“Don’t buy pesticides,” says Rogers. Simply eliminating the intentional purchase of poisons makes a big difference. After that, prioritize choices that either require little effort, like recycling, or that make a big difference in your impact.

But as Michael Maniates, author of The Living-Green Myth, said recently on Sustainability In Your Ear, “It seems to me that our best chance for making a difference is to start thinking, or maybe just thinking harder, about how to be a citizen in community with others, not as a solitary consumer in the checkout line.” He believes green choices are good, but they aren’t enough without getting involved in politics.

Citizens

“Being a conscious citizen is the political piece. It’s register and vote for candidates who have really good plans that will not just promote the economy, but a green one. Because that’s the future,” Rogers said. “There’s some great Republicans on the environment, great Democrats, great Independents. Find them. Find them and vote for them. For the health of our kids, vote green.” If you can’t find a good candidate, become one yourself and run for office.

Don’t underestimate the importance of local elections. EarthDay.org is campaigning for universal climate education in classrooms because schools determine whether kids develop the 21st-century skills that will allow them to make green innovations and discover sustainable climate change solutions.

“If you don’t have an educated public and workforce, who’s going to make the stuff? If you don’t build green consumers, who’s going to buy the stuff? If you don’t educate the kids, who’s going to vote for green politicians?” asks Rogers. If you have kids in school, get involved in the PTA and help ensure kids have access to climate literacy education.

Citizens are also responsible for holding their elected representatives accountable. Write or call your representatives about environmental issues often.

Community

Whether you decide to run for office or prefer to keep your involvement to voting, you can still be an active member of your community. You can join local cleanups, support local businesses—especially regenerative farmers—and plant trees.

EarthDay.org’s Canopy Project primarily works with communities in developing countries. But you can be part of urban reforestation in your own neighborhood.

“We urge people to take tree cover seriously,” says Rogers. Many homeowners see trees as a nuisance because they block views or damage sidewalks. But trees offer much more than just beauty. They provide habitat, store carbon, help reduce the heat island effect—which matters more as summers get hotter—and even filter pollutants.

Even if you can’t plant a tree, you can grow a tomato plant in a pot by your front door or herbs in an apartment window. “It connects us to the natural world in a way nothing else can, and it’s a great educational tool for kids,” says Rogers.

Your workplace is part of your community too, so individuals also play a role in making businesses greener.

“Every industry has opportunities,” says Rogers. Take a look at how your workplace operates. Try to encourage greener choices in your company’s processes and purchasing decisions.

If you can’t manage green consumer choices, citizenship, and community action all at once—or even at all—don’t be hard on yourself.

“Stop blaming us and look at the combination of issues,” says Rogers. No one person has to do it all; we all just have to do the best we can.

Financial and Charitable Investments

One of the most direct ways to back your environmental values is with your investment portfolio and your charitable giving. The sustainable investment market has grown dramatically: assets under management in global sustainable funds reached $3.9 trillion in Q4 2025, up 15% from the prior year, even as ESG investing faced political headwinds in the U.S. That growth reflects a structural shift, not a trend: 88% of global individual investors express interest in sustainable investing, according to a Morgan Stanley survey, with younger generations leading the way.

The options have also expanded well beyond socially responsible mutual funds. Here are several ways to align your money with your values.

Causeway Impact

Doug Heske, founder of Newday Impact Investing and a frequent guest on Earth911’s Sustainability In Your Ear podcast, has built one of the more thoughtful platforms for deploying investment capital to advance environmental and social priorities.

The company’s newest offering, Causeway, brings together high-quality investment portfolios and direct links to vetted nonprofits, so you can see your financial returns and charitable giving in one place. Newday’s portfolios focus on six impact areas: climate action, air and water quality, biodiversity and conservation, healthy soils regeneration, and human equity. A personal impact timeline gives real-time updates from nonprofit partners, letting you track results—from carbon emissions reduced to wells built—alongside your financial performance.

ESG and Clean Energy ETFs

If you want broad market exposure with an environmental focus, ESG exchange-traded funds are the easiest place to start. Large index ETFs from Vanguard (ESGV) and iShares screen for environmental, social, and governance factors while keeping fees low. Expense ratios for major ESG index funds are now between 0.08 and 0.15% per year. Thematic clean energy funds, like the iShares Global Clean Energy ETF and Invesco Solar ETF (TAN), give you more focused exposure to renewable energy, but they are more volatile and work better as smaller parts of your portfolio.

