Upworthy’s book GOOD PEOPLE is coming this year — pre-order now!

Shop
 Explore 

ecology

Science

32 years separate this before and after of a beautiful Washington forest. Take a look.

Our relationship with our planet can be mutually beneficial if we commit ourselves to sustainability.

Left photo from Records of the Environmental Protection Agency; Right, by Miguel Vieira/Flickr.

A return to green over decades.

Douglas Scott grew up on Washington's Olympic Peninsula in the dying shadow of the timber industry that had supported the region for decades.

"Nearly every home had a bright orange or yellow sign reading 'This home supported by timber dollars,'" Scott wrote on Outdoor Society.

While the region has also been recognized for its succulent seafood, temperate climate, and stunning natural formations, nothing shaped the community — or the physical landscape — quite like logging did.

Logging repercussions felt on the Olympic Peninsula.

Olympic Peninsula, circa 1972. Photo from the Records of the Environmental Protection Agency.

The tension in the air between the loggers and the environmentalists throughout the 1980s was thicker than the trees being cut down.

"I heard from old timers in the Harbor about how environmentalists were ruining the region, and I was told by environmentalists that loggers were killing everything in sight," Scott recalled.

But to understand the full impact of deforestation on the region, it helps to take the bird's eye view.

Here's a satellite image of the Olympic Peninsula from 1984. The white region in the center are the mountaintops in Olympic National Park; you'll also notice the grey and brown areas along the western and northern coasts of the peninsula.

satellite images, deforestation, tourism

Satellite image of deforestation on the region of the Olympic Peninsula.

Screenshot via GoogleEarth Engine.

"When I moved away from the area in 1997, there wasn't much of a logging or mill economy in dozens of towns around the region," Scott said.

By that time, tourism had begun to take the place of timber as the region's major industry — which was probably helped along by the fact that the trees were slowly but surely starting to recover, enhancing the already stunning vistas that drew visitors.

Here's how the Olympic Peninsula looked by the time that Scott and his family left the area; you'll notice the western and northern coasts are just a little bit greener than they were 13 years prior...

Some green coming back.

Screenshot via GoogleEarth Engine.

Those great green arbors continued their gradual recovery into the 2000s...

More forest returns to the peninsula.

Screenshot via GoogleEarth Engine.

And they're still going today.

And still more green comes back.

Screenshot via GoogleEarth Engine.

But those isolated moments don't tell the whole story of the region's recovery. It's even more remarkable when you can see it in action...

Olympic Peninsula demonstrating the power of nature.

GIF via GoogleEarth Engine.

We don't always notice the world changing right before our eyes, but the decades-long view of the Olympic Peninsula shows the true power of nature.

It's not just the trees, either; according to Scott, the replenished forests have also had a positive impact on the local salmon population and other treasured natural resources.

Mother Nature doing her thing.

Left photo from Records of the Environmental Protection Agency; Right, by Miguel Vieira/Flickr.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't use the natural world, of course. We still need wood, for example, but now we know there are sustainable ways to use it without recklessly damaging to the planet.

The Earth was built to take care of itself. We just need to let Mother Nature do her thing.

This article originally appeared on 12.22.16

From Your Site Articles

nature

Nature

People tossing pet fish into lakes have created monster goldfish the size of footballs

City of Burnsville/Facebook

A Minnesota city has issued a notice to residents to please stop releasing their unwanted pet goldfish into local lakes and ponds because they are turning into Frankenfish and messing with the natural order of things.

Okay, they didn't say Frankenfish, but take a look at the monstrous size of these goldfish. Not exactly the little fishbowl friends you find at the fair.

The city of Burnsville, Minnesota posted the plea on Facebook and Twitter, explaining what a recent fish survey had found in a local lake. "Large groups of goldfish have been observed in recent years on the lake. At high populations, goldfish can contribute to poor water quality by mucking up the bottom sediments and uprooting plants," the post said.

"You see goldfish in the store and they're these small little fish," Caleb Ashling, Burnsville's natural resources specialist, said in an interview, according to MSN. "When you pull a goldfish about the size of a football out of the lake, it makes you wonder how this can even be the same type of animal."

There's a common myth that goldfish will only grow to the size their enclosure allows. While there is some truth to that, according to Tropical Fish Magazine, the limited size of at-home goldfish has more to do with water quality than aquarium size. The reality is that common goldfish can grow very large in size—up to 18 inches—and their impact on ecoystems they aren't designed for can be significant.

