Climate change and environmental justice: a case study in ethics and science

A key part of the fight against climate change is to reduce greenhouse gases (GHGs). So, when a massive corporation reduces their emissions by an amount equivalent to taking 900,000 cars off the road, we should celebrate their efforts in “breaking sustainability barriers” – right? Shouldn’t we nudge other companies to follow their lead? In an era where our government is denying climate change, why wouldn’t we embrace our climate allies in the business world?

A report was recently released about how Smithfield Foods is meeting its pledge to reduce GHGs. Since 2013, Smithfield has worked in partnership with the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), a nonprofit at the forefront of environmental sustainability. As the EDF attests, it is true that Smithfield is leading other food industries in cutting GHGs. Yet it is also true that Smithfield continues to extort marginalized communities here in North Carolina.

In this article, I use the case of Smithfield Foods to ask broader questions about ethics and advocacy. I challenge my fellow scientists to consider how power is distributed between industry, academia and communities compared to how it should be distributed. Before we follow the EDF and hold Smithfield up as a role model, we must ask ourselves: if we’re only focused on reducing GHGs, on whose backs are we fighting climate change?

Smithfield Foods

The bacon on your BLT, the pork in your sausage and the carnitas in your taco likely all come from the same source: Smithfield. The scope of their business is massive, and in 2013 they were acquired by a Chinese company, WH Group. Smithfield is both the world’s largest hog producer and pork processor, which means that they raise and slaughter pigs and package meat for distribution. In 2017 alone, global sales exceeded $15 billion. In North Carolina, Smithfield owns 225 hog farms and contracts 1,200 of the state’s 2,200 hog farms (altogether this accounts for 90 percent of North Carolina’s hog production).

Smithfield hog farms are Consolidated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), where hogs are raised in large barns where they eat, sleep and defecate. The shift from pastures to CAFOs has been a seismic shift in North Carolina’s hog industry. In 1974, there were 22,975 hog farms and 1.4 million hogs in North Carolina. Today, there are 2,200 hog farms and over 9 million hogs. All of those hogs need to eat a tremendous amount of grain, which they then digest to produce a tremendous amount of waste. To put “tremendous” in perspective, consider that there are 10.3 million people in North Carolina. Imagine that each person weighed between 300 to 700 pounds, and that these giant North Carolinians lived almost exclusively in three counties. Now imagine that the volume of waste produced by these animals was stored in uncovered, football field-sized pits.

Hogs and Environmental Justice in North Carolina

If you didn’t know your pork chops came from Smithfield, you may have heard about them in the news. Smithfield has been heavily criticized for its waste management practices, which were brought to national attention last year due to a series of nuisance lawsuit settlements and contamination caused by hurricane-related flooding. Stick with me in this section – the injustices perpetrated by Smithfield run deep, but this understanding is necessary to engage with the ethics questions at the end.

The waste management practices in question involve the contamination of lagoons and sprayfields, which have been the focus of most environmental justice organizing against Smithfield. In an industrial hog operation, barns are constructed so that waste falls through holes in the floor and then is periodically flushed out into outdoor waste lagoons. As of January 2018, North Carolina’s Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) had issued hog farms permits for the operation of over 3,700 waste lagoons. When the lagoons become full, liquid waste is sprayed on to nearby fields. As you can imagine, this leads to a number of problems: the build up of nutrients and metals in the lagoon water contaminates nearby groundwater and surface water through lagoon leakage or spraying; methane, hydrogen sulfide and nitrous oxides are released as the organics in the lagoon water decomposes; the risk of lagoon flooding during storms increases; and spraying  aerosolizes fecal water. The odor and pollution impact people’s health and quality of life. Although DEQ waste permits specify when, where, and how much lagoon waste can be sprayed, the process is self-regulated and frequently violated by hog farms. Besides waste management, neighboring communities are also affected by the use of antibiotics in animal feed, pollution from the storage of dead pig carcasses, and heavy truck traffic.

What makes this environmental pollution an issue of environmental justice? According to the US Department of Energy, environmental justice ensures that “no population bears a disproportionate share of negative environmental consequences” and that historically marginalized populations have a seat at the table when environmental decisions are to be made. Hog operations, however, disproportionately affect low-income communities of color. In North Carolina, African Americans, Latinos, and Native Americans are 1.4, 1.26, and 2.39 times as likely, respectively, to live within three miles of at least one hog operation. In total, an estimated 1 million North Carolinians live within three miles of hog operation, and over half of them live within three miles of two or more. In fact, about 16,000 residents live within only half a mile of 2 – 5 industrial hog operations [reference: public comment submitted by UNC faculty and students regarding the renewal of NC’s animal operations general permit]. A recent study found that residents living near industrial hog operations had a higher risk of infant mortality and low birth weights as well as higher risk of adult mortality from anemia, kidney disease, tuberculosis, and blood bacterial infections as compared to communities of similar demographics.