Green Bonds

Green bonds support specific environmental projects such as renewable energy installations, energy-efficient buildings, and sustainable water systems. They have become a major type of fixed-income investment. By 2025, global green bond issuance passed $600 billion each year, with forecasts of about $950 billion in new bonds in 2026. The iShares USD Green Bond ETF (BGRN) offers easy access to investment-grade green bonds for investors who want less risk than stocks but still want to support the environment.

Donor-Advised Funds for Environmental Giving

If charitable giving is your primary goal, a donor-advised fund (DAF) lets you make a tax-deductible contribution now and direct grants to environmental nonprofits over time. Funds like Tides Foundation and Environmental Defense Fund’s giving programs can help channel charitable dollars toward proven climate and conservation organizations. For a more integrated approach, Causeway’s platform (above) connects investment portfolios directly with nonprofit partners, letting impact-oriented investors support both at once.

A quick warning: not all “green” funds are the same. Read fund documents closely, look for clear impact reporting along with financial results, and be wary of ESG labels that don’t have third-party verification. If an investment claims to be sustainable but doesn’t explain how it chooses its holdings, it could be greenwashing.

Related Reading

• Sustainability In Your Ear: Doug Heske on Responsible Energy Investing
• Invest in the Earth This Earth Day and Every Day
• Regenerative Agriculture to Restore Our Earth
• How to Combat the Urban Heat Island Effect

Editor’s Note: Originally authored by Gemma Alexander on March 18, 2022, this article was substantially updated in April 2026.

The post How You Can Invest in Our Planet appeared first on Earth911.

The first Earth Day was celebrated on April 22, 1970 — 56 years ago — and, goodness, how the world has changed since then. We’ve come a long way since the days of burning our trash and pumping our gas guzzlers with leaded gasoline. In honor of those 56 years, here are 56 important changes and milestones since the first Earth Day.

Legislation

The U.S. government has led much of the environmental charge, starting with the implementation of the EPA (1) in July 1970. Later that year, the Clean Air Act (2) targeted air pollutants, followed by the Clean Water Act (3) in 1972 and the Endangered Species Act (4) in 1973.

Some lesser-known national laws included the Safe Water Drinking Act (5) in 1974, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (6) in 1976, the Toxic Substances Control Act (7) in 1976, the National Energy Act (8) in 1978, and the Medical Waste Tracking Act (9) in 1988.

In some cases, states have led the charge. Oregon passed the first bottle bill (10) in 1971, Minnesota’s Clean Indoor Air Act (11) was the first law to restrict smoking in public places (1975), and Massachusetts required low-flush toilets (12) for construction and remodeling in 1988.

Green Innovations: The Early Years

In order to comply with all the laws from the 1970s, we needed new technology to ensure consumers could adhere to the new standards. Consider:

• The “Crying Indian” PSA debuts in 1971 (13)
• Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) gets banned in 1972 (14)
• The energy-efficient compact fluorescent light bulb launches in 1973 (15)
• Cars begin displaying fuel economy labels in the mid-1970s (16)
• In 1975, all cars are manufactured with catalytic converters to limit exhaust emissions (17)
• Chlorofluorocarbons are banned from aerosol cans starting in 1978 (18)
• The first curbside recycling program begins in New Jersey in 1980 (19)
• In 1986, McDonald’s switches from foam to paper food containers (20)
• Mercury is removed from latex paint in 1990, providing a viable alternative to banned lead paint (21)
• Earth911 launches the first U.S. recycling directory in 1991 (22)
• Energy Star certification debuts in 1992 for appliances and electronics (23)
• The U.S. Green Building Council begins in 1993 (24)

The Political Movement

The Green Party (25) launched in 1984, which was just the beginning of green issues entering the mainstream. One Percent for the Planet (26) was founded in 2002 to challenge businesses to donate to environmental causes, and the ISO 14001 standard (27) established environmental management. Companies are now facing pressure to allow employee telecommuting (28).

Things really developed after the release of Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth (29) in 2006. NBC debuted Green Week (30) in 2007. Carbon offsets (31) alleviated corporate green guilt. Bisphenol A (32) made us all question plastic purchases. Hybrid vehicles (33) generated tax credits and gas savings. Plastic bag bans gave rise to a reusable bag (34) craze. Fracking (35) and the Dakota Access Pipeline (36) were two of the most hotly contested news stories of the decade, at least until the 2016 election.

