It turns out the rate of that increase matters for non-living systems, too. A recent ����Ӱ�Ӵ�ý study looked at how a major current in the Atlantic Ocean that includes the Gulf Stream will respond to a doubling of carbon dioxide from preindustrial levels. The , published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, found that when carbon dioxide levels rise more gradually, they have less impact on the ocean circulation.

UW News sat down with author , a UW postdoctoral researcher in the , to learn more about her study.

Why did you choose to study how the rate of rising CO2 affects the climate system?

Camille Hankel: In my PhD, some of my work was on “climate tipping points,” which emerge from the hypothesis that there might be some sort of critical thresholds of warming or CO2 change that can lead to very abrupt and irreversible change in some parts of the climate system. Through that work, I got exposed to some literature on “rate-induced tipping points,” which is the idea that instead of crossing a critical level, that there could be some critical rates of CO2 change that are important for the climate system.

Specifically, I read this study that was looking at this idea in the context of the AMOC, the , which is this large-scale ocean circulation. That study was using what we call a box model — a simplified, mathematical representation of the ocean circulation. And I thought, hey, I can run these global models, which are much more realistic representations of the Earth’s climate, including ocean, atmosphere, land and sea ice, and test whether the rate of CO2 change really is that important.

What is the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, which includes the Gulf Stream ocean current, and why is it so important for Earth’s climate?

CH: It’s one of the large-scale, key features of the climate system. In particular, it transports a lot of heat from the low latitudes in the South Atlantic to the higher latitudes closer to the North Pole. So it delivers a lot of heat, primarily to Northern Europe. It also distributes nutrients around through this sort of sinking motion that characterizes the circulation — it draws the surface waters down into the deep ocean, and recirculates deep water up to the surface. It’s a big feature of the climate system, particularly in the North Atlantic, but also globally.

We’ve heard about a potential slowdown of the Gulf Stream current that could affect European weather. This was dramatized (perhaps not accurately) in the 2004 disaster movie ‘.’ Are we actually seeing a slowdown in Atlantic Ocean circulation?

CH: We have a pretty short observational record of the AMOC current, and it’s sparse. You have to imagine, this is a 3D circulation in the entire Atlantic basin, and we have a couple little slices of data in particular parts of the Atlantic. We are seeing a modest slowdown so far, but it’s a pretty noisy and uncertain observational record, so it’s hard to tell.

I would say, however, that slowdown seen in current observations would match the model predictions of future slowdowns. And we also see a pattern in temperature changes where, while the rest of the globe is warming right now as we increase CO2, there’s what people call a “warming hole” over the North Atlantic: We’re not seeing as much warming in that North Atlantic region compared to the rest of the globe. And it’s hard to conclusively attribute what’s causing it in the Earth’s climate, but the idea is that the modest slowdown of the AMOC that we’ve seen so far could be one contributing factor to that lack of warming we’re seeing in the North Atlantic.

So the observations suggest some slowdown, though much less dramatic than what was depicted in that movie.

Why is the AMOC expected to slow down under climate change?

CH: One way of thinking about what drives this major ocean current is differences in ocean density. You have this really important zone in the North Atlantic where the waters sink because the surface waters are heavier than the waters below. When you change CO2 levels, you do two things. You start to warm the ocean’s surface, and by melting glaciers as well as changing sea ice, you add freshwater to the surface of the otherwise salty ocean. Both warming and freshening reduce the density of that upper ocean water and potentially inhibit or disrupt that critical sinking motion.

There are other ways of looking at it, but the one I look at in the study is understanding how those density perturbations happen in a higher-CO2 climate and how they modulate the sensitivity to the rate of CO2 change that I find in the AMOC’s response to CO2.

Your study finds that if atmospheric carbon dioxide doubles from pre-industrial levels more slowly, there’s less slowdown in the Atlantic Ocean compared to if CO2 doubles more quickly. Is that because everything is happening more slowly?

CH: Yes, that’s part of it. The different parts of the climate system — the ocean, atmosphere, and ice — all have different response timescales to CO2 changes, meaning they respond to perturbations with different lag times. Then how these components of the climate interact with each other under slower or faster CO2 changes can look very different, and in this case influence the ocean circulation.

Specifically, I found what’s known as a positive feedback — a sort of self-amplifying cycle — that helps explain why the level of AMOC weakening depends on the rate of CO2 change. In this feedback cycle, the initial modest amount of AMOC slowdown leads to a reduction of heat transport into the Arctic, which in turn cools the region and leads to a temporary period of Arctic sea ice expansion. This sea ice expansion causes more ice to be exported to the North Atlantic, where it melts and adds freshwater to the ocean, causing the AMOC to slow down even more: hence the self-amplifying cycle. It turns out that this feedback cycle is more effective at amplifying AMOC weakening under more rapid CO2 changes than under gradual CO2 changes.

What is the importance of this work?

CH: We know about AMOC slowdowns — there’s a ton of work on that, and the mechanisms that drive such an AMOC slowdown. But what’s new is this sensitivity of circulation changes to the rate of CO2 increase, independent of the total change in concentration of CO2.

When we think about policy and basic science, we tend to focus a lot on how the level of global warming can impact the climate system. I’m trying to bring a new perspective by thinking about the rate of increase as a driver itself, that could have a lot of impacts.

You can imagine that if multiple different climates are possible for the same level of warming, then limiting us to 1.5 C or 2 C could have different meanings, right? I do think the most important thing for the climate system is always how much CO2 have you put into the atmosphere, but how quickly you got to that point clearly matters as well.

��

For more information, contact Hankel at crhankel@uw.edu.

The will give fortunate viewers across North America the chance to see something rare and spectacular. It will be the first total eclipse visible in Mexico since 1991, and in Canada since 1979. The continental U.S. won’t see another for 20 years.

As people in and near the eclipse’s check weather reports and obtain , scientists are also getting ready. Eclipses past and present aren’t just opportunities for incredible sights. Generations of researchers have used them to study phenomena ranging from the sun itself to the fabric of the universe.

, a ����Ӱ�Ӵ�ý associate professor of astronomy, is an expert on stars, particularly ones that are much larger, more violent and shorter-lived than the sun. Levesque is also an author and lecturer on the history of observational astronomy. Her book, “,” was published in 2020 and her filmed lecture series, “,” is available on Wondrium.

UW News sat down with Levesque to talk about some of the things scientists — past and present — have learned from solar eclipses.

Why are total eclipses such a major event for scientists?