Civil rights groups have taken two legal strategies to advocate for these communities. First, in 2013, 600 residents filed 26 lawsuits against Murphy-Brown LLC, the subsidiary of Smithfield that produces the majority of Smithfield’s pork in North Carolina. This started a series of retaliatory steps by Smithfield and its allies in the North Carolina legislature. Immediately after the lawsuits were filed, the General Assembly made it more difficult to file nuisance lawsuits against agriculture (Right to Farm Act). In 2017, the General Assembly passed HB 467, limiting the total compensatory damages that can be awarded in nuisance lawsuits. HB 467 was sponsored by Representative Jimmy Dixon from Duplin County, which is home to over 500 industrial hog operations. In 2018, after the first trial ended and a jury awarded the plaintiffs $51 million, the General Assembly passed SB 711 by Senator Brent Jackson and Rep. Dixon, both of whom receive contributions directly from Smithfield or from political organizations funded by Smithfield. SB 711 further limits when a nuisance lawsuit can be filed as well as when punitive damages can be awarded. Both HB 467 and SB 711 were passed over Governor Roy Cooper’s veto. In the three cases settled in 2018, plaintiffs were awarded $51 million, $25 million, and a historic $473.5 million in damages, but these were reduced to $630,000, $3.2 million and $118 million, respectively, due to HB 467 and SB 711. An additional two cases have been settled, both finding Smithfield Foods at fault. Although plaintiffs were suing Murphy-Brown and not individual farmers, Smithfield chose to remove hogs from the specific farms involved in each of the three settled lawsuits, putting the hog farmers out of business. Smithfield has successfully framed nuisance lawsuits not as a right of property owners, but as an attack on farming families. Since hog farmers tend to be white and the plaintiffs are mostly people of color, this has flared tensions along racial lines.

Civil rights groups have used another legal tool: appealing to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to fight the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). In 2014, the Waterkeeper Alliance, North Carolina Environmental Justice Network (NCEJN) and Rural Empowerment Association for Community Help (REACH) filed a complaint with the EPA that the DEQ was violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits entities receiving federal funding from acting in ways that disproportionately harm communities of color. As mentioned previously, the DEQ grants permits to hog operations so they can have waste lagoons that, in turn, harm neighboring communities of color. Former North Carolina Governor Patrick McCroy had disregarded public requests to account for the racial and ethnic impacts of the hog industry when issuing waste permits. Under his tenure, civil rights groups attempted to negotiate with DEQ over the Title VI violation, but civil rights organizations were subject to intimidation by the hog industry. However, under Governor Roy Cooper, the DEQ has cooperated with the EPA and formed an Environmental Justice and Equity Advisory Board. As part of the settlement, DEQ will be more transparent about how it investigates animal waste complaints.

Finally, it is worth noting that Smithfield’s business practices do not only negatively impact neighboring communities, but the farmers themselves. Contract farming is responsible for 81% of hog production for Smithfield. In these contracts, farmers supply labor and equipment and are responsible for waste disposal (the part of the business that costs money), but Smithfield owns the feed and the pigs (the part of the business that makes money). This arrangement puts contract farmers in a financially difficult situation. The debt they face after constructing facilities keeps them vulnerable to their terms of contract and they are not left with sufficient resources to upgrade their facilities beyond what Smithfield requires. Furthermore, Smithfield controls almost every part of the supply chain in eastern North Carolina, from the distribution of grain-based feed supply to pork processing plants, a process called vertical integration. This means that even if a farmer wanted to break a contract and convert their land to a smaller hog farm, they would be operating in a place without easy access to feed or processing plants to support their business.

Didn’t the EDF say there was good news? Smithfield’s Sustainability Goals

In 2010, Walmart approached 15 of their major suppliers to lower their GHG emissions (an initiative which they renewed with their 2017 Gigaton Challenge to reduce emissions among suppliers). As a result, in 2013, Smithfield partnered with the Environmental Defense Fund to reduce emissions, largely by reducing fertilizer loss from grain production. The details of their progress were published in the case study mentioned earlier. Indeed, Smithfield has met their target for reducing GHG emissions from grain farms and feed milling, and has supported the majority of farmers from which they source  to adopt more sustainable fertilizer practices.

