Category: Advocacy

Planetary Solvency: Why Our Future Depends on Protecting Nature

/ activist360
Cover of 'Planetary solvency – finding our balance with nature: Global risk management for human prosperity' study.
Cover of “Planetary solvency – finding our balance with nature: Global risk management for human prosperity” study.

The Big Picture

Imagine waking up to find grocery store shelves half-empty, the price of fresh produce soaring, and unpredictable storms disrupting everyday life. This isn’t science fiction—it’s a growing reality as our planet’s climate shifts in dangerous ways.

Scientists warn that unless we change course, we risk reaching Planetary Insolvency—a state where nature can no longer support human needs. But here’s the good news: we still have time to act. Understanding the risks and making smarter choices today can help us create a future where people and nature thrive together.

What Is Planetary Solvency?

Think about a business. If it spends more money than it earns, it eventually goes bankrupt. Our planet works in a similar way—if we take more from nature than it can regenerate, we risk collapsing the very systems that support life.

Planetary Solvency is the idea that we must manage Earth’s resources wisely to keep society stable. This means keeping our air and water clean, protecting forests and oceans, and ensuring that nature continues to provide the essentials we rely on—like food, water, and a livable climate.

For decades, economies have focused on short-term profit without considering the environmental “debt” we’re racking up. Now, we’re starting to see the consequences—but it’s not too late to course-correct.

The Warning Signs: Key Statistics You Need to Know

Climate scientists and risk analysts have uncovered troubling trends that show just how urgent this issue is:

  • The past 12 months were the hottest on record, with global temperatures averaging 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels (Trust et al., 2025).

  • A key ocean current system (AMOC) has a 45% chance of collapsing by 2040. This would cause extreme weather shifts, including stronger hurricanes, longer droughts, and disrupted food production.

  • If global warming reaches 2.5°C, over 50% of land suitable for growing wheat and maize could be lost, making food shortages more common.

  • Economic risk models ignore 87% of industries, assuming they won’t be affected by climate change. This is a dangerous miscalculation—nearly all businesses depend on stable natural systems.

  • Some projections estimate that climate-driven disasters could reduce global GDP by up to 63% by 2100, leading to widespread economic instability.

The takeaway? Climate change isn’t just about rising temperatures—it affects food security, jobs, public health, and global stability.

Why Current Climate Plans Are Not Enough

Many governments have pledged to cut carbon emissions and protect ecosystems, but current efforts fall short. Here’s why:

  • The Paris Agreement didn’t account for tipping points: Climate disasters don’t happen in isolation. When one event (like Arctic ice melting) triggers another (such as changing ocean currents), the effects spiral out of control. Many climate policies fail to consider this domino effect.

  • Short-term economic focus: Many governments prioritize economic growth over environmental stability, even though our economy depends on nature—from agriculture to clean water to disaster resilience.

  • Underestimated risks: Climate models often leave out the worst-case scenarios because they are hard to predict. However, ignoring unlikely but catastrophic events is a major risk management failure.

In short, we need stronger and more realistic climate policies that recognize the full scale of the threat.

What Needs to Change: The RESILIENCE Plan

To prevent Planetary Insolvency, experts recommend a RESILIENCE-based approach, which includes:

  • Better Risk Assessments: Governments and businesses need realistic climate risk models—like financial audits, but for Earth’s health.

  • Stronger Policies: Enforceable limits on pollution, deforestation, and overfishing.

  • Faster Emissions Reductions: The longer we wait, the harder it becomes to prevent extreme warming.

  • Restoring Nature: Protecting and rebuilding ecosystems like forests and wetlands, which absorb carbon and prevent natural disasters.

  • Educating Leaders: Many policymakers lack a deep understanding of climate risk. We need climate-literate decision-makers who can balance economic growth with sustainability.

The path forward isn’t just about stopping damage—it’s about creating a world where nature and people thrive together.

What Can YOU Do?

While governments and businesses play a major role, individuals can make a difference too. Here are some ways to take action:

  • Stay Informed: Read about climate solutions, not just problems. Understanding what works can help shape smarter decisions.

  • Push for Policy Change: Vote for leaders and support policies that prioritize sustainability. Your voice matters.

  • Make Smarter Choices: Support businesses committed to sustainable practices. Reduce waste and be mindful of energy consumption.

  • Spread Awareness: Talk about these issues with friends and family. Many people want to help but don’t know where to start.

These small steps, when multiplied across millions of people, can drive real change.