Emily Levesque: In a total solar eclipse, the sun is being perfectly covered by the moon. That allows us to see and measure things that are normally blocked by the incredibly bright surface of the sun. Once you remove that intense light, a lot of great observations are possible.

What sorts of observations are made possible by the eclipse?

EL: For people who study the physics of the sun, a total eclipse is the best chance of observing the sun’s corona directly from Earth. The corona is this stream of white-hot plasma — very hot, as much as 2 million degrees Fahrenheit — that’s constantly being torn off the edges of the sun and sprayed many thousands of miles above the sun’s surface. Normally, the sun’s intense light obscures the corona. For anyone in the path of totality, during those few minutes where the moon’s disc completely obscures the sun, you can see those intricate details of the corona. It’s really incredible. And for a scientist, it’s a great moment to gather data.

Do you mean scientists who are in the path of totality when the eclipse occurs?

EL: Yes. But not just scientists who happen to live in or near the path of totality. I have colleagues that have pioneered eclipse chasing. I’ve heard great stories about their adventures on expeditions all over the world to observe solar eclipses, like trying to see one in northern Norway — where they had to receive polar bear safety training — or traveling to Tatakoto, a tiny atoll in French Polynesia. There’s a total solar eclipse on average about once every 18 months, but the vast majority of Earth’s surface is water. So they travel around the world to take their measurements where and when they can.

What sorts of measurements can astronomers make during these trips?

EL: These observers don’t need huge telescopes. But they need telescopes with a lot of fancy equipment attached to them — like a fancy digital camera instead of an eyepiece. Or a telescope with a spectrograph. A spectrograph is a device that can capture light and separate it by color. Researchers can analyze the data to figure out the chemical composition of the corona. The corona is an incredibly complex structure. It’s influenced by the sun’s magnetic field, its rotation and a host of other factors. There’s a lot that’s not known about the corona and how it impacts phenomena like solar flares, which can interfere with our satellites and communication.

Setting aside the corona, what else have scientists used eclipses to study?

EL: One weird and infamous example is that scientists tested and proved one of Einstein’s theories during an eclipse. Einstein’s theory of relativity explains the relationship between space and time and gravity. Today, you’ll often hear people talk about spacetime — the inextricable link between space and time that is the fabric of the universe. If you think of spacetime as a flat sheet, Einstein’s theory is that, if you add gravity to it — especially a lot of gravity — that sheet becomes curved, like if you had dropped a bowling ball on that sheet.

Einstein’s theory states that, for something massive like the sun, spacetime around it should be curved just a little bit — and that should bend the path of light from other stars passing near the sun. Einstein published this theory in 1915 using some amazing and beautiful mathematics. He also imagined this gorgeous experiment of proving it by making observations during an eclipse of stars whose light passes close to the sun. The sun should be bending that light just a little bit, which would make their position appear to shift very slightly. Normally, it would be impossible to see those stars and measure their positions. But, you can do it during an eclipse, when the sun is completely covered.

Did Einstein follow through with that experiment?

EL: No, but his theories led to international collaborations among scientists to use a solar eclipse to test the theory of relativity. It’s really amazing because this is happening during and immediately after World War I. There were some attempts that failed due to weather conditions during the eclipse and political strife. But finally, during a , a British scientist named Sir Arthur Eddington led a team that took the right measurements during those few minutes of totality — measurements of those stars positioned nearest to the sun relative to Earth — and showed that Einstein was correct!

What advice do you have for anyone in the path of totality?

EL: Have fun and be safe — and especially make sure you have viewing glasses from reputable sources before looking at the sun prior to totality. If there’s an astronomy club near you, or a university or college with an astronomy club, see if they’re holding a viewing event and join them. But even for people who aren’t in the path of totality, there will be a lot to see — again, using safe and reputable viewing glasses. From Seattle, about 20% of the sun will be obscured. It will look like someone took a bite out of it. It’s an incredible event!

For more information, contact Levesque at emsque@uw.edu.

Call it the sweetness paradox. In grocery stores across America, foods that were once saturated with sugar now contain none��— yet they taste just as sweet. ��

The secret is an assortment of additives that replicate sugar’s sweetness, but not its calorie count. Broadly classified as non-sugar sweeteners (NSS), these additives are creeping into everything from diet sodas (aspartame) to no-sugar-added fruit cups (sorbitol, sucralose, acesulfame potassium).

The rise of NSS has made it easier for conscious consumers to reduce their sugar intake, but these products may present their own health risks. in the journal JAMA Pediatrics, , a UW clinical professor of health systems and population health and executive director of , and a team of co-authors argue for better and more comprehensive data on the proliferation and possible health effects of non-sugar sweeteners. They also call for reducing children’s exposure to NSS by restricting their use in kids’ food and beverages.

“The growing presence of (non-sugar sweeteners) in the food supply, combined with mounting concerns about their use… suggest that caution in adding them to foods and beverages is needed,” Krieger and his colleagues wrote.��

UW News sat down with Krieger to discuss what we know — and what we need to know — about these ever-present products.��

NSS have been getting a lot of attention lately, from their possible health effects to their impact on our overall diets despite having been used for decades. What’s the debate surrounding these products, and why are they drawing so much attention now?��

James Krieger: There’s been a longstanding controversy over the safety and efficacy of non-sugar sweetened products. The debate has just been lifted up recently because of a couple of things. Last year, the World Health Organization recommended that NSS not be used to achieve weight control or reduce the risk of non-communicable diseases, which means chronic diseases like diabetes or heart disease. That created quite a stir. The food industry, particularly those who rely on these products, reacted negatively to the WHO report, while many public health officials and advocates said this is a great and long- overdue statement.��

There’s also growing use of these products in the food system, particularly as more consumers are looking for and demanding products with less sugar in them. This is because there is widespread awareness of the negative health consequences of too much sugar consumption. Industry is substituting NSS for sugar. They don’t want to change the overall sweetness of their product, because they know really well that sweet foods attract consumers. Instead, they’re maintaining sweetness by substituting NSS for sugar.��

Just how much of these products is the average American eating?����

JK: There’s not great data on consumption of NSS, and that’s a real gap in the knowledge right now. There’s better evidence on consumption of sugars, and that is going down.����

The challenge is that the food industry is not very transparent about how much non-sugar sweeteners are in their products. They have to list sweeteners on the ingredients list, but they don’t have to list the amount. So we know in more of a binary yes/no fashion, are people eating products with non-sugar sweeteners? And the trend line of that looks like it’s going up. For example, from the Environmental Working Group found that the number of food and beverage products containing non-sugar sweeteners increased three- to five-fold between 2013 and 2022.��

We need a lot more research and better data to know what the exposures to these products are. We don’t really know how much people are consuming right now.��

On a quick trip through the grocery store, one might come across a dozen different non-sugar sweeteners. There’s the classics, aspartame and sucralose, the sugar alcohols like erythritol and xylitol, and the “natural” NSS like stevia and monk fruit extract. Do different sweeteners interact with our bodies differently? Do some carry greater potential health risks than others?������

JK: It’s not clear. Most of the studies, particularly the long-term studies, have looked at these products as a group. But each one has a distinct pharmacologic and toxicologic profile. Some of the older NSS have been directly assessed by the FDA, but those assessments are very dated now. The way the newer NSS get into the food supply now is that industry just needs to send in a statement to the FDA saying that, in their estimation, these are safe.����

Now that said, there are some specifics. Some credible researchers and agencies within the WHO have raised concerns that aspartame may be linked to cancer. Others disagree. It’s clear that saccharine is probably a carcinogen, and it’s not used much now. A recent study that came out on erythritol looked at its association with cardiovascular disease, that is death or non-fatal heart attacks or strokes, and found they were increased. The researchers found a possible mechanism for that, linking non-sugar sweeteners to platelet clumping and blood clotting in vitro, which could explain that link, because these can block blood flow and cause heart attacks and strokes. So there’s a plausible mechanism that it could do that.��

My guess is that it’s probably going to be a class effect — they’ll all have kind of the same effect. And the reason I suspect that is because the common mechanism they all work by is they all bind to sweet receptors, and those aren’t just in your mouth, they’re also in organs and blood vessels, everywhere in the body. All of these products bind to those sweet receptors, no matter where they are. And then they might have effects ranging from insulin sensitivity, glucose metabolism, to vascular reactivity, platelet activation and so on.

There’s really pretty good evidence from long-term epidemiological diet studies that link exposure to non-sugar sweeteners to Type II diabetes, to weight gain, to heart disease. Those certainly are three big public health problems right now. That’s what has gotten me concerned about these and why I think we need to be taking a more active, aggressive approach toward limiting people’s exposure to them.��

You write in the article that it’s especially important to understand kids’ exposure to non-sugar sweeteners. Why is that?����

JK: In general, for any kind of environmental exposure, kids are more vulnerable because they’re going through these developmental windows when their bodies are more sensitive to the effects. Exposure early in life, can actually set up lifelong metabolic and physiological changes. So avoiding early exposure to substances associated with unhealthy biological processes is��a really good opportunity to set kids on a trajectory to a healthy life as opposed to problems.����

Also, taste preferences get set early in life. There’s evidence that kids who are exposed to more sweetness will develop a lifelong preference for sweetness, and that sets them up to either consume more sugar or non-sugar sweeteners. And children don’t make choices for themselves. They’re more vulnerable, so we have to do more to protect them from any kind of thing that’s going to jeopardize their health.��

That leads me to another thing that’s a little scary. The USDA released preliminary guidelines about the amount of added sugar that can be served in school foods and meals. The guidelines say that by 2027, no more than 10% of the calories in school food can come from added sugars, which is consistent with the US dietary guidelines. That’s great, but then I worry that the food industry will put more NSS in the foods available at schools, and kids’ exposure will go up.����

You highlight other countries, most notably Chile, that require food manufacturers to be transparent about the type and amount of NSS in their products. Do you see that as an effective strategy in the U.S.?��

JK: Chile is one of the few countries that requires the amount of non-sugar sweetener to be put on labels of their food products. I think that’s a great idea, and I would love to see that happen in the U.S.��

Another approach, short of putting the actual quantitative amounts on nutrition labels, is putting labels indicating the presence of NSS on the front of packages, which is what Mexico, Colombia and Argentina have done. Many countries, predominantly in Latin America, have put front-of-package labels warning about added sugars, salt and saturated fat, which are three ingredients of public health concern. Mexico, Colombia and Argentina have added a fourth, warning that the products contain these non-sugar sweeteners and that children should avoid them. That’s probably not going to happen in the U.S. anytime soon given industry opposition and slow action by the FDA.��

There’s more potential for either FDA or USDA to require more transparency by the food industry. I could see them saying that manufacturers must disclose how much and what types of non-sugar sweeteners are in their products to a database that could be made available to researchers. It could also help if federal agencies or nutrition groups and nonprofits take this data and package it in a way to make it accessible to consumers who want to know how much of this stuff is in there. It could increase the public’s ability to access that information, and those who are really motivated might make choices about what to buy or not buy.��

And finally, let’s protect children. There’s no place for NSS in foods commonly consumed by or marketed to kids. Until we have reliable data that NSS are safe for children, let’s do all we can to make sure they do not consume them.��

For more information, contact Krieger at jwkrieg@uw.edu.

In a world abuzz with smartphones, tablets, 5G and Siri, there are whispers of something new over the horizon — and it isn’t artificial intelligence!

A growing field of research seeks to develop technologies built directly on the seemingly strange and contradictory rules of quantum mechanics. These principles underlie the behavior of atoms and everything comprised of atoms, including people. But these rules are only apparent at very small scales. Researchers across the globe are constructing rudimentary quantum computers, which could perform computational tasks that the “classical” computers in our pockets and on our desks simply could not.

To help transform these quantum whispers into a chorus, scientists at the ����Ӱ�Ӵ�ý are pursuing multiple quantum research projects spanning from creating materials with never-before-seen physical properties to studying the “quantum bits” — or qubits (pronounced “kyu-bits”) — that make quantum computing possible.

With their in the Department of Physics and the Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, UW Professor studies the quantum-level properties of crystalline materials for potential applications in electrical and optical quantum technologies. In addition, Fu, who is also a faculty member in the Molecular & Engineering Sciences Institute and the Institute for Nano-engineered Systems, has led efforts to develop a comprehensive graduate curriculum and provide internship opportunities in quantum sciences for students in fields ranging from computer science to chemistry — all toward the goal of forging a quantum-competent workforce.

UW News sat down with Fu to talk about the potential of quantum research, and why it’s so important.

Let’s start with the obvious. What is “quantum?”

Kai-Mei Fu: Originally, “quantum” just meant “discrete.” It referred to the observation that, at really small scales, something can exist only in discrete states. This is different from our everyday experiences. For example, if you start a car and then accelerate, the car “accesses” every speed. It can occupy any position. But when you get down to these really small systems — unusually small — you start to see that every “position” may not be accessible. And similarly, every speed or energy state may not be accessible. Things are “quantized” at this level.

And that’s not the only weird thing that’s going on: At this small scale, not only do things exist in discrete states, but it is possible for things to exist in a combination of two or more different states at once. This is called “superposition,” and that is when the interesting physical phenomena occur.

How is superposition useful in developing quantum technology?

KMF: Well, let’s take quantum computing for example. In the information age of today, a computational “bit” can only exist in one of two possible states: 0 and 1. But with superposition, you could have a qubit that can exist in two different states at the same time. It’s not just that you don’t know which state it’s in. It really is coexisting in two different states. Thus it is possible to compute with many states, in fact exponentially many states, at the same time. With quantum computing and quantum information, the power is in being able to control that superposition.

What are some exciting advancements or applications that could stem from controlling superposition?

KMF: There are four main areas of excitement. My favorite is probably quantum computation. It’s the one that’s furthest out technologically — right now, computation involving just a handful of qubits has been realized — but it’s kind of the big one.

We know that the power of quantum computation will be immense because ��superposition is scalable. This means that you would have so much more computational space to utilize, and you could perform computations that our classical computers would need the age of the universe to perform. So, we know that there’s a lot of power in quantum computing. But there’s also a lot of speculation in this field, and questions about how you can harness that power.

Does the ����Ӱ�Ӵ�ý have a quantum computer?

KMF: It currently does not. We are gathering materials now to construct a quantum processor — the basis of a quantum computer — as part of our educational curriculum in this field.

Besides quantum computing, what other applications are there?

KMF: Another area is sensing for more precise measurements. One example: single-atom crystals that can act as sensors. For my research, I work with atoms arranged into a perfect crystal and then I create “defects” by adding in different types of atoms or taking out one atom in the lattice. The defect acts like an artificial atom and it will react to tiny changes nearby, such as a change in a magnetic field. These changes are normally so small that they would be hard to measure at room temperature, but the artificial atom amplifies the changes into something I can see — sometimes even by eye. For example, some crystals will radiate light when I shine a laser on them. By measuring the light they emit, I can detect a change.

This is so special. I get super excited because we know that all these things are possible in theory, but we’ve just hit the timescale where we’re starting to see real technological applications right now.

That sounds really exciting!

KMF: Another area I’ll mention is quantum simulation. There are a lot of potential applications in this field, such as studying new energy storage systems or figuring out how to make an enzyme better at nitrogen fixation. Essentially these problems require making new materials, but these are complex quantum systems that are hard for classical computers to simulate or predict. But quantum simulation could, and this could be done using a type of quantum computer. The field is expecting a lot of advancement in materials and other areas from quantum simulation.

The final area is quantum communication. When you’re transmitting sensitive information, you can create a key to encrypt it. With quantum encryption you can distribute a key that’s so fundamentally secure that if you have an eavesdropper, they leave a “mark” behind that you can detect.

How big is the field of quantum communication? Is it happening now?

KMF: Well, in the past few years, quantum communication became a prominent topic in government when China .

Let’s shift gears a little to talk about quantum in terms of workforce development. You have companies, national labs and universities all pursuing quantum research. Are there any specific challenges for quantum education?

KMF: What we are doing is crafting a common framework — a common language — for education in quantum. Quantum involves many fields, including chemistry, computer science, material science, chemical engineering and theoretical physics. Historically these fields have all had their own approach, their own vocabulary, their own history. At the ����Ӱ�Ӵ�ý, we’ve launched a core curriculum in quantum for graduate students who want to pursue careers in this field. Through the , we also have partners for internships.

We need more scientists in quantum because this is an exciting time. A lot is changing. There are many questions to answer, too many. Every field in quantum is growing in its own way. In the coming years, this is going to change a lot about how we approach problems — in communication, in software, in medicine and in materials. It will be beyond what we can think about even today.

For more information, contact Fu at kaimeifu@uw.edu.

The very components that make electronics fast and easy to use also make their disposal an environmental nightmare. Components of smartphones, computers and even kitchen appliances contain heavy metals and other compounds that are toxic to us and harmful to ecosystems.

As electronics become cheaper to buy, e-waste has piled up. A 2019 from the World Economic Forum called e-waste “the fastest-growing waste stream in the world” — and for good reason. That same year, people generated more than 50 million metric tons of e-waste, the U.N.’s Global E-waste Monitor. Much of it is incinerated, piled up in landfills or exported to lower-income countries where it creates public health and environmental hazards.

Three researchers in the ����Ӱ�Ӵ�ý College of Engineering are exploring ways to make electronics more Earth-friendly. , an assistant professor in the Paul G. Allen School of Computer Science & Engineering and researcher in the UW Institute for Nano-engineered Systems, will be presenting at the CHI 2022 conference in May. , an assistant professor of mechanical engineering, is indefinitely. And , an assistant professor of materials science and engineering and researcher in the Molecular Engineering & Sciences Institute, uses biological materials, such as seaweeds and other algae, to develop alternatives to plastics that can be 3D-printed.

For Earth Day, UW News reached out to these engineers to discuss their projects.

What features do you prioritize when designing sustainable electronics?

Vikram Iyer: There are lots of important problems to tackle in designing sustainable electronics, including reducing the environmental impact of e-waste. Our groups are trying to develop creative solutions to this problem, such as using new and more environmentally friendly materials while building functional devices that don’t compromise performance. For example, the mouse we designed with a biodegradable circuit board works when you plug it into any computer.

What was the design process like for the mouse?

VI: This project was a collaboration with , a principal researcher at Microsoft, and , a UW doctoral student in the Allen School. We took several steps to make this mouse:

• We optimized our circuit design to use the fewest number of silicon chips possible, because around 80% of carbon emissions associated with manufacturing electronics comes from the energy-intensive processes used to make chips.
• We use biodegradable materials when possible. For example, the circuit board that holds and connects the chips together typically contains toxic flame-retardants, but we instead pattern our circuits on a board made from flax fibers. Also, the casing for the mouse is made out of biodegradable plastics.
• We use general-purpose, programmable chips, like microcontrollers, in our designs so that we can reuse them in new devices.
• We use software to estimate the environmental impact of each stage of production to quantify the environmental impacts and identify which stages of our design to improve next.

This is just a start, and our long-term vision is to develop new materials and methods that help us generate a production cycle for electronics in which all the materials and components can either be recycled and reused, or degraded and regenerated through the natural biological cycle.

Is it really true that the mouse’s case and circuit board dissolve in water?

VI: When we submerge our circuit board in water, the fibers start to come apart and the whole thing just disintegrates. This takes about five to 10 minutes in hot water, or a few hours at room temperature. After this we’re left with the chips and circuit traces which we can filter out. We also designed two different cases, one of these can dissolve in water and the other can be commercially composted.

Would a biodegradable mouse be as durable as a conventional mouse, especially up against the body heat and moisture we produce?

VI: There are definitely sustainable methods to ensure biodegradable components are also durable. For example, you could add a thin coating of water-repellent materials to the mouse — like chitosan, which is found naturally in the outer skeleton of shellfish. We also show that we can print the case out of polylactic acid, a material commonly used to make things like commercially compostable forks. Going forward we’re really excited to partner with researchers like Eleftheria, whose group is making new sustainable materials. And by partnering closely with researchers at Microsoft, we hope to develop solutions that are scalable and deployable for industry.

What types of new materials is the Roumeli group working on?

Eleftheria Roumeli: focuses on developing materials derived from biological matter. In addition to seaweeds and other forms of algae, this includes plant residues and microbial products. Our studies aim to further our understanding of how these natural, versatile materials can be used as composite building blocks for sustainable alternatives to plastics.

How do you manufacture sustainable components — like biodegradable parts — for electronics?

ER: The great thing is that today’s manufacturing methods can be used to create sustainable components for electronics. For example, some of the biologically derived materials my group works with can be made into inks and filaments for manufacturing parts using 3D printing. We recently published a — that’s a type of blue-green algae — both with and without cellulose fibers as a filler. Cellulose is the most abundant natural polymer, and these inks are 100% compostable in soil. There’s no special composting facility required!

What are other alternative filaments you can use for 3D printing?

ER: We can also make hybrid materials that are a blend of both biological matter — such as spirulina cells — and commercial, degradable polymers. For the polymer, we use matrix materials such as polylactic acid, which Vikram mentioned before and is the most widely available industrially compostable polymer, or polybutylene adipate co-terephthalate, a soil-compostable polymer. The particular choice of components determines the properties, performance and the compostability of our filaments.

For example, for packaging, which we usually buy and “consume” very fast and then discard immediately, a material made solely of biological components would be preferable. Then, after we use it, it could be disposed of in a backyard or landfill and it would degrade in a few weeks.

But if we want a filament for the , we would need a polymer binder to ensure that the filament meets the requirements of hot-extrusion based printing.

Are there any other new innovations for sustainable electronics?

Aniruddh Vashisth: One thing we’re working on is recyclable synthetic polymers. Unlike what Eleftheria’s team studies, these polymers are not derived from biological components. Instead, these polymers consist of an adaptive network and can be recycled and reprocessed multiple times.

Unlike other plastics, these materials do not lose their thermo-mechanical properties during reprocessing and recycling. This is exciting since you can reuse the same material again and again! This phenomenon of retaining material properties is possible because the building blocks that make up these materials can detach and reattach, just like Legos.

So when we are recycling, we are disassembling and reassembling the Legos. We have been focusing on aerospace-grade composites, but we are starting to explore other applications with a wide range of target applications.

What impact would that have on the e-waste problem?

AV: Today’s e-waste is usually a complex composite, with plastics, metal and ceramic components all in the same device. Recycling these materials is a challenging task, so they often just end up in landfills and lead to pollution.

Right now there are more than 250 million computers and 7 billion phones in the world. Most of these have polymer components. Just think if the polymers used in these devices could be recycled multiple times. That would be a great step toward sustainability! Our group has been working on how to design and characterize such recycled polymer composites for a more sustainable future.

For more information, contact Iyer at vsiyer@uw.edu, Roumeli at eroumeli@uw.edu and Vashisth at vashisth@uw.edu.

With K-12 schools, colleges and universities across the country reconvening this autumn for in-person instruction — many after more than a year of remote or hybrid learning — some educators are calling for teachers to embrace more “active learning” methods in the classroom. These methods differ from traditional lecture formats by engaging students with in-class tasks like partner discussions to learn subject matter and reinforce core concepts. In studies, many active learning methods improve grades and student knowledge.

In a published Oct. 1 in Science, a group led by at Carnegie Mellon University is advocating for a fresh look at active learning and its potential as classrooms and lecture halls again fill with students. Two co-authors from the ����Ӱ�Ӵ�ý’s Department of Biology — assistant teaching professor and lecturer emeritus — highlight the role that active learning methods have in promoting equity. In STEM education, active learning methods can eliminate inequities for students from underrepresented backgrounds, something Theobald and Freeman have studied as part of the UW’s Biology Education Research Group.

Theobald sat down with UW News to talk about the current state of active learning methods, research into their effectiveness and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Q: You teach here at the UW. How has the COVID-19 pandemic affected teaching at colleges and universities?

ET: Oh, it’s had so many effects. There has been so much disruption — some that is easily recognized, and some that isn’t. For instance, people are touting that online learning is more accessible. And on the one hand, it is. For example, there’s no commute for students. But on the other hand, there are disadvantages in terms of accessibility. Students need quiet, private spaces that are free from distraction and a good internet connection. But with remote learning, the distractions from other parts of their lives become part of their “classroom.”

And that’s just considering logistics and practicality. What has really suffered in the pandemic is the community that students experience in the classroom. I think a lot of research in active learning methods has told us that those communities — those connections — are central to learning. In our piece, we try to drive home that students need each other. They need to learn from each other. And students need to understand that they’re not alone in the learning process. A lot of that is lost online.

What messages are you trying to send with this new article?

ET: I think the message we’re trying to send centers on what I and a ton of others are feeling right now. We’re going back to in-person teaching and learning. What will that look like? The group of us who came together to write this policy forum piece are all people who have made education research our life’s work. We think this return to in-person instruction is an opportunity to discuss and reflect. Going back to in-person instruction shouldn’t mean just going back to pre-pandemic teaching methods. What could be done better?

What are some active learning methods used today?

ET: Well, it really depends on what type of classroom or learning environment you’re talking about — whether K-12 or undergraduate.

For me, I teach at the undergraduate level. The methods you can employ there can take many forms: Turn to your neighbor and discuss this concept for a few minutes, or complete a short, in-class worksheet that reinforces a key concept.

We’re designing these active learning methods around the future assessments for course performance. They’re opportunities to practice. When you practice a musical instrument, you’re rehearsing for a performance later. Or when you practice a sport, it’s for a game later. Whatever the form, think of these active learning methods as a practice for the exams, projects and presentations that students can use to demonstrate how well they know the subject matter.

Which educational settings employ active learning methods?

ET: In general, higher education — particularly STEM education — is just a little bit behind K-12 in adopting active learning, I think. Before coming to UW, I worked as a middle and high school teacher, and active learning is how I was taught to teach. I couldn’t dream of walking into a class and just lecturing at my students. I would’ve been eaten alive.

In K-12 settings, I think there’s definitely value seen in active learning, and there has been a lot of research backing up the effectiveness of active learning in these settings. And I think in higher education settings, recent research backs up its effectiveness as well in improving learning outcomes, boosting grades and reducing inequities in student outcomes.

Could active learning methods be improved?

ET: Oh yes. In any teaching method, there is always room to improve. Studies show that active learning improves learning outcomes, but there’s also a lot of variation in the results. Why is that?

Well, one new focus as a potential answer is that you have to consider hearts as well as minds when teaching: Getting away from lectures and incorporating active learning will engage minds, but you can’t just have active learning alone. You also need to foster a sense of psychosocial “comfort” in the classroom.

How do you create this sense of psychosocial comfort?

ET: This is one of our avenues of active investigation! We’re exploring the hypothesis that students need this sense of psychosocial safety — knowing, for example, that their professor cares deeply about their success. What we’re trying to emphasize in the Science piece is that, by this theory, you need to do both: Students learn best in the types of collaborative environments that active learning methods can provide, and you also need to create an environment where students feel supported and feel that instructors care deeply about their success.

More research must be done to test this “heads and hearts” hypothesis, but we believe this could be key to bringing equity into STEM undergraduate education. It could go a long way toward improving equity in higher education classrooms.

For more information, contact Theobald at ellij@uw.edu.

Early in life, we start to learn the rules of this world. We memorize simple lessons — like “what goes up, must come down” — that help us begin to make sense of our world. In time, we’re no longer surprised that rain is wet, food can spoil or the sun rises in the east and sets in the west.

But more than a century ago, scientists started to learn that all of those rules, patterns and lessons lie on a foundation that, to us, might seem filled with contradictions, confusion and chance. That foundation is . It describes how all of the material in the universe, from stars and galaxies to blades of grass and Belgian waffles, behaves at the subatomic level.

At that scale, matter has its own rules, which are so complex that they might appear divorced from the larger reality that we experience. For instance, particles can act like waves. That potential disconnect, between how we experience matter at a bulky, human scale and how matter behaves at a miniscule, subatomic scale, has kept quantum mechanics largely out of the public eye. That must change, argues , a ����Ӱ�Ӵ�ý professor of physics, because we have entered an era where quantum mechanics plays an ever-greater role in our lives.

Morales has authored a for Ars Technica on quantum mechanics for a general audience. One article in the series is rolling out each week from Jan. 10 to Feb. 21. Morales sat down with UW News to talk about the series, quantum mechanics and what he hopes the public can learn about this seemingly odd and possibly intimidating realm of science.

Of all possible subjects, why did you want to write an article series on quantum mechanics for a general audience?

MM: I believe it’s important for our society to be technologically literate, that we have some shared knowledge of the technology that plays such a vital role in our lives. And that’s what we’ve seen in history. One hundred years ago, electronics was at the cutting edge of science. It was this incredibly specialized field that only a handful of experts understood. Now we have university departments dedicated to teaching it while middle school students are wiring up circuits.

Our knowledge of quantum mechanics needs to evolve in the same way, because it is starting to pervade our lives and this trend will only grow with time. Quantum mechanics needs to leave the physics building and start to be more broadly understood, because otherwise the public is just going to throw its hands up and say the machines in our lives are magic. It’s not magic. There is real science behind this, and it can be made accessible for a general audience. The article series is my attempt to move in that direction.

How is quantum mechanics playing a greater role in our lives?

MM: There are lots of examples. An MRI machine at a hospital is an entirely quantum device. It has superconducting magnets that polarize all of the protons in hydrogen atoms to help generate the detailed, informative images that your doctor can use. That idea of polarizing a particle like a proton comes directly from quantum mechanics. The hard drive on your desk doesn’t work without quantum mechanics. You can now buy a TV that has quantum dots in it. And there are more examples that are coming, probably faster than we think — like quantum computing and quantum cryptography.

What makes quantum mechanics a barrier for people who aren’t experts in this field?

MM: It’s probably the math, to be blunt. A lot of complex mathematics underlies the principles of quantum mechanics. Physics students are introduced to this field largely through a mathematical lens, which is great — they need that perspective. But, I would argue that a non-expert does not. And that’s what I’m trying to do in this article series. I’m leaving the math out of it entirely.

So how do you talk about quantum mechanics without using mathematics?

MM: I think as a field we’re still trying to figure out how! For each of these articles, my approach�� was to focus on a theme as we embark on this walking tour through the quantum mechanical woods. On each tour, I use concrete examples to illustrate a quantum mechanical effect — and give an accurate model, without the math, of what’s going on. I am not trying to focus on the “mystery” of quantum mechanics. I’m trying to illustrate by example, using things we encounter out in the world and that are also backed up by thousands of experiments in the laboratory. Then at the end of each tour we come back to the visitor center and talk about applications that are starting to appear in our lives.

What are some of these concepts from quantum mechanics that you talk about in the series?

MM: We start with “Particles move like waves but hit like particles.” That means that when a particle is in motion, it’s moving like a wave. But when it hits something, like a detector, it shows up as a spot. This is true of all particles, all the time. Neutrons, which are made up of three quarks, do this. So do molecules made up of hundreds of composite particles. This is a foundation of quantum mechanics. If you’re teaching a physicist, you’ll go through the mathematical steps that prove this concept. But without the math, you can use a mental picture like what I just described: moving like a wave and hitting like a particle.

Another concept I get into is that a particle has a range of “colors,” or energy, and this is closely related to the size of a particle. If you take some photons and stuff them randomly into a fiber optic cable, when we see them at the other end, we see that they’ve “held hands” along the way. All particles can be classified as either “introverts,” like photons that bunch up, or “extroverts,” like electrons that avoid one another. The size of a particle wave in motion can then be extended to understand interferometric telescopes that span the earth.

These are a number of concepts that don’t get discussed much in popular media, and I try to delve into them here, because these principles will play a role in quantum-based technologies of the future.

What are some of those technologies?

MM: Too many to name! Our knowledge of quantum mechanics and advancements in manufacturing methods are allowing us to make devices with properties not seen in nature, but based on quantum mechanical concepts. It’s really revolutionary. It’s almost like we’ve discovered a new superpower. Quantum electronics is an example. This field makes use of the wave-like properties of particles and has revolutionized our observations of the and the early universe.

Optical clocks are probably coming out of the lab soon and deliver an unheard-of level of timekeeping precision. A previous level of precision — that of atomic clocks — gave us GPS. That’s why the smartphone in your pocket knows where it is. I expect that these quantum-based technologies will bring about their own revolutions in how we live our lives.

And that to me, is why I feel it is so important for us to try to familiarize ourselves with quantum mechanics. I’m hoping that this series can be a chance for people to explore, even during the pandemic, and to pick up something new in a format that is hopefully fun and approachable.

For more information, contact Morales at miguelfm@uw.edu.

In 2017, the Heising-Simons Foundation — a family foundation that works in climate and clean energy, science, education, and human rights — established the to support early-career astronomers engaged in planetary research. Just over a year later, the Foundation that it would overhaul the selection process for the program because, out of 12 fellowships awarded in the program’s first two years, only two — one each year — went to female scientists.

“Even with our good intentions, we find ourselves part of a system that drives to less rather than more diversity,” said the Foundation in . “We commit to working to change our Fellowship and that system for the better.”

Over the next year, the Foundation worked with — director of the ����Ӱ�Ӵ�ý’s , an NSF-funded body to promote female STEM faculty on campus — to modify the application and evaluation process for the 51 Pegasi b Fellowship based on social science research. The goal: to put male and female scientists on a more equal footing.

The Heising-Simons Foundation used the revised method to choose its next class of fellows. In March of this year, the Foundation that six scientists would receive 51 Pegasi b Fellowships in 2019, four of them women.

In published Dec. 6 in the journal Nature Astronomy, Yen shared the changes that the Heising-Simons Foundation implemented, and how its lessons could inform changes in academia, education and philanthropy to boost diversity, equity and inclusion in all STEM fields. Yen sat down with UW News to discuss this unique case study.

This is just one postdoctoral fellowship that researchers in astronomy can apply for. Why is this case so important?

These fellowships have a large impact on career trajectory. When postdoctoral researchers apply for faculty positions, grants or other opportunities, they’ll be evaluated in part based on research they’ve already done and fellowships they’ve previously earned. So, when the process to award things like postdoctoral fellowships already treats male and female candidates differently, it has an impact not just in regard to diversity, equity and inclusion, but also the demographic makeup of faculty, senior researchers, administrators and mentors.

What prompted the Heising-Simons Foundation to change the way that this fellowship was awarded?

With just two fellowships going to female scientists in its first two years, there were strong reactions from the astronomy and philanthropic communities, all essentially asking: Why is the gender diversity so skewed in these fellowships while we’re having these conversations about diversity, equity and inclusion?

The Heising-Simons Foundation listened, and asked, “How can we make this better?” They reached out to experts and began a year-long process to change the way that they solicit applications and evaluate candidates.

How did you approach working with the Foundation for this fellowship?

I worked with them to evaluate the application process and as a facilitator during the evaluation and review process. Our goal was to bring changes to the fellowship application and evaluation process that reflected effective practices for diversity, equity and inclusion.

What are some of those best practices?

First, don’t narrow the applicant pool any earlier than you need to. That makes it more likely that fellowships will be awarded in a way that addresses diversity, equity and inclusion. Second, ensure that the information collected from applicants actually captures what we want to know about them, and also create an evaluation rubric for reviewers. This avoids situations in which evaluators might “fill in the blanks,” read between the lines or make assumptions about applicants that might introduce bias into the selection process. Also, we just want to ensure that we’re aware and acknowledge that bias happens to all of us.

So what are some of the changes that the Heising-Simons Foundation put in place to reflect those best practices?

Previously, postdoctoral researchers would apply through the universities that they wanted to work at. The universities would then pick which applications to send to the Heising-Simons Foundation. We changed the process so that postdoctoral researchers would apply directly to the Foundation, which would then forward those applications to the relevant universities. This keeps the universities involved in the selection process, which the Foundation wanted, but also increased the percentage of female applicants from less than 25% under the old system to more than 30%.

What about changes to the information given by applicants?

Research has shown that we’re not as good as we think we are in evaluating applications without bias coming into play. This is true even in science. Part of overhauling the process involved changes to the application itself — the information we’re requesting from the applicant. This involved stepping back and asking, “What do we really want?” Do we want someone innovative, for example? If so, how do we collect information that will let us identify innovation, for example, among the pool of applicants? And what criteria will reviewers use to evaluate and score the applications?

By starting from those types of goal-oriented questions, we made changes to the application, such as asking for an open-ended statement from the applicants about diversity, equity and inclusion. We also improved the rubric for reviewers to use in evaluating and scoring applications, including justifications for their score.

What about steps to reduce bias in the evaluation and selection process?

We did quite a lot. To provide a common context among the reviewers, I provided background research about bias — that it happens, often in counterintuitive ways, and can affect outcomes like who receives a fellowship. They reviewed applications in-person, and we took concrete steps to avoid introducing bias through things like “decision fatigue.” This is a well-documented phenomenon, and happens when you just “plow through” a list of cases with no breaks. Here, we handled the applications in randomized bundles of six, followed by a brief break. This randomized discussion also helped with anchoring bias where we latch onto a first impression — like an ordinal score or ranking — that influences our future thinking about that application.

On paper, these might look like lots of changes, but they really aren’t. They’re small changes that required a modest investment in time and resources to come up with and implement. But that investment had a large effect on reducing bias and ensuring that the evaluation and selection process is sensitive to diversity, equity and inclusion. These changes support the overall goal of scientific excellence, noting that excellence has many dimensions.

These changes don’t seem specific to astronomy.

That is correct. They’re widely applicable to STEM fields, academia and funding organizations. Many types of organizations have made commitments to diversity, equity and inclusion in STEM fields. But it takes a lot of leadership to actually make it happen. The Heising-Simons Foundation said that it wants to make the investment — caring enough to not just say, “We want to do better,” but to actually do better. And even after a change like this, the work is not over. This is an ongoing conversation, and the work must continue.

How would you like to see conversations about diversity, equity and inclusion evolve?

I would like people to consider diversity as part of excellence. People right now want to know what the value of diversity is in an organization. But let’s put it another way: What’s the value — or the cost — of being homogenous?

For more information, contact Yen at 206-543-4605 or joyceyen@uw.edu.

When he saw the job posting last summer to lead at the ����Ӱ�Ӵ�ý, it took Callender all of about two minutes to start working on his application. Callender himself was a Sea Grant Knauss marine policy fellow in 1992 in the Oceanographer of the Navy’s Office in Washington, D.C. and that experience forever changed the course of his career.

Callender began as Washington Sea Grant’s new director this fall, and UW News sat down with him recently to learn more about what he hopes to bring to the organization.