However, the case study points out that while 19% of Smithfield’s GHG emissions came from grain farms in 2018, 43% came from manure management. This refers to the methane and nitrous oxides given off by open waste lagoons. Smithfield is now turning towards biogas technology to address this issue, which captures methane and other gases and refines them into natural gas that can be used for energy. Biogas is a promising technology for curbing emissions, creating jobs, and providing renewable energy for North Carolina. However, Smithfield’s current plans do not involve community advocates nor do they ensure that their waste management practices will comply with environmental standards set by the North Carolina General Assembly in 2007 for new hog operations. Waste will still be pumped into lagoons that may pollute groundwater or be prone to overflow in storms, and effluent will still be sprayed on to neighboring fields. Smithfield has yet to include host community benefit agreements as part of their plan.      

The EDF and Smithfield have a clear strategy for environmental issues: make progress by putting aside differences and focus on common ground. This led to the successful reduction of GHGs through supporting grain farmers. This strategy seems pragmatic. However, after six years of partnership, at what point is pragmatism a euphemism for complicity?

Advocacy and hard questions

This case study illustrates how systems and sociopolitical context influence the way the scientific challenges of our day, like climate change and environmental justice, are tackled. Smithfield is an example of a powerful corporation both making meaningful contributions to fighting climate change through reductions in GHGs, while at the same time polluting the environment and investing heavily in the perpetuation of environmental injustice.

Yet if Smithfield can pay for lawyers to fight nuisance cases, buy the influence of North Carolina representatives, and support monarch butterfly preservation, they certainly can afford to compensate communities suffering from their hog operations and remediate the damage they have caused. And if the Environmental Defense Fund is truly committed to their mission of protecting our climate and human health and truly values ethical action, they should be transparent about the injustices Smithfield still has to right.

There are three main calls-to-action I would like to put forth.

1: Learn from communities. If you conduct research in a field related to identifying and treating hazards, recognize the expertise of communities affected by these hazards and learn how to support community organizing. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is a method that involves the community in every step of the research process, using their lived experience to drive research questions, collect data and interpret results. In this way, CBPR transforms “research from a top-down, expert-driven process into one of co-learning and co-production.” For example, when UNC’s Dr. Steve Wing investigated the health effects of living near hog operations in North Carolina, the project was a result of working with community members rather than simply in communities. Through their lived experience, community members best understood the kinds of healths effects of living near CAFOs, the relationships between different community members, and the relationship between Smithfield and contract farmers. When results were published, community partners were included as coauthors. Even if findings are not published, communities can use them as evidence when pushing for change, such as submitting public comments to local government or in court.

If your research is relevant to community health, how do you engage communities? Do you value their expertise? Are they involved in research design? Do you invest time into building trust and relationships? Do you compensate community members for their time? Do you present or disseminate results in a way that’s accessible, relevant and empowering for communities?

As an aside, if you follow no other link in this article, I urge you to read more about the late Dr. Wing here or here.

2: Be an engaged scientist. CBPR is most common in the health and environmental sciences, and not all STEM fields lend themselves to community engagement. For example, understanding the chemical bonds in tertiary protein structure or figuring out how to travel to Alpha Centauri  are scientific endeavors that expand our knowledge of how the world works. We do them because, as Mae Jemison has said, “pursuing an extraordinary tomorrow builds a better today.”

However, there are still ways to be an advocate in science, regardless of your field. Be aware that every stage of the scientific process is influenced by the politics of scientists, funders and institutions: the questions to be answered, the datasets to be used, the solutions that are offered and the way solutions are evaluated. This reality reflects the importance for diverse perspectives, both by increasing representation from marginalized communities within the scientific community as well as developing equal partnerships with communities themselves.

In addition, be vigilant against the influence of special interests in science. Advocate for a democratic scientific process in the institutions you work in. Unfortunately, the publication and dissemination of scientific findings are vulnerable to industry and political pressures. Recently we have seen this at the EPA with climate change. At UNC, Dr. Steve Wing’s documents were seized by North Carolina’s Pork Council, a special interest group funded by Smithfield.

How can science advance the public good when research is increasingly privately funded? Is any of your institution’s funding tied to special interest groups, and does this give science a lack of power? How can an academic best partner with community organizers to advocate for change, when institutions may have mixed support for more progressive and political causes? Is there an equal sharing of power between your research institution and communities?

3: Be an engaged citizen.  Show up to fight for a more equitable and sustainable future.

There are some individual actions you can take. Voting is one. In North Carolina, Governor Cooper unsuccessfully tried to veto HB 467 and SB 711, two pieces of legislation mentioned earlier that have dismantled community power, making it harder to file nuisance lawsuits and reducing the compensation plaintiffs can receive. Governor Cooper will be up for reelection in 2020, and many of his potential opponents receive contributions from Smithfield and  plan to use his support for HB 467 and SB 711 against him. You can also buy pork products from small, sustainable farms, such as Cane Creek Farms in Saxapahaw.