Summing Up

The future isn’t set in stone. What we do today will determine whether our planet remains livable or spirals into crisis. By managing Earth’s resources as carefully as we manage money, we can protect future generations and ensure a stable, thriving world.The good news? We still have time to act—but the clock is ticking. Will we make the right choice?

Source: Trust, S., Saye, L., Bettis, O., Bedenham, G., Hampshire, O., Lenton, T. M., & Abrams, J. (2025, January). Planetary solvency – finding our balance with nature: Global risk management for human prosperity. Institute and Faculty of Actuaries & Exeter University.

National Parks at Risk: How Privatization Could Speed Up Climate Change

/ activist360
Yosemite Valley, among the trees.
Yosemite Valley, among the trees, in June 2023. Credit: Diana Bald

America’s national parks are powerful and beautiful. They are scenic vacation spots and part of our shared heritage. They are home to countless wildlife species and natural protectors against climate change. Recently, concerns have grown about privatization—the idea of private companies taking over or managing aspects of our national parks. Why does this matter? Privatization could change how these lands are cared for, possibly speeding up climate change and limiting public access.

Below we’ll share what privatization is, why it’s happening, and how it might put our parks—and our planet—at risk. You’ll learn about potential harm to wildlife and ecosystems and see how private profit-seeking might increase carbon pollution. Finally, we’ll look at the different sides of the debate and share ways you can help protect these treasures for future generations.

What Is National Park Privatization?

Privatization of national parks means involving private companies in running parts of a park—or, in more extreme cases, selling park land. While the second option is very rare and highly controversial, there are other, more common ways private interests can step in.

  • Concessions: This is when private businesses manage hotels, restaurants, campgrounds, or gift shops inside a national park. A company might build and operate a lodge while paying fees to the government.

  • Public-Private Partnerships: The government owns the park but hires or partners with a private operator to handle daily services, like cleaning facilities or running visitor centers.

  • Outright Sale: In uncommon situations, park land could be sold to a private entity, meaning it is no longer publicly owned.

Why It’s Happening

Many parks have significant funding gaps. According to the National Park Service (NPS), national parks in the United States face an estimated $11.9 billion maintenance backlog, meaning there’s a lot of work that needs to be done—like fixing roads, upgrading water systems, and repairing trails—but not enough money to do it all. Some people believe private companies can fill this gap by bringing in their own funds and running things more efficiently.

Why Do People Worry About Privatization?

Privatization sometimes gives private businesses room to push for more development—like building bigger hotels or even introducing commercial activities in delicate areas. This can mean fewer trees to absorb carbon dioxide, more greenhouse gas emissions from construction, and more energy use to support amenities like large resorts (Source: National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA)).

Loss of Public Control

Our national parks belong to all of us. When for-profit companies take a bigger role, everyday citizens can lose their say in how these lands are used. Government agencies like the National Park Service aim to protect wildlife, natural beauty, and our shared heritage. Private companies have a duty to earn profits. These two goals don’t always line up.

Risk of High Prices and Limited Access

Private businesses often raise fees to cover costs and make a profit. That might include higher prices for overnight stays, guided tours, or even basic park entry. Imagine a scenario where only those who can pay premium rates get to enjoy our national treasures. That kind of setup could exclude families on a budget or students looking to learn about nature firsthand.

How Could Privatization Speed Up Climate Change?

Privately built hotels, roads, and resorts can encroach on forests or wetlands that store carbon. Removing trees or filling in wetlands releases carbon that was previously locked away in plants and soil, adding to the greenhouse gases warming our planet.

When privatization weakens environmental protections, there’s a chance that companies will seek permission to mine, drill, or log on public lands near or even within parks. Extracting natural resources not only increases carbon emissions but also disrupts critical habitats for animals and plants.

A private operator looking for higher profits might want to draw large crowds. More visitors can be wonderful for education and appreciation, but it can also mean more cars, heavier traffic, and longer lines, all leading to additional exhaust fumes and higher greenhouse gas emissions.

Harm to Wildlife and Ecosystems

Big developments like roads, fences, or commercial sites can cut wildlife habitats into smaller pieces. When animals can’t move around freely to find food or migrate, their populations may decline. This fragmentation makes ecosystems more fragile and less able to bounce back from natural disasters linked to climate change.

Reduced Biodiversity

National parks often safeguard a vast range of plant and animal species. Overbuilding, pollution, and noise can push away or endanger species—leading to a drop in biodiversity. Healthy ecosystems rely on a balance of predators, prey, and plants. When that balance is lost, the entire system can unravel.

