From coal to solar and wind power plants: Towards a renewable energy production in India, Pennsylvania, and the Philippines

The transition to renewable energy production must be tackled globally. Three examples from India, the US state of Pennsylvania and the Philippines show that climate-friendly power generation can succeed. They are leaving coal behind them and are building large solar and wind power plants. This is because coal, oil and gas are fossil fuels that are extremely harmful to the climate. To combat the climate crisis, we need to be replace them with renewable energy sources.
Renewable energy in India: the world’s largest solar park
The world’s largest solar and wind power plant is being built in a barren salt desert in western India. Once completed in 5 years, it will supply around 16 million Indian households with electricity from renewable sources. The construction of this park will cost 20 billion dollars. The park will be one of the most important and largest clean energy sources in the world. The company behind the project is AGEL (Adani Green Energy Limited), which once made its fortune with coal and is now turning to renewable energy production.

“A region so large, a region that is so unencumbered, there’s no wildlife, there’s no vegetation, there’s no habitation. There is no better alternative use of that land,” said the managing director Adani about the site in the middle of a salt desert.

India spends 100 billion US dollars on the transition to renewable energy
With the huge solar and wind farm India wants to make its own energy policy fit for the future. The power plant is intended to reduce environmental pollution, achieve climate goals, and meet energy requirements at the same time. After all, India is not only one of the countries with the highest population in the world, but also one of the fastest growing economies. The demand for electricity is correspondingly high. Until now, 70% of India’s electricity has been generated by coal. But that is now set to change. The company is planning to invest 100 billion US dollars in the transition to renewable energy in India over the next decade, with 70% of the investment earmarked for clean energy.
After all, if India were to fall back on fossil fuels, the consequences the climate crisis would be catastrophic. Not only globally, but also for its own country. This is because India – like other South Asian countries – is repeatedly overwhelmed by extreme heatwaves. These heatwaves have led to power cuts, extreme air pollution and increased glacial melting in the north of the country. Since 1992, more than 24,000 people have died from heatwaves in India.
Pennsylvania replaces its largest coal-fired power station with a solar farm
Pennsylvania closed one of its largest coal-fired power stations in June 2023 and is now building a huge – 2,700-hectare – solar farm instead. The solar farm will be built in close proximity to the old power station to prevent further damaging of the environment. Once the plant is up and running, it will supply 75,000 households with green electricity. The costs amount to 90 million US dollars. The Mineral Basin Solar Project fills a critical gap in power generation and creates 750 new jobs. The plant is expected to be completed in 2026.
A gigantic solar park like this is being build in Pennsylvania. (Unsplash: Nuno Marques)
A huge photovoltaic park in the Philippines
Ambitions are also high in the Philippines when it comes to switching to solar and wind energy: With around 5 million solar panels on 3,500 hectares, the energy company SPNEC (Solar Philippines New Energy Corporation) planes to build one of the biggest solar parks in the world – probably even larger than the one in India. The park will go into operation in 2026. If the project succeeds a large proportion of the Philippines’ energy requirements will be covered by renewable energies.
Unlike in India or Pennsylvania, the solar park in the Philippines is being built on a large area of forest. This is of course problematic. It further destroys the habitat of animals and plants. Experience has shown that this has a negative impact on local biodiversity. However, this diversity is essential for maintaining a balanced ecosystem.
Climate-friendly power generation: Away from coal and gas
Scientists have agreed for a long time that we can only stop the climate crisis if we replace environmentally harmful energy sources with renewables. This means moving away from gas and coal and towards wind, water and solar energy. Many countries and regions now have realized this: The global output of wind energy, for example, doubled between 2014 and 2020. India, Pennsylvania, and the Philippines are all taking a step towards renewable energy and are examples of how future energy needs can be met in a climate-friendly way.
This work is licensed under the Creative Common License. It can be republished for free, either translated or in the original language. In both cases, please cite Kontrast / Kontrast Redaktion as the original source/author and set a link to this article on Scoop.me. https://thebetter.news/renewable-energy-india-pennsylvania-and-the-philippines/