Unfortunately, in a gerrymandered state, your vote is not enough. In a consolidated food system, with large corporations like Smithfield, buying local is not enough. We must advocate for systems changes. Fighting climate change or environmental injustice both require a combination of public education, political legislation and engaged corporations.

As Dr. Wing advocated, “we need to insist that industrial producers pay for their damages to human health and the environment.” The most important direct action you can take is to aid organizations that uplift the voices of affected community members, through donations or volunteering. We must support their efforts to raise awareness of their issue, to lobby political leaders for increased regulation and enforcement and to negotiate with corporations. In the case of Smithfield, you can support NCEJN or REACH. If you are financially able, you can donate. You can also volunteer your time.

How else can you advocate for communities and support their right to self-determination? How can we work to make systems changes while up against corporations with large lobbies? And in pursuing a career in science where objectivity is valued, in a world where future employers in academia or industry will google who you are, are you willing to speak truth to power as a citizen to demand systems change?

I don’t pose these as rhetorical questions. I would love to hear what you think. Please leave comments! Or email me, at amlacko@ad.unc.edu

I would like to thank Justine Grabiec for her help with editing. I would also like to give a special thanks to Danielle Gartner, Adrien Wilkie, Mike Dolan Fliss and Libby McClure for their thoughtful comments on how to improve my framing of this article, for their links to additional resources, for their continued partnership with organizations like NCEJN and REACH, and for all they do to keep Dr. Steve Wing’s legacy alive through the Epidemiology and Justice group. You all are rockstars.

Peer edited by Justine Grabiec and Rita Meganck..

Follow us on social media and never miss an article:

New Year, New Earth? The Environment in 2019

2019, “new year, new me,” as they say. Many people have new goals; maybe they’ll read more, go to the gym more, or try to improve relationships. Whatever your New Year’s resolution, one goal everyone should have is to think about and care more for the environment. The environment sustains us, as it provides us with food, materials for shelter, and ultimately, life. It has been about a month into the 2019 and a lot of wildlife in the United States and around the world has been negatively affected.

The Government Shutdown Affected More than Federal Employees

Due to the government shutdown, federal employees at went unpaid. At national parks, fewer employees went to work, resulting in fewer people available to efficiently take care of the parks. Previous administrations closed the parks during government shutdowns, however the Trump Administration allowed understaffed parks to remain open. At several parks, lack of staff led to damaged parks and eventually park closure. Visitors broke park rules, such as allowing their pets in the parks and off of leashes, and campgrounds were overflowing with trash. AP News reported damage to normally restricted areas, illegal driving off of marked trails, an increase of trash, and maybe most disappointingly, a rise in human bodily waste. Human presence in restricted areas interfered with daily activities surrounding protected species, and plants that take decades to centuries to grow were destroyed, meaning it could take decades to centuries for parks to recover, even though it took a few seconds to destroy.

Rollback of Environmental Regulations

Under the Obama administration, many environmental regulations were put in place to protect the environment from human damage. However, the Trump administration has rolled back many of those regulations, claiming these regulations harm local businesses or don’t help reduce natural disasters like forest fires. National Geographic has kept a running list since March 2017 on environmental regulations, decisions, and news during the Trump administration. Rollback of coal regulations have been primarily covered by media outlets due the harsh environmental and health impacts of coal mining and the decreasing use of coal. In February 2017, Congress and Trump revoked the “Stream Protection Rule,” which provided restrictions to dumping mining waste into nearby water. Not only do organisms live in those waters, but humans use freshwater as drinking water. With an increasing global population and limited amounts of freshwater, water conservation is crucial.

Ferruginous Pygmy Owls are at most 6 inches in height.

Lastly, the border wall that is constantly a point of contention for Trump and Congress would be a danger to animals, scientists say. The wall wouldn’t prevent people from crossing the border, but it would prevent hundreds of species from accessing resources for survival, leading to species endangerment. Pygmy owls live in the U.S. – Mexico region, but fly close to the ground to hunt. With a wall, they wouldn’t be able to fly over to search for food or shelter. Javelinas, a pig like mammal, also roam the areas searching for food. By separating species from their habitats, we are active in their disappearance.

Species lost in 2018, and those on track to become extinct

We have already lost many species in the past few decades and we are on track to lose many, many more. Species doesn’t just include animals, but plants and insects as well. It’s easy to think of a species’ extinction as contained (where the extinction of one animal doesn’t have any impact), but extinction has a much larger impact by disrupting the food chain and affecting the viability of other species. Habitats and ecosystems have evolved to include all of the organisms within them, and when this balance is disrupted, it can lead to extreme environmental damage and catastrophic chains of events. This can be thought of as an extinction cascade, and can result from climate change, habitat and species destruction by humans, and introduction of invasive species. These combined factors have led scientists to suggest that we are currently experiencing the sixth mass extinction in Earth’s history, as defined by “when the Earth loses more than three-quarters of its species in a geologically short [time] interval.”