Less Resilient Ecosystems

Forests, wetlands, and grasslands inside parks help lessen the worst impacts of climate change by storing carbon, stabilizing soils, and buffering against floods. If these areas become fragmented or polluted, they can’t protect us as effectively from the rising threats of wildfires, severe storms, or droughts (Source: United Nations Environment Programme).

Different Sides of the Argument

We’re stunned by the concept of loosing national parks that belong to all of us to private ownership of a few. Privatization supporters argue that private companies could bring much-needed funding, potentially fix aging facilities, and even offer new innovations—like using clean energy in park buildings. They also point out that private partnerships might generate jobs for local communities. Critics worry that a focus on profit could weaken conservation efforts, possibly leading to higher entrance fees that shut out families or lower-income visitors. They also warn that private operators may not face the same level of public oversight, which could make environmental regulations harder to enforce.

Arguments For Privatization

  • May bring more money to fix trails, roads, and park facilities.
  • Could create jobs in local communities, especially around tourism.
  • Potential for private innovation, such as using solar power in new building projects if the contract requires it.

Arguments Against Privatization

  • Profit motives overlook long-term conservation and climate goals.
  • Increased fees could limit public access and make visiting too expensive for many people.
  • Less accountability and oversight mean environmental standards may not be enforced strictly.

Actions Concerned Citizens Can Take

You don’t need a science degree or a powerful position to help protect our parks. Here are some ways you can make a difference:

  • Stay Informed
  • Speak Up
    • Contact your elected officials—call, email, or meet them at a town hall—and share your concerns about privatization proposals.
    • Write letters to local newspapers or post on social media to raise awareness.
  • Support Public Funding
    • Advocate for strong public budgets for parks. For instance, the Great American Outdoors Act helps fund maintenance and conservation projects without relying solely on private money.
    • Encourage your community to vote in favor of bond measures or other funding initiatives that keep parks public and well-maintained.
  • Volunteer and Donate
    • Donate to nonprofits dedicated to conservation and biodiversity.
    • Look for volunteer programs in local or national parks, where you can help maintain trails or educate visitors about conservation.

Final Thoughts

National parks belong to everyone. While privatization might seem like a quick fix to budget problems, it can have serious effects on our climate and on the health of these special places. Private operators could prioritize profits over the long-term well-being of wildlife and ecosystems, leading to more carbon emissions and less public involvement.

By staying informed, speaking up, and supporting strong public funding, you can help protect national parks for generations to come. Your voice matters in deciding how these natural wonders should be cared for. With a little effort, we can make sure our parks remain open, wild, and resilient in a changing climate—leaving a healthy legacy for those who come after us.

Sources

Microplastics in Our Brains?!? What Scientists Have Discovered About Plastic Pollution and Human Health

/ activist360
Comparison of microplastic accumulation in human organs—brain has 10x more than liver and kidney, visualized with sugar in glass jars.
Microplastic Concentrations in Human Organs: Brain samples contained 7–30 times higher MNP concentrations than liver or kidney tissues. Median MNP concentration in the brain (2024 samples): 4,917 µg/g (range: 4,026–5,608 µg/g). Median MNP concentration in the liver (2024 samples): 433 µg/g. Median MNP concentration in the kidney (2024 samples): 404 µg/g.

Why Should We Care?

Plastic pollution is everywhere. Scientists have found microplastics in our food, drinking water, and even the air we breathe. But a new study has revealed something even more alarming—microplastics are accumulating in human brains!

Researchers found that brain samples contained up to 30 times more microplastics than other organs, raising concerns about long-term health risks. Even more shocking, people with dementia had five times the amount of microplastics compared to those without the disease.

What does this mean for our health? Let’s break it down.

What Did Scientists Find?

A team of researchers studied liver, kidney, and brain samples from people who had passed away. Using advanced technology, they found:

  • All organs contained microplastics, but the brain had the highest levels—even more than the liver and kidneys, which naturally filter toxins.

  • The most common type of plastic found was polyethylene (PE)—used in plastic bags, food packaging, and containers.

  • The average microplastic concentration in the brain was 4,917 µg per gram of tissue—compared to 433 µg/g in the liver and 404 µg/g in the kidneys.

To put the quantity of microplastic concentration into perspective, imagine you’re filling three jars with sugar to represent the amount of microplastics in different organs:

  • The kidney jar gets a small teaspoon (404 µg/g).

  • The liver jar gets about the same—just over a teaspoon (433 µg/g).

  • But the brain jar? You dump in more than 10 times that amount—nearly half a cup (4,917 µg/g)!

Now picture that sugar as tiny plastic shards instead of something sweet. Your brain—one of the most protected organs in your body—is absorbing these particles at a dramatically higher rate than the liver or kidneys, which are designed to filter out waste.

While other organs process and remove toxins, the brain seems to be holding onto plastic, potentially for life. Scientists still don’t know exactly what that means for long-term health, but they do know the levels are rising quickly, and that’s a cause for concern.

This is the first time scientists have confirmed that microplastics are accumulating in the human brain—a place that should be well-protected from foreign substances.

Why Is This a Big Deal?

Plastic doesn’t belong in our bodies, let alone inside our brains! Scientists are especially worried because:

Microplastics in the brain may contribute to neurological diseases. In people diagnosed with dementia, microplastic levels were over 26,000 µg per gram of brain tissue—more than five times higher than in non-dementia cases. These tiny plastics were found inside blood vessel walls and immune cells, suggesting they might be affecting brain function.

Microplastics can bypass the brain’s defense system. The blood-brain barrier normally protects the brain from harmful substances. This study suggests nanoplastics (as small as 100–200 nanometers) may be slipping through, raising concerns about how they could impact brain health over time.

While scientists haven’t proven that microplastics cause diseases like dementia, the fact that they are accumulating in the brain demands more research.

How Do Microplastics Get into Our Bodies?

You may not realize it, but we consume and inhale plastic particles every day. Here’s how they might be reaching our brains:

  • Breathing in tiny plastic particles from dust, air pollution, and synthetic fabrics.

  • Eating plastic-contaminated food—studies have found microplastics in seafood, salt, fruits, and vegetables.

  • Drinking bottled water, which contains nearly double the amount of microplastics as tap water.

  • Absorption through the bloodstream—scientists believe that some nanoplastics are small enough to pass through protective barriers in our bodies.

Once inside, these plastics don’t just disappear. They may stay trapped in organs like the liver, kidneys, and brain for years.

Has This Problem Gotten Worse?

Yes—dramatically. Scientists compared brain samples from 2016 and 2024 and found that:

  • Microplastic levels in the brain have increased by nearly 50% in just 8 years.

  • Similar increases were found in the liver and kidney, suggesting we are all being exposed to more plastic than ever before.

  • Older brain samples (1997–2013) contained far fewer microplastics than recent ones, proving this is a rapidly growing problem.

With plastic production and pollution continuing to rise, scientists predict that microplastic exposure will only get worse unless major changes are made.

What Can We Do About It?

While the full health effects of microplastics are still unknown, reducing exposure is a smart move. Here’s how:

  • Use fewer plastics: Switch to reusable bags, glass or metal water bottles, and cloth grocery bags.

  • Filter your water: Some high-quality filters can remove microplastics from drinking water.

  • Limit processed foods: Fresh, whole foods are less likely to contain microplastics than packaged and processed foods.

  • Ventilate your home: Indoor air contains plastic particles from synthetic fabrics and household dust—keeping air clean can reduce inhalation.

  • Support policies to reduce plastic pollution: Push for laws that limit plastic waste and promote better recycling solutions.

Summing Up

Microplastics are inside our brains, and their levels are rising at an alarming rate. Scientists don’t yet know the full impact on human health, but the findings from this study suggest a need for urgent action. While research continues, the best thing we can do is reduce plastic exposure and push for solutions to stop plastic pollution at its source.

The next time you drink from a plastic bottle or open a plastic-wrapped snack, remember—some of that plastic may never leave your body.

Would you like to see a future where our brains stay plastic-free? At activist360, we sure would!

Nihart, A. J., Garcia, M. A., El Hayek, E., Liu, R., Olewine, M., Kingston, J. D., Castillo, E. F., Gullapalli, R. R., Howard, T., Bleske, B., Scott, J., Gonzalez-Estrella, J., Gross, J. M., Spilde, M., Adolphi, N. L., Gallego, D. F., Jarrell, H. S., Dvorscak, G., Zuluaga-Ruiz, M. E., … & Campen, M. J. (2024). Bioaccumulation of microplastics in decedent human brains. Nature Medicine. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-024-03453-1?error=cookies_not_supported&code=79978c49-7500-4963-807e-3de1d60b6782