Green Tech: The Next Wave

In the past 10 years, emerging green tech has made eco-friendly a way of life, including:

• LED light bulbs (37)
• Portable solar panels on backpacks and watches (38)
• Plant-based plastics (39)
• Motion sensor lighting (40)
• Faucets with automatic shut-off (41)
• Low volatile organic compound (VOC) paint (42)
• Recycled plastic clothing (43)
• Ride-sharing mobile applications (44)
• Natural cleaning products (45)
• Biodiesel engine vehicles (46)
• Food waste composting (47)
• Portable air purifiers (48)
• Europe’s Green Deal introduced global recyclables shipping regulations to reduce pollution in low-income nations (49)
• Corporate borrowers headed toward $500 billion in bond financings for the renewables transition (50)
• President Biden rejoins the Paris Climate Accord on his first day in office. (51)

The Latest Five: 2022–2026

The pace of innovation has not slowed. Five more milestones have reshaped the environmental landscape since that 51st Earth Day:

• The Inflation Reduction Act (52), signed into law in August 2022, became the largest climate investment in U.S. history, directing roughly $370 billion toward clean energy tax credits, EV incentives, methane reduction, and domestic clean manufacturing. Analysts projected it will drive more than $4 trillion in cumulative capital investment over a decade and put the U.S. on track for a 40% emissions reduction by 2030. Sadly, many of its key provisions have been defunded or eliminated by the Trump Administration.
• The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (53), adopted by 188 governments in December 2022, set the most ambitious biodiversity protection commitment in history. Its headline “30×30” target calls for conserving 30% of the planet’s land, freshwater, and ocean areas by 2030, a goal that would require doubling current protected land coverage and quadrupling marine protections.
• America’s first commercial direct air capture plant (54), opened by Heirloom Carbon Technologies in Tracy, California in November 2023, marked the arrival of atmospheric carbon removal at commercial scale on U.S. soil. The plant uses limestone to absorb CO₂ directly from the air, with the captured carbon injected into concrete for permanent storage. In May 2024, Climeworks activated the world’s largest direct air capture facility, the Mammoth plant in Iceland, with a design capacity to remove 36,000 tons of CO₂ per year.
• Solid-state batteries (55), a next-generation alternative to conventional lithium-ion technology, moved from laboratory promise toward commercial reality between 2022 and 2026. Unlike liquid-electrolyte batteries, solid-state versions are less flammable, achieve higher energy density, and degrade more slowly. In early 2025, Mercedes-Benz began road-testing a prototype EV powered by a lithium-metal solid-state cell that extended driving range 25% over comparable liquid-battery models. Multiple automakers and cell manufacturers now target commercial production between 2027 and 2030.
• Perovskite and tandem solar cells (56), a new photovoltaic technology that pairs conventional silicon with thin perovskite layers, pushed solar efficiency into territory once considered theoretical. By 2024, tandem cells in laboratory settings exceeded 34% efficiency — well above the roughly 22% ceiling of standard silicon panels only a few years ago. manufacturers in Asia and Europe began scaling pilot production lines. Because perovskite cells can be printed on flexible substrates, they open the door to solar surfaces on buildings, vehicles, and everyday objects that conventional panels cannot reach.

The past 56 years have been huge when it comes to saving the environment. Expect more to come, including a resurgent EV industry, nuclear fusion, regenerative agriculture, restorative forestry, and more, as costs and the cool factor improve.

Editor’s Note: Originally published on April 18, 2018, this article was most recently updated in April 2026.

The post 56 Environmental Innovations in the 56 Years Since Earth Day Began appeared first on Earth911.

This week’s quotation is from Franklin D. Roosevelt, 32nd president of the United States: “A nation that destroys its soils destroys itself. Forests are the lungs of our land, purifying the air and giving fresh strength to our people.”

Earth911 inspiration posters: Post them and share your desire to help people think of the planet first, every day. Click the poster to get a larger image.

The post Earth911 Inspiration: Forests Are the Lungs of Our Land appeared first on Earth911.

This article contains affiliate links. If you purchase an item through one of these links, we receive a small commission that helps fund our Recycling Directory.

1. Invest in Reliable Equipment

• The core hardware list hasn’t changed much — but what’s available at each price point has improved considerably.