It is only a matter of time until the Northern Rhino is only seen in history books.
  • The Northern White Rhino will become extinct in 2019. Its horn, thought to have medicinal properties, has been the target of extreme poaching, even when protected by armed guards. In 2018, the population of the Northern white rhino was reduced to just three rhinos, two females and one male. However, the male died in 2018, ensuring the extinction of the species.
  • Fewer than 30 Vaquita Porpoises remain in the wild because humans have been harvesting their bladders for unique foods.
  • Many species of insects have been rapidly declining in numbers (Monarch butterfly is a well known example). This is exceedingly important with regards to ecosystems and food chains, since insects feed many animals, help with decomposition, and maintain the habitats in which they live. See a video here on why insects are so important to us. (A prime example of extinction cascade)
  • There are two types of extinction: Extinct from the wild, where no animal remains in the wild, they can only be found in captivity, and extinct, where the animal cannot be found anywhere in the world. The U.S. just lost its last wild Caribou, meaning the Caribou is extinct from the wild in the U.S.
  • If you don’t care about animal extinction, then let me tell you that coffee plants are threatened with extinction. Have I gotten your attention now?

On a positive note…

While this article may seem disheartening, and as heartbreaking as it is to lose species we grew up with (such as rhinos), we are also making a lot of progress with keeping the environment healthy. In October of 2018, Trump signed a bill to help clean plastic out of the Earth’s oceans. It doesn’t make up for other environmental regulation rollbacks, but it is a large step forward, since plastics in the ocean has detrimental effects on sea life.

Green (or renewable) energy, which is energy that comes from natural resources and can be replenished in a human’s lifetime, such as sunlight, wind, and water, is becoming more and more commonly used around the world. Not only are these forms of energy good for the environment, but they are projected to become inexpensive compared to coal and gas, making them cost effective as well. Countries are already sustaining themselves on green energy, and aim to reach 100% green energy use by a certain point in the future. For example, for 300 days in 2018, Costa Rica generated 100% of their energy from renewable resources!

Tigers are the only large cats that swim!

Many organisms, such as the Tardigrade, have evolved to withstand extreme environments and circumstances. So it is possible that there are a plethora of organisms on our Earth we have yet to discover that could withstand critical environmental change. Science has also advanced enough that, while we may not be able to directly prevent extinction, we can slow it down, or help preserve some characteristics of dying species. For example, Northern and Southern white rhinos are more closely related than previously thought, and we might be able to create a new hybrid species through IVF. Through conservation, Nepal has doubled their wild tiger population! Baraboo, Wisconsin is home to the International Crane Foundation which aims to educate the public about all 15 species of Cranes and how they are trying to save the species. Lastly, on February 12th, 2019, the U.S. Senate voted to protect more than 100 million acres of wilderness across the United States, a bill that has been in the works for four years!

How can you help?

One thing we can do to help our environment is education and outreach. Reduce the amount of waste thrown away, reuse containers and bags, and go to a local county website to look at recycling options. Orange County of NC has a great page on what you can recycle and where to recycle. Reducing our waste and the amount of non-biodegradable objects that go into the environment will help keep species safe.

A damaged earth can survive without us, but we cannot survive without a healthy earth.

Peer edited by Emma Hinkle and Connor LaMontagne.

Follow us on social media and never miss an article:



Superior Syntheses: Sustainable Routes to Life-Saving Drugs

While HIV treatment has come a long way over the past few decades, there is still a discrepancy between total number of HIV patients and those with access to life-saving antiretroviral therapies (ART). The inability to access medications is often directly linked to the cost of the medication, demonstrating the need for ways to make these medicines cheaper. In October 2018, Dr. B. Frank Gupton and Dr. Tyler McQuade of Virginia Commonwealth University were awarded a 2018 Green Chemistry Challenge Award for their innovative work on the affordable synthesis of nevirapine, an essential component of some HIV combination drug therapies.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/blyth/1074446532

Neviripine, a component of some HIV therapies.

For the past 22 years, the American Chemical Society (ACS) in partnership with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), has awarded scientists who have contributed to the development of processes that protect public health and the environment. Awardees have made significant contributions in reducing hazards linked to designing, manufacturing, and using chemicals. As of 2018, the prize-winning technologies have eliminated 826 million pounds of dangerous chemicals and solvents, enough to fill a train 47 miles long. The nominated technologies are judged on the level of science and innovation, the benefits to human health and the environment, and the impact of the discovery.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/37873897@N06/8277000022

Green Chemistry protects public health and the environment.

