From the “well, duhhh” science department and Liverpool University comes this bit of obvious science. It makes you wonder how many times public money is used to study the same thing over and over again.

Urban forests reduce heat-related mortality, study shows

A new study shows that among different types of vegetation, forests within walkable distance from residential areas are particularly crucial in mitigating heat-related health risks.

Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University

Across the globe, heat waves are becoming more frequent and more intense. Therefore, how to effectively combat the adverse effects of heat is an increasingly important topic of research.

Urban greening is a promising strategy to limit the negative health impacts of extreme heat; however, much remains to be learned about how best to promote and implement it. It is still unclear what types of greenspace matter most and how close greenspaces should be to living areas.

A new study published in Environment International shows that among different types of vegetation, forests within walkable distance from residential areas are particularly crucial in mitigating heat-related health risks.

The results add to previous studies conducted by the research team from universities and research institutes in China, the UK, and Spain that used big data to measure the positive effect of urban greenery on health.

Challenging common assumptions

Dr Jinglu Song is the first and corresponding author of the new study and an associate professor at Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University (XJTLU)’s Department of Urban Planning and Design. She says that the findings can potentially reshape urban planning and public health strategies, particularly in densely populated cities with limited greenspace availability.

Dr Song explains: “By analysing data from Hong Kong, we found that compared with other types of vegetation like grasslands, nearby forests have a pronounced impact on reducing heat-related mortality risks, particularly those within 1 kilometre of residential areas.

“Our findings suggest that urban greening strategies should focus on tree planting within walkable distances to local residents, in addition to adding other types of vegetation in a specific area.”

Dr Song says that the study challenges some conventional assumptions about urban greening strategies and has the potential to significantly impact urban planners, designers, and public health initiatives.

“For example, it challenges the idea that small greenspaces close to where people live are the most effective for improving health, especially those within 300 or 500 metres.

“Instead, our research suggests that broader-scale greening strategies, particularly involving trees, are more effective up to 1km away from communities,”  she adds.

New approach leads to more accurate results

The study uses an innovative way to measure the average amount of greenspace coverage within people’s nearby environment, also referred to as “distance-based greenspace exposure”. Rather than using the traditional indices that measure the ratio of greenspace within a planning unit, it considers how many people actually use greenspaces and how far away they are from these spaces.

“Our approach provides a more accurate representation of how urban residents interact with greenspaces and how these interactions influence health outcomes,” Dr Song says.

The motivation for the research team to continuously delve into this topic stems from the need for concrete evidence demonstrating the health benefits of specific types of greenspaces and actionable information for urban greening initiatives.

“We will further explore this topic through expanded research across diverse climatic regions and urban settings. Potential research directions could include examining the effects of different vegetation types on other health outcomes beyond mortality, looking into the mechanisms through which green spaces influence health, and applying emerging technologies to enhance assessments of urban greenery.”

Journal

Environment International

DOI

10.1016/j.envint.2024.108950

Adults are talking about nuclear power as if it were a long lost relative.

Having wrecked reliable power supplies with subsidies for chaotically delivered wind and solar, any country worth being part of has put nuclear power generation back at the forefront of its energy future.

The French are pouring €millions into research and development in an effort to resuscitate its nuclear power generation capacity.

The Brits are pouring £millions into the research and development of small modular reactors, with Rolls-Royce leading the charge.

As Kim Hassall outlines below, the West is merely playing catch up with China when it comes to cutting-edge nuclear technology. And that technology clearly includes the use of thorium as the fuel source for the next generation of modern, safe and reliable nuclear reactors.

Thorium: green renewable nuclear – Are all energy options on the table?
The Spectator
Kim Hassall
6 September 2024

For some 15 years, I have followed the re-emergence of nuclear Thorium or ‘the green nuclear’ as it is often referred to.

Way back, an experimental Thorium Molten Salt Reactor was built at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee. It critically operated for roughly 15,000 hours from 1965 to 1969. In 1968, it was announced that the Thorium-based reactor had been both successfully developed and tested.

President Nixon defunded Thorium research in the early 1970s. You can’t make bombs out of it, so why bother?!

Up until recently, America would not license a Thorium reactor for construction. However, when China burst ahead with establishing a Thorium reactor a few years ago, America changed tack and is now licensing nuclear Thorium. Abilene Christian University, MIT, and Georgia Tech have all obtained licences for research.

The Wuwei reactor in the Gobi desert, located in the Gansu province, is a two-megawatt liquid-fuelled Thorium molten salt reactor (MSR), operated by the Shanghai Institute of Applied Physics of the Chinese Academy of Sciences.  The permit was issued by the National Nuclear Safety Administration. It allows the Shanghai Institute to operate the reactor for 10 years and it will start by testing the facility’s operations. This Chinese prototype probably helped America change its mind on Thorium. Even Canada has got a research reactor up and going.

Beware though… Thorium nuclear is not a loved bedfellow of the Uranium nuclear industry. It is a bit like Rolls Royce vs a mini-minor. The Uranium nuclear lobby will often disregard Thorium, in my experience.

However, Thorium was mentioned in Ziggy Switkowski’s 2006 Nuclear report to government, but only in passing.

A lot has changed since then.

Alan Finkel’s energy report did not mention Thorium at all and instead had a gas focus. (How things have changed since then on gas, although he did recommend that we do not go headlong in decommissioning all coal power stations too soon.) As far as I know, the CSIRO and the Grattan Institute have not mentioned Thorium in the energy mix. Even the Department of the Environment may not be across Thorium. A few years ago I queried their views on Thorium and they admitted that they had never heard of a Thorium reactor.

Germany has commissioned two companies to develop and commercialise modular Thorium reactors by 2030. Naarea and Thorizon are the two companies involved in this project. Also, the Copenhagen Atomics group are at the forefront of promoting Thorium nuclear. They are well worth looking at.

A Thorium reactor can also be used to decontaminate its own nuclear waste. And best of all, Thorium reactors do not melt down, ever! Have our politicians only spoken to the Uranium lobby?
The Spectator