  Aquarium or tank. A 100-gallon tank remains the recommended starting point for a serious home system. It gives you flexibility in fish species, plant density, and system stability. Acrylic tanks are lighter and optically clearer; glass tanks are heavier but scratch-resistant. Expect to pay $300–$600 for a quality 100-gallon tank. Search current options on Amazon.

  If you’re new to aquaponics, the AquaSprouts Garden Kit is a well-reviewed all-in-one beginner system that fits a standard 10-gallon aquarium. It includes a grow bed, submersible pump, mechanical timer, and light bar mounting system, and costs $75–$90. The aquarium itself is sold separately.

  Canister filter. For a 100-gallon aquaponics tank, target 500–600 gallons per hour (GPH) of water turnover, well above what the tank volume alone would suggest, because the fish load demands high filtration. The Fluval FX2 (~$269 on Amazon) is consistently top-rated for tanks up to 100 gallons, featuring 4-stage filtration, Smart Pump technology that auto-adjusts flow, and a built-in water change system. A solid budget alternative is the Penn-Plax Cascade 1000 (~$199 on Amazon), which handles up to 100 gallons, recirculating the water more than twice an hour.

  Air pump. Dissolved oxygen is critical for fish health and for the beneficial bacteria driving nitrification. A quality air pump — or a canister filter with an integrated spray bar — will keep oxygen levels stable. A 2025 review in Reviews in Aquaculture found that micro-nano bubble (MNB) aeration increased butterhead lettuce yield by 35% compared to conventional diffusers, and raised nitrate concentration in the water. MNB systems are commercially available but not yet mainstream for home setups, so a conventional air pump remains the practical choice for most beginners.

  Grow lights (optional, system-dependent). Indoor systems need supplemental lighting. Full-spectrum LED grow lights have dropped substantially in price and energy draw. Look for LED bars with daylight-spectrum output (5000–6500K) sized to your grow bed. Search LED grow lights on Amazon.

  Water heater (optional). Tilapia require 70–85°F. If your space runs cooler, a submersible aquarium heater is essential. Search aquarium heaters on Amazon.

2. Choose Your Setup

Three system types work at home scale. The choice depends on available space, target crops, and tolerance for complexity.

Media bed are recommended for beginners. Plants grow in a bed of inert media, such as expanded clay pebbles, gravel, or lava rock, positioned above or beside the fish tank. A pump floods the bed periodically, then drains back. The media supports roots and houses beneficial bacteria. Research from Texas A&M confirmed media beds are the most forgiving system for beginners and support the widest range of crops, including fruiting vegetables like tomatoes and cucumbers. The Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service provides detailed DIY build plans.

A 2025 study found that carbonized rice husks and cocopeat as grow media can yield five times more crop than traditional expanded clay aggregate (LECA), though they decompose over time and require more frequent replacement.

Nutrient film technique (NFT). A thin stream of water flows continuously through PVC tubes past plant roots dangling inside. Excellent for herbs, lettuce, and small greens in tight or vertical spaces; the tubes can be wall-mounted. Vertical aquaponics setups can increase productivity per unit area by up to 160% compared to horizontal systems, based on research with strawberries and basil. NFT kits are available on Amazon for both DIY and complete systems.

Raft (deep water culture). Plants float on foam rafts with roots submerged directly in nutrient-rich water drawn from the fish tank. They produce a higher yield than NFT for leafy greens, but requires more robust filtration because solids aren’t removed by a media bed. More common in semi-commercial operations than small home setups. Check options on Amazon.

A growing range of IoT sensors let you track pH, dissolved oxygen, ammonia, and temperature continuously from your phone. WiFi pH/EC meters designed for hydroponic and aquaponic systems are now in the $60–$120 range. For beginners, manual weekly testing is fine. For anyone running a system unattended or scaling up, continuous monitoring significantly reduces the risk of a water quality crash.

3. Add the Fish

An aquaponics system will support many species of fish. Several of the most popular options are:

• Tilapia: The most common aquaponics fish for good reason. Tilapia tolerate temperature swings, pH variation, and elevated ammonia better than most species. They grow quickly (typical harvest: 6–8 months), are inexpensive to stock, and provide a dual harvest of vegetables and protein. Best for warm indoor or greenhouse systems (70–85°F).
• Koi: Popular ornamental choice. Koi tolerate poor water quality and are hardy once established, but they’re susceptible to a range of pathogens and aren’t typically harvested for food. Well-suited to media bed systems where water quality is easier to maintain.
• Bluegill, perch, and catfish. Solid edible alternatives to tilapia in cooler climates where tilapia’s warmth requirements are a challenge. Texas A&M’s fish species selection guide covers temperature ranges, feed conversion ratios, and disease susceptibility for home-scale species in detail.

These are great options, but you can also consider carp, perch, largemouth bass, bluegills, guppies, and more. Purchase fish from a reputable aquaculture supplier or local fish hatchery when possible — disease-carrying fish is one of the fastest ways to crash a new system. Pet store fish are not certified disease-free.

4. Add the Plants

Like fish, the options are endless when deciding which vegetables to grow in your aquaponics system. Some popular options include broccoli, celery, cucumbers, and basil.

But because different plants require different conditions, you’ll want to select plants that will thrive in your setup. As Go Green Aquaponics explains, it is important to consider the following:

1. System: What type of aquaponics system you will use – plants with no root structure do well in a raft setup, while root vegetables do well in a media bed.
2. The optimal temperature and pH level for your fish and your plants – the closer the match, the more successful you’ll be.
3. Environment: the amount of light, temperature and – if you’re setting up your system outside – rain the plants will get.
4. How much space you have for plants versus how much space the plants need to grow.
5. Plant-to-fish ratio: The more fish you plan on having, the more plants you need to absorb the nutrients.

5. Maintain Your System

Keeping healthy plants and fish will require regular maintenance. Some tips include:

• Feed your fish two to three times daily in small amounts. Overfeeding is the most common cause of ammonia spikes in home systems. Uneaten food decomposes rapidly and overwhelms the beneficial bacteria that keep the system in balance.

  Test pH weekly. Target range is 6.4–7.4, with most systems running best around 6.8–7.0. The API Freshwater Master Test Kit (~$35 on Amazon) tests pH, ammonia, nitrite, and nitrate in one kit — the standard recommendation for aquaponics monitoring. For more serious systems, the LaMotte Aquaponics Water Test Kit (~$85 on Amazon) covers nine parameters including dissolved oxygen and carbon dioxide, and comes with a rugged carrying case. To raise pH naturally, dissolve a tablespoon of food-grade potassium carbonate (potash) in a bucket of system water, add it slowly to the tank, and retest after 24 hours before adding more.

  Test ammonia and nitrate weekly or biweekly. Ammonia should be below 2 ppm; nitrates should stay under 160 ppm. Elevated ammonia: feed less, increase aeration, or reduce fish density. High nitrates: add more plants or remove some fish.

  Mind the cycling period. A new system takes 4–6 weeks to fully cycle and for the bacterial colony to establish and nitrogen conversion to stabilize. Don’t increase fish load or plant density during this period. Ammonia and nitrite readings near zero consistently is your green light.

The following video from Rob Bob’s Aquaponics provides guidance on how to check the pH, ammonia levels, and nitrate levels.

Get Some Fish In Your Garden

Aquaponics is an easy and environmentally conscious way to grow produce and raise fish at the same time. It can be used to grow all your favorite leafy greens, and there are endless varieties of fish that will adapt well to this system. Just keep up with regular maintenance and aquaponics will prove to be a viable and sustainable new way to garden.

The science of aquaponics is advancing quickly. Three developments from recent peer-reviewed literature are worth knowing about, even if most aren’t yet practical for home systems:

Algae co-cultivation. Reviews in Aquaculture reports that introducing macroalgae such as Spirogyra spp. can nearly double plant yields compared to traditional aquaponic systems. Co-cultivating microalgae (Chlorella) with plants in raft systems also controls ammonia at twice the efficacy of non-algal systems. This is emerging research — not yet mainstream for home growers — but a promising direction for anyone looking to push yields further.

Decoupled system design. Research from the Journal of the World Aquaculture Society (2024) documents that decoupled systems, which separate the aquaculture unit from the hydroponic unit, allow optimized conditions in each component, resulting in better nutrient utilization and increased productivity compared to coupled designs. Decoupled systems allow independent pH management for fish and plants, which is otherwise a constant compromise in standard coupled setups. Commercially available decoupled systems are beginning to become available; for DIY builders, it’s a worthwhile design consideration when scaling up.

AI and IoT integration. A 2025 Sustainable Environment Research review emphasizes that monitoring strategies using artificial intelligence, the Internet of Things, and renewable energy can significantly enhance aquaponic system efficiency. For home growers, this means the WiFi monitoring systems mentioned in Step 2 are part of a broader wave of automation coming to small-scale aquaponics. The good news: prices will continue to drop.

Editor’s Note: This article was originally published on March 17, 2021, and updated in April 2026. Feature image of outdoor aquaponics system courtesy of Vasch~nlwiki, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons

About the Author

David Thomas is founder and editor-in-chief of Everything Fishkeeping, a fishkeeping and aquascaping magazine. He has been keeping fish since he was a child and has kept over 12 different setups. His favorite is his freshwater tank with Tetras and Loaches.

The post How To Grow Vegetables With Aquaponics appeared first on Earth911.

Gas just broke $4 a gallon again — and this time, it happened in weeks, not months. The war with Iran and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz triggered what the International Energy Agency called the largest oil supply disruption in history, cutting roughly 20% of global petroleum from accessible markets and sending U.S. pump prices surging more than 30% since late February. Diesel has climbed above $5.60 a gallon. Analysts warn that if the Strait stays shut through summer, prices could reach $6–7 a gallon.

At the same moment, the federal government pulled a $7,500 lever it had been offering EV buyers for three years. Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act ended the IRA’s clean vehicle tax credit on September 30, 2026, sooner than almost anyone expected. For anyone considering an EV right now, both of these developments matter enormously, and they cut in opposite directions.

Here’s how EV math works in April 2026.

6 Benefits of Electric Cars

The benefits of owning an EV arguably outweigh any cons — from spending less money in the long run to making fewer trips to the repair shop. And it doesn’t stop there.

1. Gasoline Prices Have Never Made the Cost-Per-Mile Case for EVs More Clearly

With U.S. gas prices above $4 a gallon and diesel topping $5.60, the fueling cost gap between EVs and gas vehicles has widened sharply. The EIA’s March 2026 short-term outlook projected average retail gas prices of $3.34 per gallon for the full year — but that forecast was built on assumptions about the Strait reopening quickly. Prices are already well above that. Electricity prices, by contrast, remain stable and domestically produced.

A typical EV running on home electricity still costs roughly one-third as much per mile as a comparable gas vehicle — a savings that grows with every ten-cent jump at the pump. The current energy shock makes that argument harder to dismiss.

2. Energy Independence Means Something Different Now

The Iran war viscerally confirmed energy analysts argument that American households are deeply exposed to disruptions on the other side of the planet, even as the U.S. produces record quantities of domestic oil. Global crude oil prices are set by global markets, and domestic production buffers the shock but doesn’t eliminate it.

Charging an EV from the grid — or better, from rooftop solar — can insulate a household from price shocks. It’s a form of energy resilience that’s worth taking seriously as a financial and practical argument, not just an environmental one.

3. EV Range Has Left ‘Range Anxiety’ Behind

The 2021 version of this article listed 60-to-100 miles as a typical EV range. That figure is obsolete. As of 2026, the Lucid Air leads at 410 EPA-rated miles, the Hyundai IONIQ 6 Long Range delivers 361 miles, and the Chevrolet Equinox EV — the best-selling non-Tesla EV of 2025 — offers 319 miles starting under $35,000. Even mid-range EVs from mainstream brands now routinely clear 250 miles per charge.

The range question has effectively been answered for most everyday use cases. Long-distance travel remains more planning-intensive than gas, but it’s a planning question, not a stranding question, for most drivers on most routes.

4. Charging Infrastructure Has Reached Critical Mass

As of January 2026, the U.S. had nearly 68,000 public DC fast-charging ports, a 33% increase compared to 2024. Tesla’s Supercharger network alone accounts for over 52% of fast-charging stalls, and more than two-thirds of those are now open to non-Tesla vehicles. Ford, GM, Rivian, Hyundai, Kia, Mercedes-Benz, Volvo, and Stellantis have all adopted NACS, effectively granting their drivers access to the Supercharger network via native ports or adapters.

Reliability, long the Achilles heel of non-Tesla charging facilities that were often out of commission, is also improving. New stations are being built with redundant chargers, remote monitoring, and real-time availability data integrated into vehicle navigation. The experience of pulling up to a broken charger on a long trip is becoming less common, though rural coverage gaps persist.

5. Maintenance Costs Remain Lower — and the Gap Is Growing

EVs require no oil changes, no exhaust system. They need fewer brake replacements because regenerative braking extends pad life substantially. And they have significantly fewer moving parts subject to wear. A Consumer Reports analysis drawing on survey data from hundreds of thousands of members found that EV owners spent about half as much on maintenance and repair as owners of comparable gas vehicles; that’s an average savings of $4,600 over the life of the vehicle.

With inflation squeezing household budgets and the Iran war likely to push repair and parts costs higher as diesel-driven supply chain expenses rise, lower maintenance overhead matters more in 2026 than it did even a year ago.

6. State Incentives Fill Some of the Federal Gap — For Now

The federal $7,500 clean vehicle credit is gone. But the replacement focused on American-made cars makes up the gap. The One Big Beautiful Bill introduced a federal auto loan interest deduction of up to $10,000 annually through 2028, available for U.S.-assembled EVs financed with new loans. It’s a deduction rather than a credit, meaning it reduces taxable income rather than tax owed directly, and it phases out for households with incomes above $100,000 for a single person and $200,000 for couples.

State incentives come in many forms and have different eligibility rules. Several states with high EV adoption still offer significant savings, which are especially important now that federal credits are no longer available.

• Colorado provides a $750 state tax credit for buying or leasing a new EV with an MSRP up to $80,000. There is also an extra $2,500 credit for EVs priced under $35,000, so budget-conscious buyers can save up to $3,250. You can assign the credit to a participating dealership and get the discount at the point of sale, so you do not have to wait until you file your taxes.
• New Jersey’s Charge Up program gives up to $4,000 in point-of-sale rebates for eligible new battery-electric vehicles, applied directly at the dealership through June 30, 2026. The state plans to keep EV incentives active through 2030, with funding renewed each year. This is one of the strongest long-term commitments among states.
• Oregon’s program has some important updates. The Standard Rebate, which offered up to $2,500 for any Oregon resident, was suspended in September 2025. The Charge Ahead Rebate, which provided up to $7,500 for income-qualified buyers, was suspended on December 5, 2025 due to limited funding. If you bought an EV during the eligible period, you still have six months from your purchase date to apply. Approved applications may be put on a waiting list for payment in spring 2026. New funding rounds may happen, but they are not confirmed yet. Check the Oregon DEQ’s program page before counting on the rebate.
• California’s Clean Cars 4 All program is one of the most generous for income-eligible buyers. Low-income residents in certain air districts can get up to $12,000 toward an EV purchase, plus up to $2,000 for home charging or prepaid charging credits. If you do not need to scrap an old vehicle, you can get up to $7,500 through the Driving Clean Assistance Program. Both programs are income-based and run by regional air districts. Use the state’s DriveClean incentive search to see what is available in your ZIP code.
• Massachusetts provides a $3,500 rebate through the MOR-EV program for buying or leasing a new qualifying EV with an MSRP under $55,000 at participating dealerships. If you meet income requirements, you can add another $1,500 through MOR-EV+, for a total of $5,000. There is also a $3,500 rebate for used EVs, but only for income-qualified buyers.
• New York’s Drive Clean Rebate gives up to $2,000 off the purchase or lease of over 60 new EV models. The rebate is applied at the point of sale by participating dealerships across the state, and there is no income requirement. The amount depends on the vehicle’s range: you get the full $2,000 for EVs with over 200 miles of range on a 36-month lease or purchase, $1,000 for 40 to 199 miles, and $500 for shorter-range models or those with MSRPs above $42,000.

All of these programs depend on available funding and may change their rules. Check the DOE Alternative Fuels Data Center for the latest information before you buy.

Many automakers are also stepping in with manufacturer cash incentives and subsidized lease deals to offset the lost federal credit. Hyundai, for example, cut the price of its 2026 IONIQ 5 by nearly $10,000.

5 Drawbacks of EVs

Of course, nothing is perfect, and electric cars are no exception. There are a few important factors to consider before signing on the dotted line at the dealership.

1. The Federal Tax Credit Is Gone — And the Replacement Is More Complicated

The $7,500 IRA clean vehicle credit that made EVs significantly more accessible to middle-income buyers expired on September 30, 2025. The $4,000 used EV credit expired at the same time. The EV charger installation credit survives through June 30, 2026, but only in eligible census tracts, such as low-income communities and non-urban areas.