Gupton and McQuade were awarded the Green Chemistry Challenge Award for the development of a sustainable and efficient synthesis of nevirapine. The chemists argue that oftentimes, the process to produce a drug remains consistent over time, and is not improved to reflect new innovations and technologies in the field of chemistry, which could make syntheses easier, cheaper, and more environmentally friendly. Synthesizing a drug molecule is not unlike building a Lego tower; the tower starts with a single Lego and bricks are added one-by-one until it resembles a building. Researchers start with a simple chemical and add “chemical blocks” one-by-one until it is the desired drug molecule.  Gupton and McQuade demonstrated that by employing state-of-the-art chemical methods, they can significantly decrease the cost to synthesize nevirapine.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/billward/5818794375

Producing pharmaceutical molecules is like building a Lego house.

Before this discovery, there were two known routes toward the synthesis of nevirapine. Researchers used projections to determine which steps were the costliest. With this knowledge, they were able to improve the expensive step of the synthesis by developing a new reaction that used cheap reagents (“chemical blocks”) and proceeded in high yield. A chemical yield is the amount of product obtained relative to the amount of material used. The higher the yield, the more efficient the reaction. Reactions may have a poor yield because of alternative reactions that result in impurities, or unexpected, undesired products (byproducts). Pharmaceutical companies often quantify chemical efficiency by using the Process Mass Intensity (PMI), which is the mass of all materials used to produce 1 kg of product. Solvent, the medium in which the reaction takes place, is a big contributor to PMI because it is a material that is necessary for the reaction, but not incorporated into the final product. Gupton and McQuade were able to decrease the amount of solvent used because they streamlined reactions that reduced impurities, allowing them to recycle and reuse solvent. These improvements reduced the PMI to 11 relative to the industry standard PMI of 46.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nevirapine.svg

Molecular structure of nevirapine 

In addition to their synthesis of nevirapine, Gupton and McQuade also developed a series of core principles to improve drug access and affordability for all medications. The general principles include implementation of novel and innovative chemical technologies, a decrease in the total number of synthetic steps and solvent changes, and use of cheap starting materials. Oftentimes, the pharmaceutical industry focuses on starting with very complex molecules in order to decrease the number of steps needed to reach the target molecule. Interestingly/unfortunately, starting with complex “chemical blocks” is often the most expensive part of  producing a medication. By starting with simpler chemicals, they believe production costs can be significantly decreased. Virginia Commonwealth University recently established the Medicines for All Institute in collaboration with the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation, and Gupton and McQuade hope that by employing the process development principles, they will be able to more efficiently and affordably synthesize many life-saving medications.

Peer edited by Dominika Trzilova and Connor Wander.

Follow us on social media and never miss an article:

 

 

Mr. Turtle

In 2012, I was working at the Cooperative Oxford Lab in Oxford, Maryland, when we were notified of and rescued a stranded sea turtle. Sadly, the turtle was so sick that it died. An intern performed the necropsy (an autopsy on animals) and found that the turtle’s stomach was full of plastic trash and even a belt buckle and a hair comb. I never got  the image of the dying turtle out of my head.

Meanwhile, besides mourning plastic-choked sea turtles, I was also feeling bewildered and upset by the constant talk from overseas outlaws, urging us Muslims living in the west to commit destructive acts. I decided I needed to do something to protest such talk, and it suddenly hit me that I could teach myself how to make animated videos declaring my love for the exquisitely lovely country of Sweden, where I used to live, and my darling home state of North Carolina. Little did I know that this commitment would eventually serve me in many more ways.

It took a few years, but a light bulb finally went off in my head, and I put two and two together: why not use my new animation skills to shed light on environmental concerns?  Even better, why not do this as a project with children? This is how the animation “Mr. Turtle Gets Sick” came to be.

SAMSUNG

Teaching children how to animate!

A second grade teacher at Northside Elementary, right here in Chapel Hill, graciously allowed me into her classroom last October through December. Along with help from my little brother, two fellow geology students, and especially my brother’s roommate, we first taught the children sea turtle ecology, let them draw illustrations, and recorded each child’s voice for the narration.

2014-12-04 12.28.12

The crew of “Mr. Turtle Gets Sick.”

After this, we began animating. We first taught this to the whole class and then worked with each child individually. We provided the oversight and structure while letting the kids decide on the different actions and take the helm of doing the actual computer work. For example, if a child wanted to show Mr. Turtle swimming, then he or she specified Mr. Turtle’s position at both his start and end point, and the amount of time it took him to move that far. The fact that there was a “timeline” component meant that, in addition to the reading, artwork, and animation involved, the kids even practiced their math skills by learning how to space the actions out evenly. The illustrations the kids had drawn served as the background scenery.