The rights to the content remain with the original publisher. Läs mer…

Lula da Silva keeps his promise: Amazon deforestation reduced by 64%

The deforestation of the Amazon rainforest has been in action for years, risking the collapse of the unique ecosystem. But the election of Lula da Silva as president in early 2023 brought hope. He announced that he would put an end to the deforestation of the Amazon. He seems to be keeping his promise as, compared to November 2022, deforestation in the Amazon fell by 64% in November 2023.
The Amazon rainforest is one of the largest carbon reservoirs on earth. This makes it particularly important in the fight against climate change. Despite this, illegal deforestation persists. This was especially evident under the right-wing nationalist ex-president Jair Bolsonaro. During his time in office, rainforest deforestation increased by around 75%.
The current president, Lula da Silva, promised to stop deforestation when he took office – and it looks like Silva is keeping his promise. Compared to the previous year, deforestation fell by 64% in November 2023. According to the Brazilian Space Agency (INPE), around 200 square kilometres were destroyed. This is the smallest area since the evaluations began. It is also the first time since 2018 that less than 10,000 square kilometres have been deforested in one year.
“Brazil is ready to resume its role in the fight against the climate crisis and protect all ecosystems, especially the Amazon. Our government once managed to reduce forest destruction by 80 per cent. Now let’s all fight together for zero deforestation!”
FIRST SUCCESSES AFTER JUST 6 MONTHS: RAINFOREST DEFORESTATION DOWN BY 33.6 PER CENT
After six months in office, the BBC report initial successes in the fight against deforestation. Compared to the first half of the previous year, deforestation has been reduced by 33.6%. In June 2023, 41% less forest was destroyed than in the previous year. Brazilian Environment Minister Marina Silva attributes this to Lula’s successful environmental policy.
LULA’S POTENTIAL TO REDUCE DEFORESTATION BY 89%
Lula’s goal of ending deforestation by 2030 is a major challenge. This is because deforestation reached alarming proportions under his predecessor Jair Bolsonaro. The new conservation plan published by President Lula at the beginning of June 2023 aims to achieve this goal. Among other things, it provides for the confiscation of half of all illegally used land within protected areas, as well as higher penalties for illegal deforestation.
The Brazilian president also calls on other countries – especially the rich West – to contribute financially to saving the “green lungs of the Earth” in order to combat the global climate crisis.
A study attests that Lula’s plans have the potential to actually reduce deforestation in the Amazon by 89%. In any case, Lula will not have an easy time of it. The left-wing president still faces a conservative majority in parliament.
UNDER BOLSONARO, THE AMAZON SHRANK BY MORE THAN TWICE THE AREA OF VIENNA – PER MONTH
This is sorely needed, as the Amazon has been badly affected in recent years. When Lula first moved into the presidential palace in 2003, he launched an ambitious programme to save the rainforest. He and his successor Dilma Rousseff, who like Lula comes from Brazil’s left-wing Workers’ Party, succeeded in reducing deforestation by 80% to a historic low. But when Bolsonaro came to power in 2019, Brazil made a U-turn in its environmental policy.
Bolsonaro willingly granted concessions to allow corporations to clear the rainforest for soya and palm oil cultivation, cattle breeding and mining. Illegally cleared areas were legalised by Bolsonaro and forest fires were only half-heartedly combated. Deforestation increased sharply by 70 per cent under his government.
FOR THE FIRST TIME, THE AMAZON EMITS MORE CO₂ THAN IT CAN CAPTURE
Under Bolsonaro, the Amazon’s carbon footprint has turned around. For the first time, it is emitting more CO2 than it can bind. This was revealed in a study by researchers from the French National Institute for Agronomic Research. The scientists mainly analysed satellite data documenting the plant biomass in the rainforest and its deforestation. The result: the Amazon basin released around 16.6 billion tonnes of CO₂ into the environment, but only absorbed around 13.9 tonnes. This 2.7 billion tonne difference is roughly Austria’s consumption for 35 years.
[embedded content]
WITHOUT A WELL-PRESERVED AMAZON RAINFOREST, THE ENTIRE ECOSYSTEM COULD COLLAPSE
The Amazon currently has a perfectly functioning water cycle. Inland regions actually have too little rainfall for a tropical rainforest. But the trees suck the groundwater upwards, it evaporates and rains down again over the huge forest area. This cycle could be permanently disrupted by further deforestation. The rainforest would slowly die off, turn into a savannah and change the climate around the world.
This process would release as much CO2 as the entire world consumes in seven years. The unique ecosystem, which is home to 10% of all species, would be irretrievably lost and with it the CO2-binding effect of the rainforest. Scientists assume that this tipping point is reached at a deforestation rate of 20 to 25%. We are currently at 18%.
ANTI-DEFORESTATION RAIDS AFTER TAKING OFFICE
Just a few days after taking office, Lula’s government took action and carried out controls in the rainforest against illegal deforestation. As reported by Reuters, checks were carried out in areas that are all within the Cachoeira Seca indigenous reserve, where deforestation is strictly prohibited.
While deforestation is decreasing, the number of fires continues to rise, as satellite monitoring shows. Whether this is due to natural causes or arson cannot be determined.
[embedded content]
This work is licensed under the Creative Common License. It can be republished for free, either translated or in the original language. In both cases, please cite Kontrast / Marco Pühringer as the original source/author and set a link to this article on Scoop.me. https://thebetter.news/amazon-deforestation-reduced/

The rights to the content remain with the original publisher. Läs mer…

Swamps as a climate saver: Ireland stores tons of CO₂ through 33,000 hectares of new peatlands

Ireland is reforesting its swamps and bogs in a bid to fight climate change. Although marshlands cover only three percent of the earth, they store 25 percent of the world’s CO2. So far, around 8100 hectares on the “green island” have been flooded with water. The “watering” is intended to create optimum conditions for new peat land. Experts believe that the “renaturation” project will store enormous amounts of climate-damaging greenhouse gases.
Peatlands are considered to be the ecosystem with the greatest storage potential for CO₂. When a plant dies, the CO₂ stored in it is released into the water or into the marsh soil as it decays, rather than into the air. Bogs and marshlands are therefore true climate protectors!
Trees store CO₂ and release oxygen This process is called photosynthesis. When trees die and rot, they release the remaining CO₂ into the environment, especially into the air. However, if a tree falls into a swamp, the CO₂ is not released into the air but stored in the water and soil. If the swamp dries up, and thus also the CO₂-containing mixture, peat is formed. Over thousands of years, a well-known raw material is created from it: coal!
Ireland is reforesting swamps and peatlands to fight climate change
Until the industrial revolution, almost one fifth of Ireland was covered with peatlands. From the 1850s until today, people have destroyed large parts of Ireland’s nature – that is, besides marshlands, also countless forests. The partly state-owned company “Bord na Móna” wants to revive nature and make Ireland the green lung of Europe to fight climate change. For this reason, they are filling 33,000 hectares of alluvial land with water over the next few years. They also want to reintroduce native species of plants and animals that have been driven or wiped out over the years. Currently, just under a quarter, or 8125 hectares, has been “reforested.”
How Ireland’s marshlands were destroyed and rebuilt
The reason for the poor condition of Ireland’s peatlands is historical. The tradition of “peat cutting” has been preserved and carried on for generations. The peat, when dried, is a good fuel. For the economy, especially during the industrialization, the peat was in great demand because it could be found everywhere on the island and was therefore very cheap. Peat was also used to heat the houses in Ireland.
Another reason for the large-scale drainage of the Irish peatlands is agriculture. During the Industrial Revolution, Ireland developed not only railroads and cities, but also agriculture on a large scale. For the cultivation of food, large areas of marshland were destroyed.
Even at the beginning of industrialization, the destruction of the marshes was already underway: by the end of the 19th century, Ireland was more industrialized than the whole of Austro-Hungarian Empire or Spain, two countries that were significantly larger in terms of area and population. The partly state-owned Irish company “Bord na Móna” and others now wants to declare war on environmental destruction and make the “emerald isle” live up to its name again.
This work is licensed under the Creative Common License. In case of new republication, please cite NeueZeit.at/Noah Düker as the Source/Author and set a link to the article in English: https://scoop.me/ireland-climate-change-peatlands/
The rights to the content remain with the original publisher. Läs mer…

Amsterdam Airport Schiphol bans Private Jets and Night Flights

The private jet ban is set to into effect at the end of 2025. This will lead to “more quiet, clean and better air travel” an airport official said in a statement. Other than that, larger and therefore louder aircraft like the Boeing 747 should no longer be commissioned to land at the Dutch airport. Local inhabitants and climate activists welcome Schiphol’s move towards better quality of live in the Amsterdam suburb. The wake of this decision now echoing through Europe as more cities want to push for similar policies in the future.
Speaking in numbers, this would mean about 10,000 fewer aircraft per year to land at Schiphol, their flights being cancelled with the ban. Recently the government also implemented directives for the airport to reduce the flights from 500 to 440 thousand flights, cutting an additional 40 thousand flights, starting November 2023. 
“For too long, we have only thought about growth and not enough about the associated costs. We need to be sustainable for our employees, the environment and the world.”, Says Ruud Sondag, CEO Royal Schiphol Group. 
[embedded content]
Lawsuit against guidelines – airlines fear reduced profits
Travel agencies and Airlines have complained about the changes. The Dutch Airline KLM, who’s main airport is Schiphol, was surprised, claiming that they had wished for coordinated action across the entire air travel industry. But the lack of actual plans stemming from big airlines might explain why Schiphol’s decision not to wait.
The shrinking of flight numbers at Schiphol was followed by a lawsuit by KLM and four other airlines in fear of having reduced profits. Early April 2023, a Dutch court now overruled the directive due to an issue regarding formalities in the law-making process. 
Climate activists are disappointed about the court’s ruling, setting back the efforts of CO2 reduction in the Netherlands drastically. Their hopes now lie with the airport’s lone push to at least save a fourth of the CO2 intended by the government.
Private jets as climate killer – Germany to consider ban in the future
German air travel expert Sussane Menge sees private jets as a “great climate injustice” and calls for airports in Germany to implement similar directives to Schiphol to combat rising CO2 emissions. 
“It is no longer plausible that many people are now combating global warming by insulating houses and replacing heating systems, while a small minority is pumping out jet fuel as if there were no tomorrow.” – German air travel expert Susanne Menge. 
Now the German Greens have announced that they are considering proposing a similar with support from opposition party “die Linke” (the Left) though the future of this legislation is unclear.
Most wealth – Most emissions
And the numbers add up, considering that in 2019, a year before the Private jet boom properly kicked off, private jets already accounted for 899,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide (CO2). In comparison, in the same year, the CO2 emissions on a global average per person accounted for about 4.78 tons per year.
A person with average carbon emission would take more than 627 thousand years to produce the amount of CO2 a billionaire emits in a Year. (Foto: Nate / Unsplash)
Considering these facts, it gets even more baffling when one considers that these 899 thousand tons of carbon dioxide is emitted by just about 22 thousand jets. Meaning that these approximately 22,000 private aircraft owners emit equally to about 188,000 people. And that’s only with their jets, accounting for other luxuries, these numbers can rise up to a staggering 3 million tons per year for the top 1 percent.
A person with average carbon emission would take more than 627 thousand years to produce the amount of CO2 a billionaire emits in a Year. Considering the shrinking CO2 budget, the rising temperatures and growing wealth inequality, considering bans like this might be a necessity all over Europe in the future. Läs mer…

Vegan pies, shirts made from coffee grounds, and fan urine-based fertiliser: how Forest Green Rovers became the world’s first carbon neutral club

Third tier English football club Forest Green Rovers are grabbing the footballing world’s attention through their climate friendly practices. The world’s first carbon-neutral club have a fully vegan half-time menu, shirts made from recycled coffee grounds, and are now fertilizing their fully organic pitch with the urine of away fans. They lead the way in a sport so vulnerable to climate change that it stands as an existential threat.
Following two world cups marred by controversy, years of oil state, oligarch and hedge fund involvement at the highest level, and the ever-rising cost of following the world’s most popular sport, it’s easy to see why many people are falling out of love with football. Swimming against the tide, English League One outfit Forest Green Rovers are the unsuspecting source of a seldom found footballing good news story. While elite clubs across the world flirt with oil state ownership and the riches that come with it, “The Green” have staged an in-house revolution to become the first United Nations recognised carbon neutral football club.
CLIMATE CHANGE AND FOOTBALL
While growing inequality in the footballing sphere is a central concern for those interested in the longevity of the game, many are unaware of football’s contribution to climate change. Sport as a whole has a global carbon footprint equivalent to Tunisia, and football with it’s never ending traveling for away days, continental competitions, equipment manufacturing, and stadiums large enough to host a small city’s worth of people, is the greatest contributor of all.
The emission heavy nature of football is self-destructive. A study in England found that one quarter of English league football grounds will be at risk from flooding every season if global warming continues at its current rate. On top of this, players will be expected to play through exhausting warmer temperatures, and games will increasingly be called off or made impossible to reach for fans because of extreme weather events.
[embedded content]
Those involved in the sport are slowly waking up to the scale of the problem though. In 2015, Carlisle United were forced to close their stadium for three months at a cost of three million pounds due to flooding damage caused by Storm Desmond. When a 2021 study revealed that the storm was 59% more likely to occur because of climate change, the Carlisle manager was quick to push for climate friendly progress.
“THE GREENS” LEAD THE WAY FOR FOOTBALLING PEERS
So how did this club, playing in the third level of English football in front of an average attendance of below 4,000 people, become the first UN recognised carbon neutral football club and grab the attention of the world’s top teams?
Their transformation began in 2010 with the takeover of the club by Dale Vince, a green energy industrialist who wanted to transfer his knowledge and ambitions to a new project. He quickly banned the players from eating red meat, and soon after changed the food available at the stadium to an all vegan menu. In addition, he installed solar panels to the stadium in order to cut emissions, created the world’s first organic football pitch, and even brought in a solar powered lawnmower to maintain it. For the fans, Vince introduced football shirts made from recycled coffee grounds and will only release a newly designed kit every two years. Along with greatly cutting emissions, it removes financial pressures from fans who may struggle to afford the newest design each season.
The most recent eyebrow raising move by the club came in 2022 as they revealed that the urine of away fans would be converted into clean water and fertiliser. A spokesperson for the club said:
“Space mission-inspired closed loop technology will convert fans’ urine into clean water and a concentrated fertiliser product, both of which can be used to keep the pitch in top condition… the award-winning modular units will treat wastewater from the urinals through on-site physical treatment. The modules also have the potential for further treatment options of wastewater from the toilets and handwashing facilities to produce compost and flush water.”
The next move for Forest Green is the construction of their planned Eco Park Stadium, a new home for the club, which is set to be the greenest in the world. It will be built almost entirely with sustainably sourced wood and is to be fitted out with electric car and bike charging stations among other eco-friendly facilities.
FOOTBALL CLUBS MUST SECURE THEIR FUTURE WITH CLIMATE FRIENDLY PRACTICES
The kind of outside the box thinking shown by Forest Green, while easy to laugh at for opposing fans, is what is needed on a mass scale should the football industry wish to curb its self-destructive practices.
Hailed the “greenest team in the world” by FIFA, they have reduced their emissions by 42% since 2011 and have mockingly been called “dirty vegans” by rival fans along the way. This nickname is worn as a badge of honor though, and is one that more clubs should aspire to.
While Forest Green are a shining example of how to operate in a climate friendly fashion, not enough clubs are following suit. Should those from every level of the footballing hierarchy wish to continue playing as they have for well over 150 years, they will need to accept progress and make the switch to a cleaner way of operation. Läs mer…

A 4-day week feels like a world without cars for the climate

A comprehensive review of studies from Great Britain shows: Shorter working hours—in the form of a 4-day week—bring relief for the people and the climate. Because not only are we less burdened, so is the environment. In the UK, switching to a four-day week with full wage compensation would save as much CO₂ as taking all private cars off the roads.
Climate awareness in society has probably never been as high as it is now. At least when it comes to the urgency of counteracting climate collapse. According to a survey by the Austrian Climate Ministry, 8 out of 10 are convinced that we have to change our daily behavior in order to stop the climate crisis. The open question that remains is: how? Because small reforms are not enough. We know that here and in other countries.
A review of international studies now shows that a real turnaround in climate policy could be achieved in an area that many people do not even suspect—our working hours. Specifically, if we shorten them. This would achieve several goals at once: it would make the distribution of time more equitable, employees would stay healthy longer, and CO₂-intensive private car use would decline rapidly.
The 4-day week in the UK could save over a fifth of CO₂ consumption
UK environmental scientist:in Laurie Mompelat, together with economist:in Mika Minio-Paluello, has broken down that if the entire UK switched to a 4-day week, the country’s CO₂ footprint could be reduced by 127 million tons per year. That’s a reduction of more than a fifth (21.3 percent overall)—so it’s a very big deal. It would thus have the same effect as taking all private cars (roughly 27 million cars) off the road.
The 4-day week as a tool for more climate protection could make up for much that has been missed or simply not achieved so far. Between 1990 and 2016, the UK managed to reduce emissions within its borders by 41 percent, but emissions resulting from the consumption of goods and services fell by only 15 percent. The latter CO₂ emissions are released abroad—through the production of clothing, electronics or processed food, for example—but are attributed to the British footprint. And consumption issues in particular would have to be addressed individually—which is considered difficult and slow.
Sociologist Juliet Schor: longer working hours cause more emissions
Reducing overall working hours, however, could play a central role in decarbonizing the country. One day less work per week also means one day less commuting, less energy consumption in many businesses—including offices—and less CO₂-intensive activities in private households due to the increase in time prosperity. So people also simply have more time for activities and activities that are slower and more time-intensive, but more environmentally friendly. Sociologist Juliet Schor summarizes the relationship succinctly: “Longer working hours mean more emissions. Fewer hours mean fewer emissions. This relationship is called the scale effect, concerning the size of the economy. So: more work means a bigger economy, means more production. And more production is associated with more emissions.” Schor is studying the 4-day-Work-Week in several countries.
[embedded content]
Even away from the workplace, a decrease in emissions is evident when we have more free time. German technology researcher Philipp Frey explains:
“In fact, at least in Europe and North America, using satellite measurements, a positive correlation can be observed between work days, where more is emitted, and weekend days, which tend to be days off, where less is emitted. Emissions on a work day are almost twice as high as on the weekend.”
When it comes to the climate, we can’t just talk about doing without, but about how we reorganize work
When we have more free time—and therefore less stress—we are more likely to decide to do things on foot, by public transport or by bike. We go shopping instead of shopping online, we cook ourselves instead of resorting to frozen and convenience foods. The positive consequences for our climate cannot be overstated, according to Philipp Frey of the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology Research:
“On the one hand, reductions in working hours can make a contribution to combating the climate catastrophe, and at the same time they are attractive for employees. On the other hand, they are attractive for employees. This gives us the opportunity to get out of a discourse about doing without—and into a debate about how we can increase our prosperity in terms of time. And from this perspective, it’s also a good sign that the latest report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change explicitly mentions working time reduction as a possible climate protection measure.”
Laurie Mompelat and Mika Minio-Paluello also cite the potential savings in CO₂ consumption through a general reduction in working hours—and also summarize other studies conducted internationally.
Effect 1: Electricity consumption decreases—less heating, fewer electronics
Studies show that a reduction in weekly working hours is generally accompanied by a significant reduction in energy consumption. This is because you save electricity that would otherwise be consumed at the workplace. This is because many devices that are typical in offices, for example, are then in use less. Lighting, heating, elevators, computers, canteens. Energy consumption also drops in the manufacturing sector.
In a large-scale experiment conducted between 2008 and 2009 in the U.S. state of Utah, 17,000 public employees were switched to a four-day week. There, it was shown that enormous energy savings were possible as a result of a work-free Friday. 6,000 tons a year could be saved in Utah by a 4-day week, an interim report on the experiment noted. 12,000 tons if commuting savings are added.
In 2020, Autonomy published a report that concluded: a 3-day weekend could reduce CO₂ emissions by 117,000 tons in the UK—per week.
Effect 2: Commuting decreases
A shorter working week also means less CO₂ caused by cars due to less commuting. In a study by the University of Reading, 2,000 employees and entrepreneurs were surveyed on commuting behavior. Two out of three companies that offered a 4-day week said their employees now drove less. If you extrapolate this to the population, the potential for savings is huge: after all, one in two employed people in the UK currently either drive themselves to work or are passengers. In rural areas, three out of four employees travel to work by car.
If everyone worked one day less per week, millions of cars would disappear from the road (Photo: Sorin Gheorghita/Unsplash).
Effect 3: Private consumption becomes more climate-friendly
A number of studies have examined the impact of working hours on individual household consumption and energy-intensive behavior. One U.S. study combined calculations of the CO₂ impact of goods with data from consumer spending and concluded that households with longer working hours have a significantly larger CO₂ footprint.
In the University of Reading study, two out of three respondents said they would spend the extra day off with family and friends. One in two would cook more at home, and one in four would volunteer in the local area. As a rule, these are activities that are not only fulfilling, but also climate-friendly and good for social coexistence.
Effect 4: Our leisure activities slow down
More free time creates space for more CO₂-poor activities: reading, playing, sports, time with the family. Watching a movie for a change, more walking, more continuing education—in short, deceleration, and self-actualization. Research into the impact of the reduction in working hours in France has demonstrated clear trends toward more domestic and lower-carbon activities. The introduction of the 35-hour work week in France has greatly changed the daily routines of employees.
Contrary to what many feared, people did not use their time off to consume more. Instead, they took care of themselves and lived more relaxed lives.
Effect 5: Shorter working hours are good for our health—even saving CO₂
With a three-day weekend—and more free time—we can spend more time outdoors, complete trips on foot, and be less stressed. Long work hours are associated with stress and an increased risk of burn-out, musculoskeletal complaints and mental illness. Treating all of this, costs money—and consumes resources: medications have long delivery routes, healthcare facilities need energy, and patients and family members as well as staff have to travel distances.
In summary, it is clear that we should think about and shape climate protection and our working hours in a networked way. Productivity has always increased in recent decades. And in the areas where no classic leaps in productivity are possible—health care, nursing, elementary education, education—employees already rarely work full time because the workload of these jobs is high. The path toward shorter working hours would therefore be clear. All that’s missing is the political will.
This work is licensed under the Creative Common License. It can be republished for free, either translated or in the original language. In both cases, please cite / Kathrin Glösel as the original source/author and set a link to this article on Scoop.me. https://scoop.me/4-day-week-climate/
The rights to the content remain with the original publisher. Läs mer…