"A few goldfish might seem to some like a harmless addition to the local water body – but they're not," wrote the Minnesota department of natural resources earlier this year.

The city of Eagan, Minnesota, has experience with the problems invasive goldfish can cause. Several. years ago, some goldfish dumped into a pond at Eagan's Central Park resulted in a population spun out of control, which muddied the waters and harmed native plants. It took three years of effort and a great deal of expense to rid the pond of the issue.

"We tried netting them out," Koehle says, "and we got thousands of them, but we couldn't get them all," said Eagan water resources specialist Jessie Koehle, according to Minnesota Conservation Volunteer magazine. Eventually, we had to use rotenone to reclaim the pond, killing all the fish and starting over."

"It can be a pain to figure out what to do with a goldfish that you don't want," Koehle said. But releasing them into a lake or pond isn't the best solution, even if it seems like the kindest one. It's also against the law to introduce fish into bodies of water where they don't naturally live.

The city of Burnsville recommended that people rehome pet fish with responsible caregivers rather than release them out into nature. That's good advice for fish owners no matter where you live. One little fish may not seem like a big deal, but when it results in an explosion of an invasive species, it can wreak havoc on ecosystems and cause real harm to other living things. If your fish didn't come directly from the pond or the lake you're looking at, don't put it there. Keep pet fish in tanks, and keep the balance of nature intact.

From Your Site Articles

A viral reminder that Native people are the historical experts on sustainability

Photo by Anthony Gotter on Unsplash, Screenshot from tumbler

Environmental catastrophes like the recent Australian bushfires and ecological travesties like plastic-filled whale stomachs serve as stark reminders of our precarious relationship with our planet. While many of us call for greater sustainability in all areas of life, we don't really know what that looks like—which is why we should listen to those who do.

Unfortunately, ignorance about Native cultures and history prevents many people from looking toward indigenous wisdom when it comes to environmental issues. Many of us tend to think of sustainability as something new and innovative rather than a way of life that has already been accomplished in multiple places by multiple peoples.

A viral Facebook post from The Audacity of the Caucasity illustrates this point beautifully. A screenshot of a post on tumblr shows three people's posts about how Native people didn't just live in harmony with nature, but actively and purposefully managed the land to meet their own needs while also maintaining healthy ecosystems.

RELATED: Still don't think climate change matters? Here's how it's hitting people where it hurts.

The first, from @downhomesophisticate, reads:

"I don't think a lot of people really understand that ecosystems in North America were purposefully maintained and altered by Native people.

Like, we used to purposefully set fires in order to clear underbrush in forests, and to inhibit the growth of trees on the prairies. This land hasn't existed in some primeval state for thousands of years. What Europeans saw when they came here was the result of -work-"

Then @feministdragon explained in more detail what that work entailed:

"The east coast was all mature and maintained food forests. Decades if not centuries of nurturing and maintenance. When the British arrived, they were amazed that there were paths through the forest just 'naturally' lined with berries and edible plants, like a Garden of Eden. Then they tore that shit down to grow wheat."

Finally, @worriedaboutmyfern shared what they'd learned from their mom, who happens to be an ethnobotanist.

"My mom is an ethnobotanist and getting people to understand this is literally her life's work. A lot of native tribes just had a whole different way of looking at agriculture. Instead of planting orchards in tidy rows near their villages, they went to where the trees were already growing and tended them there. They would girdle trees by stripping the bark in order to stop the spread of disease or thin out badly placed saplings. And they would encourage the companion plants they wanted and weed out the ones they didn't, so that in the end the whole forest would be productive while remaining an ecosystem and not a monoculture. It is still agriculture, but it is a form of agriculture that is so much gentler on the landscape that, as the OP says, the European settlers could not recognize what they were seeing. To them the natives must have seemed to magically live in abundance while they starved."

(The tumblr post also includes many more details about how Native peoples managed the land.)

While it's clear that modern life makes a total return to Native land management practices impractical, that doesn't mean we can't learn from indigenous wisdom. All of us will be impacted by an unhealthy planet, and it only makes sense to consult the historical experts on sustainable living to find solutions.