 

At the unveiling, the children saw the finished product for the first time, and all the parents were invited for the viewing. The parents were thrilled! Afterwards, I contacted a local sea turtle expert, and he came to the classroom and did a follow-up presentation. He told the kids about sea turtle nests on North Carolina’s beaches, how sea turtles get caught in fishing nets, and how actually not all species of sea turtles eat jellyfish. The kids had so many questions that we kept going right until it was time to go to lunch.

Working with children was a beautiful experience, especially after being around academics all day. If anyone is interested and would like to be involved in future similar activities, please email me!

Animation: “Mr. Turtle Gets Sick”

Credits: Sharla Coleman’s second grade classroom at Northside Elementary, Mejs Hasan, Sean Catangui, Ali Hasan, Elsemarie deVries, Theo Jass

Software used: Blender, a free, open-source 3D modeling and animation program.

See ‘Mr. Turtle Gets Sick’ and other animations by Mejs here:

Mr. Turtle Gets Sick: http://youtu.be/ierH4oUaqO4

Dear Foreigner: http://youtu.be/jW99oPD3gK4

Freedom: http://youtu.be/H4inZuEF4ZM

Peer edited by Suzan Ok and Leanna Gentry.

Follow us on social media and never miss an article:

Arctic Tales of Icy Trails

Far out in eastern Russia, deep in the Siberian Plateau, lies one of the great waterways of the world. 

The Lena is the eleventh longest river on Earth. For thousands of treacherous kilometers, she makes her way through forests and across tundra, eventually delivering her waters into the icy cradle of the Arctic Ocean. The power of these frigid landscapes is such that for six months out of the year, the surface of the Lena is completely frozen.

The freeze starts with the deepening chill of October and extends through black December twilights and a solemn New Year.

Even when fresh springtime breezes arrive, melting the ice, the Lena pays a terrible price for her freedom. The sheets of ice do not yield peacefully, drop by drop, in a quiet surrender to the warmth. Instead, the process is rife with violence. As some parts of the ice destabilize, the flow of the river increases suddenly, and before the ice has a chance to melt, it sweeps downstream, displacing and spilling water over the banks and causing major flooding. This process is called “ice break-up.”

Very few people live along the vast plain where the Lena alternates between flow and ice. Near the Arctic Circle, a lonely station is the last shivering wisp of human life before the river dissolves into its northern grave.

Sarah Cooley in the lovely Scandinavian dream of Iceland, just one of the countries where she has pursued her polar studies as a UNC student.

Sarah Cooley in the lovely Scandinavian dream of Iceland, just one of the countries where she has pursued her polar studies as a UNC student.

Records made at this station over several decades indicate the precise date in spring when the Lena breaks free of her icy grip – the precise date when the ice crumbles and the entire river flows again. Over the past years, this date on which the ice breaks has crept earlier and earlier.

Thousands of miles away, in an office at UNC, sits Sarah Cooley. She has never been to Russia, nor seen the Lena with her own eyes, so she cannot tell you about its beauty, or ferocity, or chill. However, she has seen the Lena plenty through images. These are not images captured by a camera, but rather images captured by satellites, whose falcon-like eyes see much from their distant orbits. Can careful mastery and manipulation of these images tell us something about ice break-up on the Lena, something beyond the comprehension of a single station outpost?

It was August 2014, and Sarah was preparing to start her senior thesis. She wanted to focus on glaciers and satellites, so she went to find Dr. Tamlin Pavelsky, a professor in the geology department, whose earlier research focused on ice break-up in Arctic Rivers. However, Dr. Pavelsky completed his project in 2004, during the infancy of the newly-launched Terra and Aqua satellites. These satellites carry onboard quite a remarkable instrument called MODIS.

Although its name makes every aspiration at modesty, MODIS has much of which to be proud. Since 2000, the MODIS sensor has snapped images of the entire planet, every day. That means hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of images dedicated just to Arctic rivers like the Lena are available, free of charge, on a NASA website.

Now that MODIS is fifteen years old, her idea was to recreate Dr. Pavelsky’s project, incorporating the many extra years of data into the study. The first step required Sarah’s full familiarity with the NASA LAADS website, from which she had to download over 16,000 satellite images.

“It might be the most images anyone’s ever ordered before,” Sarah explains. The four Arctic Rivers she studied stretch out over 18 MODIS scenes. For each of those 18 scenes, Sarah downloaded 60 days’ worth of images over the fifteen years of MODIS’ existence. The sixty days were centered on March, April, and May, since that is the window in which the ice break-up occurs. Eighteen scenes on sixty days for fifteen years added up quickly!