The loan interest deduction that replaced the purchase credit is available only to buyers who finance a U.S.-assembled EV, ruling out cash purchases and vehicles assembled in Canada or Mexico (check the vehicle’s VIN: U.S.-assembled vehicles start with 1, 4, 5, or 7). This program is also an annual deduction on taxable income rather than a dollar-for-dollar credit, which means buyers in lower tax brackets get proportionally less benefit.

The net result is that the out-of-pocket cost of EVs is higher upfront in 2026 than in 2024–2025 for most buyers who don’t live in a high-incentive state. Automaker discounts and competitive leasing help, but the headline sticker shock is real.

2. Charging Can Still Be Slow — And Fast Charging Carries a Cost

DC fast charging, which can replenish an EV from 10% to 80% in 15 to 45 minutes depending on the vehicle, is increasingly available. But it comes at a premium: public fast charging costs significantly more per kilowatt-hour than home charging, and some networks charge idle fees after your session ends, so don’t leave your EV hooked up longer than needed. Home Level 2 charging (overnight, plugged into a 240V outlet) remains the most cost-effective option but requires an upfront equipment investment, and not everyone has access to dedicated parking.

The EV charger tax credit’s narrowed eligibility means many urban apartment dwellers and suburban homeowners outside those tracts get no federal help with installation costs.

3. Upfront Cost Remains Higher Than Comparable Gas Vehicles

The Chevrolet Equinox EV starts at $34,995. That’s genuinely competitive, and several EVs now undercut the critical $40,000 price point. But comparable gas hybrids remain several thousand dollars cheaper at purchase, a gap that the loan interest deduction only partially closes, and only over several years of ownership.

The economic argument for EVs is stronger over the lifetime of the vehicle than at the point of purchase. For buyers who are payment-sensitive or unable to finance, the math favors gas vehicles in the short term, even as gasoline prices strain monthly budgets.

4. Rural Charging Gaps Persist

The Biden administration’s $5 billion National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure program, which was funding charger buildout along highway corridors including in rural and underserved areas, was suspended by the Trump administration in early 2025. Private investment continues, but it concentrates in high-traffic corridors and urban markets where utilization rates justify the capital.

For drivers in rural areas or anyone frequently traveling through them, this remains a practical constraint. Home charging covers most daily use, but highway travel through low-density regions still requires careful route planning.

5. Policy Uncertainty Makes Long-Term Planning Harder

The EV market has experienced whiplash between 2022 and 2026 due to the IRA’s expansion of credits and their accelerated elimination. The OBBBA’s auto loan deduction expires at the end of 2028. Fuel economy standards have been relaxed. Several states are fighting against preemption of their own EV mandates. HOV lane access for EVs has been eliminated in New York and California.

None of this changes the fact that EVs make environmental or financial sense over a 10-year ownership horizon. It does mean that buyers should research current incentives carefully before purchase, verify vehicle assembly origin, and not assume that today’s program landscape will look the same in two years.

What You Can Do

If you’re weighing an EV purchase in 2026:

• Check your state’s current incentive programs at the DOE Alternative Fuels Data Center (afdc.energy.gov) before assuming federal credits apply — they don’t.
• Verify vehicle VIN origin before financing: only U.S.-assembled EVs (VIN starting with 1, 4, 5, or 7) qualify for the new loan interest deduction.
• Request manufacturer incentives directly: automakers including Toyota, Hyundai, Ford, and GM have introduced their own cash discounts and subsidized leases to offset the lost federal credit.
• Model the 5-year total cost, not just the sticker price: fuel savings, reduced maintenance, and available incentives often close the gap faster than the purchase price suggests.
• If you rent or lack dedicated charging, factor public charging costs into your fuel savings estimate — DC fast charging at public stations costs more per mile than home Level 2 charging.
• For rural buyers, check PlugShare or ABRP (A Better Route Planner) to map charging availability along your most common routes before committing to an electric vehicle—you’ll find the gaps are closing.

Editor’s Note: This article was originally written by Stephanie Braun on May 3, 2017, and was most recently updated in April 2026. Feature image courtesy of Shutterstock.

The post The Pros and Cons of Electric Vehicles In 2026 appeared first on Earth911.