At the same time, we need to acknowledge that Native communities are disproportionally impacted by environmental issues. Oil pipelines are being built through Native lands. Indigenous people in the Pacific islands are having to navigate rising sea levels. Inuit communities are having to figure out how to move entire villages due to melting Arctic ice. Native environmental leaders not only have generational wisdom to offer, but an urgent need for all of us to take meaningful action.

RELATED: Laws and climate change are harming this tribe's foodways. Here's how they survive.

When prominent activists like Greta Thunberg tell the world to listen to indigenous leaders, we should share and heed that advice. We can learn about and support young indigenous activists on the front line of environmental issues. We can check out the initiatives of organizations like Indigenous Environmental Network and their allies like Climate Justice Alliance.

When we have a collective problem, we look to experts to help solve it. And when it comes to protecting the environment and maintaining a sustainable relationship with the earth, indigenous people are some of the most experienced experts we have.

From Your Site Articles

native americans

Nature

No, Koalas are not ‘functionally extinct,’ but that doesn’t mean they’re okay

Bob Walker/Unsplash

A viral Forbes article claiming that koalas have become "functionally extinct" and that 80% of their habitat has been destroyed by Australia's devastating bushfires made its way around social media this weekend.

The problem is, it's not totally true.

Several ecology experts have responded to the article, pointing out that the koala situation in Australia is not that straightforward. The primary source for the "functionally extinct" claim in the Forbes article was the Australia Koala Foundation (AKF), an organization that advocates for the protection and conservation of koalas and their habitats. The functionally extinct designation generally means that an animal's population has dwindled to the point where they no longer play a significant role in their ecosystem and the population is no longer viable. AKF first announced that koalas may be functionally extinct back in May, but koala researchers and scientists say that its inaccurate to paint the koala population with that broad of a brush.

RELATED: When some koalas needed friends, these farmers stepped up.

"I do not believe koalas are functionally extinct—yet," Rebecca Johnson, a koala geneticist at the Australian Museum, told CNET. "That said, the fires are likely to have had a huge impact on what we know are some extremely valuable populations who are important for the long term survival of the species."

Dr. Christine Adams-Hosking, a koala expert at the University of Queensland, toldAustralia's SBS News, "In ecology it's always grey—there's never black and white, because koalas are very hard to track and count. But to say they're functionally extinct all over Australia, you can't possibly say that, because in some places they're doing well—in some places they're over-abundant."

The numbers offered by the AKF in the Forbes article are not definitively backed up by science. Adams-Hosking told SBS that recent expert estimates suggest that there are between 120,000 and 300,000 koalas in Australia—significantly more than the 80,000 count provided by AKF. It's not clear where AKF got the statistic that 80% of koala habitat has been destroyed, though the bushfires certainly are reeking havoc on the species, and that may be true in some specific areas. Hundreds of koalas have been killed in the fires, with heartbreaking and dramatic rescue stories making the news.

HEARTBREAKING... BUT THANK YOU! This woman rescued a koala caught in the middle of a fire in New South Wales, Austr… https://t.co/2xga6c3PA8
— KDKA (@KDKA) 1574187223.0

Adams-Hosking is clear about the dangers facing the cuddly creatures, but she's also clear about the importance of using scientific methods to gather data and make the most accurate statements about their status. The problem is, in an era of 24/7 breaking news headlines, actual science is comparably slow—and remarkably unsexy. When you add politics into the mix, not-totally-accurate stories sourced from not-total-experts can easily overpower the more measured voice of scientific research.

As Adams-Hosking pointed out to New Scientist, AKF's claims were made on the eve of elections in Australia. The environment and climate change are big issues, and AKF is an advocacy group that has been pushing politicians to take action. Hyperbole is a hallmark of politics, but is anathema to science. When the two overlap in reporting, this is what we get.

"There's a lot of politics going on, and somehow the koala gets involved," said Adams-Hosking.

So are koalas okay or not? The problem with stories like the Forbes article is that they cause people who are concerned about the environment to react strongly and share with passion. Then articles like those referenced above come out, causing people who think environmental concerns are overblown to say, "See? They're wrong! It's debunked! It's fake news!" But reality is always more complex than simple headlines or single stories, and the truth often lies somewhere between polarized extremes.

RELATED: Australia wanted tourists to forget climate change is a thing. It backfired.

The overall outlook is that koala populations vary throughout Australia—they are in danger of extinction in some areas, while overpopulating others. But deforestation due to farming and urbanization is an ongoing threat to koalas, who rely on eucalyptus trees for food. The recent bushfires in Australia haven't helped. Without protection they will continue to lose habitat and populations will remain threatened.

I think it's really important to be careful about the kind of language we use causing hopelessness. Let not give up on koalas!!! Conversation works we we actually do conservation!
— Erin Biba (@erinbiba) November 24, 2019

Climate change has also begun playing a role in koala population decline, as extreme weather accelerates and heatwaves become more common in Australia. Koalas can handle some heat, but they can't survive in sustained high temperatures. In urban areas, koalas also face dangers from people's pet dogs and from drivers hitting them with cars. But the biggest threat remains land loss from deforestation and habitat loss.

"They just can't live without forest, it's that simple," Adams-Hosking said. "Unless you get serious about protecting their habitat, nothing will change."

So yes, even though koalas aren't all going extinct, they are in trouble. Let's work on protecting them and all other species that are threatened by human activity. At the same time, let's make sure we turn to scientists for science and advocacy groups for advocacy. We need both, but we have to be careful about who we get statistics from and who we rely on for facts when we're sharing stories.

From Your Site Articles

Monarchs make a population comeback along Central Coast - Upworthy ›

Planet

Recycling was supposed to help save the planet. It's past time for us to rethink that idea.

Recycling isn't the answer we thought it was.

Photo by Vivianne Lemay on Unsplash

Those of us who want a sustainable future for our grandkids try really hard to do the right things for our planet. We grew up internalizing the three R's–Reduce, Reuse, Recycle—but it appears that one of those Rs has not lived up to its promise.

We all know that plastic and excessive packaging of all kinds are problematic, but most of us don't worry about it too much because most of it can be recycled anyway, right? We cheerfully put our yogurt containers and pizza boxes and egg cartons into our curbside recycling bin, confident that we've done our part for the environment by not throwing them into a landfill.

We imagine our municipalities taking that recycling to some kind of local recycling plant, where our plastic and paper gets transformed into shiny new eco-friendly products. Right?

Wrong. That's not at all what happens, and never has been. Today, much of what we're putting into our recycling bins isn't being recycled at all—even the stuff that theoretically can be. Instead, it's ending up in landfills or polluting our oceans.

RELATED: A dead whale just washed ashore with 88 pounds of plastic waste in its stomach. This needs to stop.

How is that possible, when we've spent so much time and energy convincing Americans to recycle?

Part of the problem is that instead of recycling these things ourselves, we've spent decades shipping tons and tons of our trash across the ocean to be recycled in China and SE Asia. But last year, China announced that would no longer take most of our recyclables, including mixed paper and most plastics. That cuts out most of our household recycling, and without China buying our waste anymore, there's nowhere for it to go.

Since 2018, we've been shipping more of our plastic to other developing nations in Southeast Asia, including Thailand and Vietnam. But according to Unearthed, the investigative arm of Greenpeace, those countries don't have the environmental infrastructure to handle that waste responsibly. Some of that recycling ends up being dumped into the ocean.

Why don't we just recycle our waste ourselves? Compared to the vast amounts of recyclable materials we dispose of, we have very few recycling plants in the U.S.

According to an article by Alana Semuels in The Atlantic, that's partially individual Americans' own fault. We are notoriously terrible at keeping track of what can be recycled and what can't, so we toss all kind of non-recyclable items in the recycling bin to let others (up to now, low-paid workers in China) figure out. We're also bad at keeping recyclables separated and clean the way they have to be in order to be go through the recycling process. Since it's cost prohibitive to hire people to sort and clean recyclables, waste management companies are telling people they either have to pay a lot more for recycling or ditch it altogether.

And because money is money, most people are choosing the latter. And many localities aren't even offering people the choice.

What does all of this mean for the average American who wants to do right by the planet? First, it means we need to focus a whole lot more on reducing and reusing and stop putting all of our eggs into the recycling basket. It means avoiding plastic whenever and wherever we can and not assuming we can just toss it into a blue bin somewhere. It means utilizing reusable water bottles, shopping bags, dishes and silverware, etc. as a matter of habit, not as an afterthought.