It took Sarah three months to acquire her full library of images. The ordering process is not too difficult, “but then you have to wait for it, and when you get it, it’s not always what you expected, it might have errors, or wrong dates and be the wrong place.”

These images from MODIS show the progression of ice break-up on the Lena River of Russia. Where the river shows white, it is frozen ice. The white slowly overtaken by black water indicates that the ice is disappearing.

Nevertheless, after a Christmas break spent watching Sherlock and trying the utter patience of the NASA LAADS website, Sarah eventually was ready to proceed with her analysis of those thousands of images.

The thing to know about satellite images is that they are not precisely like the pictures we might snap, with ambitions of posting to Facebook and getting 100 likes.

A satellite image is a record of how much light is being reflected off the surface of the Earth – and not just the ordinary, commonplace lights like blue light, red light, and green light. Satellites also venture into the realms of light humans can’t see, such as near-infrared light, and short-wave infrared light, and all sorts. The falcon eyes of MODIS captures these wavelengths of light, then translates its findings into simple numbers that computers and brains can interpret and analyze.

Sarah was sitting on a trove of 16,000 MODIS images of near-infrared light. But can near-infrared light actually tell us anything about ice in Arctic rivers? This is where Sarah had to experiment.

She found that when the Lena was frozen, it reflected almost all near-infrared light that reached it. On the other hand, when the river was an unshackled tumult of free-flowing water, its reflectance was very low. And when the river was a mix of ice and water, its reflectance value was somewhere in between.

Sitting in her warm office thousands of miles away, Sarah started watching the progression of ice break-up on the Lena by using near-infrared light as the key to unlock her satellite images.

With her reflectance data in hand, Sarah sliced her northern rivers into ten kilometer slabs. Then, like a child playing with its food, each slab was cut into impossibly tiny 250 meter pixels. For all her MODIS images, Sarah counted up which of her tiny pixels crossed the threshold that equaled ice; which lay in the range of water; and which belonged to the brew that denotes a mixture of ice and water.

On the day that 75% of the tiny pixels in a given slab passed the threshold that implies water, that slab was declared to have undergone its spring melting. This method finds the exact date that each slab of river melted, allowing detailed analysis of melting time on a year to year basis. It means that instead of a single date of ice break-up provided by a lonely station near the Arctic Circle, Sarah can now produce an estimate of when ice break-up is happening along the entire river.

It’s a very straightforward approach, and that’s one of the things Sarah likes about MODIS. “I really enjoy the simplicity, and it being daily is great. You can really do a lot with it.”

Of course, Sarah did not count all of the pixels and separate them into categories by hand. Instead, she wrote a series of computer scripts that did the work. The first part of her script classified the MODIS images into land, water, ice, and ice and water mixture. Then, all clouds were removed. Finally, computers calculated the amount of ice melt in each 10-kilometer slab. These scripts took three hours to run per river, much preferable to the hundreds of tedious hours it would take to do by hand. Now the scripts can be passed on and used by others, absorbing the newer images that MODIS keeps adding to its archives.

It is quite an achievement, especially compared to how Sarah felt when she first arrived at UNC as a freshman and saw older classmates doing sophisticated projects.

She remembers vividly thinking: “Oh my gosh, I can never do that. Now I realize I can do so many more things than I ever thought I could. And I realize that learning all those things isn’t something that happens overnight, it’s something you learn by taking classes, doing research, working in the lab. And now I’m never intimidated by coding. I love coding and seeing the things I can do with it.”

We are now in the waning days of April, and Sarah will soon graduate from UNC Chapel Hill. She and Dr. Pavelsky are finalizing a paper on their results.

After UNC, Sarah is moving to England to complete a Masters of Philosophy degree in Polar Studies at Cambridge University as a Gates Cambridge Scholar. Showing a persistent interest in Arctic ice, she plans to focus on glacier flow in Greenland.

Sarah fell in love with Greenland and wanted to pursue polar science ever since she studied abroad in Denmark and visited the Greenland ice sheet. “It’s really cool being out there, and there’s people, wildlife. Some people like to study polar science in Antarctica, but to me, it seems so empty. I like how in the Arctic everything feels connected to the people and the land.”

Meanwhile, the Lena still succumbs to the bleak icy thrall that envelops her every October, from which she cannot relax until the spring ice break-up, which every year creeps earlier in the calendar. Signs of climate change are everywhere.

Will the river change its melting patterns? Will its ice break-up involve more flooding in the future, or will it occur in irregular patches that do not progress linearly down its Siberian route? All of these are questions that satellites, ground station data, and scientists like Sarah can help to answer.

Peer edited by Chris Givens and Chelsea Boyd. 

Follow us on social media and never miss an article: