Mythbusters Quiz

1 of 13

Global warming doesn’t make everywhere hotter

This one is true.

The impacts of warming are not even globally: there are variations depending on the time of year and specific location; some places might get even colder than usual.

Global warming does mean that the earth’s average temperature is rising over the course of decades to centuries, but it is an “average” temperature, meaning that there are variations depending on the time of the year and specific location. Climate change can also cause disruptions in atmospheric circulation and ocean currents that can result in colder than average winters. For example, disruptions to the polar vortex means cold air masses from the Arctic move further southward, causing cold snaps in the US and Europe.

2 of 13

Sustainability is only about the environment

This one is false.

Sustainability is a broad all-encompassing concept focusing on key social, economic and developmental considerations along with environmental issues.

Sustainability is more than being about the environment. It’s an all-encompassing concept with multiple definitions. The most widely used definition of sustainability was mainstreamed in 1987; the United Nations Brundtland Commission defined sustainability as “meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” This definition also considers key social, economic and developmental considerations at the global and context-specific scale. Today, there are almost 140 developing countries in the world seeking ways of meeting their development needs, but with the increasing threat of climate change, concrete efforts must be made to ensure development today does not negatively affect future generations. A good example of how the world is working to create a more sustainable future is through the 17 Sustainable Development Goals. They recognise the significance of tackling environmental issues, and its interlinkages with improving health and education, reducing inequality, and spurring economic growth.

3 of 13

Global warming today is a naturally occurring phenomenon

This one is false.

The current rate of global warming is unprecedented (over the past 10,000 years), and there is scientific evidence from ice cores and ancient tree rings that this is due to human activity: the burning of fossil fuels that release greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

While the climate on earth has indeed experienced large fluctuations in its history, there is substantial evidence that current climate change, induced by global warming, since the mid-20th century is undeniably caused by humans. The current warming is occurring at a rate not seen in the past 10,000 years, and atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are increasing 250 times faster than they did from natural sources after the last ice age. Key evidence for this has come from ice cores drawn from Greenland, Antarctica, and tropical mountain glaciers, as well as ancient tree rings, ocean sediments and coral layers. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a global organisation comprising the world’s leading scientists and policy-makers, the “scientific evidence for warming of the climate system is unequivocal.” For more information, check out IPCC’s latest report published in 2023.

4 of 13

The food I eat actually contributes to climate change

This one is true.

Food production and consumption combined contribute to nearly one third of global greenhouse gas emissions, with a large proportion of this coming from land-use change (such as clearing rainforest for cattle grazing).

Food production and consumption combined (the whole food system) contribute up to nearly one third of global greenhouse gas emissions from human activity. About 70% of these emissions come from agriculture, particularly land-use change. This is when, for example, vast swathes of rainforest are cut down to free up the land for cattle grazing and other types of agriculture. Particular foods, such as beef, contribute more to climate change than plants and smaller livestock, because beef are ruminant animals that emit methane (a potent greenhouse gas) as part of their digestive processes.

5 of 13

There is a difference between carbon neutral, net zero and carbon negative

This one is true.

Carbon negative is when more CO2 is removed than emitted into the atmosphere. Carbon neutral and net zero are similar; both involve reducing emissions. Net zero refers to when the amount of greenhouse gas emitted is equal to that removed from the atmosphere, in line with the trajectory of limiting global warming to 1.5°C. Carbon neutral does not have a specific reduction trajectory of 1.5°C, and is less prescriptive.

Carbon neutral and net zero are both similar concepts, as companies aim to balance their carbon emissions. However, carbon neutral means offsetting carbon emissions through carbon sinks or stores such as carbon capture and storage, or reforestation. Whereas net zero carbon means no carbon is emitted in the first place. However, significantly, “net zero” alone refers to the balancing of all greenhouse gas emissions and removal, such as methane which is produced from agriculture, fossil fuels and decomposing waste. In other words, net zero is the point when we stop adding to climate change. Carbon negative is the point of positive change, in which more CO2 is removed than is emitted, therefore we are actively reducing the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, and is what all companies should aim towards!

Sources

Plan A: carbon neutral vs net zero vs climate positive

6 of 13

Living a more sustainable lifestyle is always a lot more expensive

This one is false.

Living a more sustainable lifestyle can include options that actually make things cheaper, such as repairing clothing rather than throwing it away to buy new things, or walking rather than taking the car.

Living “sustainably” can be overwhelming and seem like a monumental, impossible task. However, it doesn’t have to be an instantaneous change, and can be a slow transition of lifestyle, starting with small simple steps. Alternatives such as walking or cycling compared to driving, or even taking the bus, can be cheaper than having a car. Saving for a piece of clothing or bag you love that won’t fall apart will save more money than buying cheaper, low quality products that need frequent replacements! While some more eco-friendly products may have objectively higher costs, many substitutes such as solar panels may save money in the long run (depending on where you live). Living sustainably is difficult, yet small efforts do count! Simple changes like turning the tap off when brushing your teeth really can make a difference, saving up to 200 gallons of water a month!

7 of 13

Recycling is the best way to tackle plastic pollution

This one is false.

The most effective way to tackle plastic pollution is to reduce generating plastic waste in the first place, because only 9% of plastic produced has ever been properly recycled.

Plastic pollution is a huge problem: every year over 300 million tonnes of plastic is produced, that is enough plastic to circle the earth 4 times! Recycling is a way to reuse plastic, however, it is not the best way to tackle pollution. While it reduces waste, only 9% of plastic produced has ever been recycled. The vast majority of plastic ends up in landfills, incinerated, or as litter in the environment. Additionally, plastic cannot be recycled indefinitely, as with each recycling, quality is degraded. Plastic may also break down in the environment into microplastics, which can accumulate in food chains and end up in the food we eat, such as fish.

Sources

8 of 13

Bioplastics are always better than plastic

This one is false.

Bioplastics are “better” than plastic because they are made from non-fossil fuel derived materials that are better for the planet, but they are not always better, as not all properly degrade.

Bioplastics are plastic materials made from renewable biomass sources such as vegetable fats and oils, corn starch, straw, corn, algae, wood chips or recycled food waste. However, there is a big difference between “degradable” and “biodegradable”. Degradable means to break down, similar to plastic, into smaller pieces. On the other hand, biodegradable means the bioplastic can be decomposed by bacteria or other organisms. But, as bioplastics can be made of a wide range of materials, they require specific environments to break down, and if not, they won’t. Because of this, unfortunately a majority of it ends up in landfills or incinerated. And by the time processing is finished, bioplastics have a similar chemical formula to regular plastic. While this may seem like an easy way out, solutions should be approached with caution and properly researched before being widely implemented.

Sources

9 of 13

I have to have studied an environmental science related degree at university to pursue a career related to sustainability

This one is false.

You don’t need an environmental science background for a sustainability career. This interdisciplinary field welcomes professionals from engineering, business, economics, policy, design, and communications.

While a background in environmental science, ecology, or related fields can be beneficial, it’s not a requirement for a career in sustainability. Sustainability is interdisciplinary, requiring skills beyond environmental science. Many other disciplines, such as engineering, business, economics, policy, design and communications, can provide pathways into sustainability-related roles. Many organisations also offer training programs and certifications in sustainability, allowing individuals with diverse academic backgrounds to specialise in this field.

Sources

10 of 13

Cat food is causing overfishing

This one is false.

Overfishing is driven by many factors, but cat food is not the primary cause of demand. It’s still important to look at the brand, as some engage in more sustainable practices than others.

While it’s not entirely false that cat food contributes to increased demand for fish, it’s a gross oversimplification to say it’s causing overfishing! Cat food does use fish, but often includes fish by-products, and/or fish not usually sold for human consumption. Overfishing is primarily driven by the demand for human seafood consumption, unsustainable fishing practices, and illegal or poorly managed fishing. While cat food is not a main cause of overfishing, it’s still important to look at the sourcing of the fish in the cat food to understand its impact, as some brands are more sustainable than others.

11 of 13

AI usage has significant environmental impact

This one is true.

AI requires an intensive amount of energy (generated from burning fossil fuels) that releases the greenhouse gas emissions contributing to climate change. There is also a lot of water required to cool the data centres, which depletes this scarce resource from nearby watersheds.

The use of AI requires an intensive amount of energy, often derived from fossil fuels, contributing to greenhouse gas emissions. Data centres that power the engines behind AI require a huge amount of water: in fact, roughly 10-50 ChatGPT-3 requests consume 500ml of water, and ChatGPT-4 consumes even more! This not only leaves a considerable carbon and water footprint, but also exacerbates local water shortages in some regions. The manufacturing of the hardware (servers, chips, etc.) necessary for AI operations also contributes to environmental impact through resource extraction and manufacturing processes.

More statistics:

Google’s data centres used 29 billion litres of freshwater in 2023, 80% of which was drinkable water
US data centres are projected to reach 150-280 billion litres of water use by 2028
Global data centres are projected to consume 4.2-6.8 trillion litres in 2027, which is equal to half of the annual water withdrawal for the UK

12 of 13

The loss of a few species doesn’t have a big impact

This one is false.

Even the loss of a few species can have domino effect impacts on other species that rely on them in the ecosystem.

Biodiversity is crucial for ecosystem stability and function. The loss of even a few species can have cascading effects, especially if they are keystone species or important pollinators (like bees, butterflies, and other insects) essential for the reproduction of many plants, including a significant portion of our food crops. For example, it could cost UK farmers £1.8 billion per year to replace bee pollination services with the hand pollination of crops! Ecosystem services, such as clean air and water, pollination, and climate regulation, are all dependent on the presence of healthy and diverse species.

13 of 13

We can continue to mine materials as usual to meet technological demand

This one is false.

Continued mining of critical minerals for gadgets such as mobile phones and computer components has highly damaging environmental impacts, such as pollution from mining sites, deforestation and loss of biodiversity.

The mining required to obtain the necessary materials (such as rare earth elements, lithium, and copper) can have significant environmental impacts. This includes habitat destruction from open-pit mines and deep-sea mining, pollution from processing, and increased energy consumption. For instance, deep-sea mining for polymetallic nodules involves scraping the seafloor, destroying habitats and potentially harming or killing organisms. Furthermore, the increased need for these minerals means that mines are often deeper and require the removal of larger amounts of rock to extract the same amount of desired material, leading to greater environmental disruption. An example of this is seen in the book “Material World” by Ed Conway, where a typical gold wedding ring previously required 0.3 tonnes of ore to make, now one may require 2-40 tonnes.

Learn

Engage

Futures