Why did you decide to leave your job with NOAA’s ?

RC: My previous job was incredibly diverse and richly rewarding, because my motivation fundamentally is to make a difference for the planet. But those kinds of jobs are measured in “dog years,” because they are really intense. What I really wanted to do next was find a position where I was closer to the resources I truly care about, and I could actually see the results of my work and my team’s work. I was always impressed with Washington Sea Grant.

Thinking back to your years with NOAA, what are some key takeaways you’re bringing into this new role?

RC: It’s all about people and relationships. In that role, I was able to build trust with key players, including members of Congress, congressional staff, nongovernmental organizations, within NOAA, other agencies and political leadership. One of the things I’m doing here is developing a strategic approach to networking and meeting people in the community.

The other piece I’m bringing here is a passion for diversity, equity and inclusion. I was seen as somebody at NOAA who, frankly, was one of the leaders in that area, even though I’m a Caucasian, middle-aged male. It matters a lot to me personally because I have a disabled daughter, and I see how she doesn’t fit in and isn’t treated fairly. It’s great to see that’s a focus at the UW, and we have an amazing, interesting group of people here who are passionate about it as well.

Do you have a specific accomplishment you are most proud of from your time at NOAA?

RC: There are probably two. The one I’m personally most proud of is we were able to establish in 2017 a new on the island of Oahu in Hawaii, in partnership with the community. It’s an amazing place — .

Secondly, with the thawing of relations with the U.S. and Cuba, we were able and in 2017 we developed, for the first time in the modern era, a map of the seafloor used for maritime navigation that combines the maps of both countries. This map will really open up commerce and ensure safe shipping. To be able to have those kinds of meetings with Cuban leadership and to put something together that mattered to both countries meant a lot.

What is attractive about this position at Washington Sea Grant?

RC: I’m one of those people who enjoys being a constant learner. So for me, having the ability to learn about new ecosystems and their challenges — and to learn about new coastal communities — intrigues me. I also wanted to have a better connection to the resources I work with. I love the mountains; I’m a longtime climber who has spent the equivalent of years in the mountains. I love the oceans — from a professional perspective, that’s where I have spent my entire career. I love to be on, under and around the water. Coming to a place that has amazing landscapes, seascapes and natural resources that I could work and play in was very, very compelling to me.

What are the strengths of the organization?

RC: I think one of the big strengths of this program is it supports more research than almost any other Sea Grant program. I see us as being that nexus of applied research that can make a difference in the goal of trying to enhance lives and livelihoods, public safety, and marine and coastal conservation. Our outreach programs that take research we support out into the community are also a strength, as well as our communications work that amplifies what we do to an even broader audience.

Are there specific areas where you would like to see Washington Sea Grant improve or grow?

RC: Part of my networking is also data gathering, and understanding the various relationships and challenges, so it’s hard for me to say yet. I do think we need to help deal with major issues related to climate change — coastal hazards, impacts of sea level rise, etc. I think longer term, we’re going to be in that game of helping communities adapt. I think for our kids’ kids, we owe it to them to be able to help them prepare for the challenges we’re seeing today.

How do you expect to use your experiences working across sectors here at UW?

RC: At Washington Sea Grant, we are 28 people with $2.7 million in federal appropriations, and there’s probably about a billion-dollar amount of coastal challenges out there. We can’t do it all as a small Sea Grant program, but we can be a catalyst — a trusted resource that can bring in groups across campus and ensure that we’re coordinated. Then we have more groups, instead of one, pulling in the same direction. Building on the relationships people already have is critical. Before, I was seen as somebody who didn’t care about the logo on your T-shirt; it was all about the resource at stake and the challenges at hand. I want to bring that mindset here, too.

A lot of Sea Grant’s work is in coastal Washington communities, though the organization does outreach on water-quality issues throughout the state. What would you say to residents around Washington about the broader importance of Sea Grant’s work?

RC: Do people eat seafood? Do they go on vacations? People want to go to a place where the environment is clean and the seafood is safe, so being able to preserve habitats that benefit the entire state is important. This state has the largest shellfish aquaculture production of any other state. It’s important to ensure those businesses are given information they need to be sustainable and productive, in harmony with the natural resource they are utilizing. That’s going to benefit people across the state.

“We must act urgently and collaboratively to transform the built environment from a leading driver of climate change to a significant and profitable solution.”

Such strong words of industry agreement are good news to , architect, engineer and ����Ӱ�Ӵ�ý associate professor of architecture. Simonen leads a UW-hosted research group called the that brings together academics and building industry professionals to study carbon emissions across a building’s life cycle, or entire period of use, and to focus on reducing the amount of “embodied” carbon in building materials.

The statement comes from a that was shared and signed at an event called , linked with the three-day in September in San Francisco.

“Together, we can help draw down excess atmospheric carbon,” reads this Carbon Smart Building Declaration, “and create a built environment that supports a healthy, equitable, and sustainable human community.”

Carbon emissions from the built environment account for more than 40 percent of greenhouse gases worldwide, and must be dramatically reduced to combat the effects of climate change. Simonen says that construction of a single “low embodied carbon” office building could save 30 million kilograms, or 33,000 tons, in carbon emissions, Simonen says — “the emissions equivalent of avoiding driving a car around the Earth 3,000 times.”

Exciting, too, Simonen said, is a new, open-source tool to track the carbon emissions of raw building materials called the , or EC3 for short. The tool, developed by the Carbon Leadership Forum in collaboration with and , can help construction professionals better report and reduce embodied carbon. No less an ally than Microsoft that it will pilot the calculator as the corporation remodels its campus. Funding for this has been provided by the Charles Pankow Foundation, the MKA Foundation and other building industry supporters such as carpet manufacturer Interface and the American Institute of Steel Construction.

The Carbon Leadership Forum is now an affiliate of , a new institute at the UW seeking to connect academics with people working on these environmental challenges and translate science into practical solutions.

Simonen said she was encouraged by a standing-room-only audience for Carbon Smart Building Day, the new calculator tool and the fact that so many have signed the Carbon Smart Building Declaration.

“What this means,” she said, “is we are approaching global consensus on the challenge ahead and exciting momentum on where to act to increase impact.”

Simonen added that the Carbon Leadership Forum continues to work with industry and NGO partners to build awareness of embodied carbon in construction. Another ongoing initiative, she said, is the , a platform for engagement and information to help achieve the aim of a carbon-neutral built environment by the year 2050.

###

For more information, contact Simonen at 206-685-7282 or ksimonen@uw.edu.