We can also make choices with our wallets. Only buy things when absolutely necessary, and try to buy used first. Whenever possible, choose items without packaging, and when packaging seems unnecessary or excessive, question the companies who are using it. Until we pressure the powers that be to stop wrapping everything we use, we're going to continue to pollute our planet. All of that plastic eventually has to go somewhere.

RELATED: If you don't think twice about the plastic strap around a package, here's why you should.

Pretend that paper is a limited commodity. Pretend that plastic is literally destroying our home. Pretend that it's not normal to consume in excess and that very little is actually garbage.

Basically, we need to completely overhaul our approach to waste, from our own kitchens to the corporations that package what we purchase. But at the very least, we need to stop thinking of recycling as a hallmark of sustainability. We face many environmental questions in the 21st century, and it's clear that we aren't going to find the answers in the bottom of the recycling bin.

From Your Site Articles

Ridwell CEO shares ideas on sustainability - Upworthy ›

United Nations

Shaping Our Future Together

Heroes

Could you live in this delightfully tiny home? Eco-advocates sure hope so.

When you think about climate change, what comes to mind?

I immediately imagine smokestacks billowing black soot, congested highways with idling cars, and millions of unassuming, gassy cows hanging out on the prairie. I don't, however, think about the house I live in — but I should, if you ask a climate scientist.

The housing sector is responsible for over one-third of global greenhouse gas emissions, according to the United Nations.

And that's what makes this amazing tiny house all the more spectacular.

Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images.

This Ecological Living Module — aptly dubbed the "tiny house" — aims to spark fresh ideas rethinking home construction and functionality to fight climate change.

The house, set up in New York City's U.N. Plaza between July 9-18, was built through a collaborative effort between U.N. Environment, U.N. Habitat, and Yale University. And its features are pretty darn remarkable.

Could this tiny house represent the homes of the future?

Many environmentalists certainly hope so.

Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images.

It's a mere 72 square feet (!), give or take, and is truly a work of sustainable art.

Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images.

The house was constructed using only locally sourced and bio-based materials. It runs on solar energy, has on-site water collection for in-home use, and uses plants to keep the interior air pure and fresh.

Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images.

Photo by Hind Wildman/U.N. Environment.

The home even has a "micro-farming wall" on its exterior so that potential residents can eat (very) locally.

Photo by Hind Wildman/U.N. Environment.

The tiny home movement has been picking up speed in American culture as more people trade large houses on big properties for a simple, cheap, and sometimes mobile alternative.

But beyond relishing in any short-lived lifestyle trend, the U.N. module home is aimed at helping solve two dire global problems in the long term:

People are in desperate need of more housing, especially in the expanding urban regions of the developing world.
The worsening effects of climate change go hand in hand with a growing world population emitting more carbon into the air.

The tiny home is a two birds, one stone solution.

"We clearly need more housing," explained Erik Solheim, U.N. Environment Head, "but the key thing is that we also need smarter housing."

Homes like this one do the trick.

Photo by Hind Wildman/U.N. Environment.

While this particular tiny house in New York will be moved this month, U.N. Environment plans to build future iterations in different countries to continue pushing for solutions-based design.

"Adequate housing is at the heart of sustainable urbanization," according to Maimunah Mohd Sharif, executive director of U.N. Habitat. "If adopted widely, this practice can create jobs and prosperity with lower greenhouse gas emissions."

Sounds like a win-win for our world to me.

Throwing away food isn't just wasteful — it's hurting our planet in a big way.

True

The next time you go grocery shopping, throw about 40% of your food in the trash on your way out.

If that sounds a little ridiculous, you're right — it is. But it also puts the issue of food waste into perspective. In the U.S., that's how much of our food goes uneaten and most of it is sent straight to the landfill.

When you're tossing those wilted veggies into the trash at the end of the week, you may as well be throwing dollar bills in there as well. And that's just the tip of the iceberg lettuce (sorry, I had to). Not only does food waste affect your bottom line — it has an enormous environmental impact, too.

And now that summer is here, it’s easy to see where waste can happen. The warmer months are filled with plenty of fresh, seasonal fruits and vegetables — watermelon, arugula, peaches, zucchini — and there's no shortage of potlucks or lazy evenings on the patio to enjoy your spoils. Though, for many of us, it literally spoils.

[rebelmouse-image 19477514 dam="1" original_size="3705x2492" caption="Photo by Cecilia Par / Unsplash." expand=1]Photo by Cecilia Par / Unsplash.

But the good news is that a weekend barbecue is the perfect opportunity to get a little eco-friendlier and start cutting back on all that food waste.

Here are 23 reasons you should get started today.

1. You're probably wasting a lot more food than you think.

It might not seem like you're wasting all that much, but it adds up. Think about that time you bought too many tomatoes and didn't have time to eat them all before they started to wrinkle. Or that time you stacked your plate up a little too high at the neighborhood get-together then tossed your paper plate of food in the trash when you were full. Or what about that time you didn't like how bruised that apple looked. If you took all that food over the course of a year and threw it on a scale, it'd weigh in at about 300 pounds.

2. Interestingly enough, though, we didn't always waste so much.

Food waste has increased pretty drastically in the last few decades. Since 1974, food waste has increased 50% in the U.S.

Many experts think cheaper food and higher cosmetic standards are the culprits. We're able to get more food, so we buy a lot more than we probably need and value it a little less. We're also way pickier about what it looks like (#Foodie), and while aesthetics are great for Instagram, be sure you’re using “imperfect” produce, too.

[rebelmouse-image 19477515 dam="1" original_size="4592x3064" caption="Photo by Eaters Collective/Unsplash." expand=1]Photo by Eaters Collective/Unsplash.

3. With waste on the rise, it's not too surprising that the U.S. actually leads the world in food waste.

A whopping 40% of food in the U.S. is wasted from farm to fork. This is the highest of any country — well — ever.

4. And consumers are actually the largest source of that food waste.

In our homes, we waste more than grocery stores, restaurants, and any other part of the supply chain. In fact, we account for nearly half of all food that ends up wasted. Yikes. Not to mention, if you added up the food we waste at restaurants or ignored at the store because it looked “a little funny,” the amount of waste we’re responsible for only increases from there.

Photo by Scott Warman/Unsplash.

5. Of all the food we throw out, animal products are the main foods we waste.

Around a third of the animal products Americans are buying go straight to the landfill. Broken down, 11.5% of food wasted is meat, poultry, and fish; 19% is dairy products like cheese and milk; and 2% is eggs.

6. All this waste isn't great news for landfills.

In fact, according to the Natural Resources Defense Council, food accounts for 21% of what you'll find in a landfill. If you compare that with the other stuff that goes into landfills, food waste is the top contributor.

7. Food waste creates a pollution problem, too.

The amount of climate change pollution that wasted food generates per year is equivalent to 37 million cars. Yes, million. That‘s a hefty price for the planet to pay.

8. Rotting food also accounts for 25% of methane emissions, which is even more harmful than CO2.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but it warms the planet 86 times as much as CO2.

9. And when you pitch your food, you're also wasting freshwater.

In fact, 25% of all freshwater use in the U.S. produces food that goes uneaten.

The amount of water wasted can be hard to picture — but it’s staggering. Wasted food uses more fresh water than Texas, California, and Ohio combined.

[rebelmouse-image 19477516 dam="1" original_size="4000x2667" caption="Photo by Dylan de Jonge/Unsplash." expand=1]Photo by Dylan de Jonge/Unsplash.

10. All that meat we're throwing away is one of the biggest culprits of all that wasted water.

Meat requires the most water usage of any food to produce. For a single pound of beef to make its way to your table, it's the equivalent of running your shower for over six hours (or, put another way, 12,000 gallons of water).

Maybe at that next barbecue, you might consider black bean burgers or grilled veggies instead — both of which require significantly less water to produce — or at least be mindful of how many burgers you throw on the grill.

11. Don't forget the fertilizer that helps your food grow.

18% of fertilizer winds up down the drain when food is wasted, which adds up to be about 3.9 billion pounds of nutrients.

12. Food scraps could be a better fertilizer anyway.

Composting food scraps is a safer alternative that fertilizes our soil while still being safe for human and planetary health, which is a missed opportunity to say the least.

13. There's an economic price to pay for all that food we're not eating as well.

That cost is about $218 billion. Put another way, a four-person family loses something like $1,800 a year on wasted food.

[rebelmouse-image 19477517 dam="1" original_size="2560x1700" caption="Photo by Sven Scheuermeier/Unsplash." expand=1]Photo by Sven Scheuermeier/Unsplash.

14. In fact, cutting back on food waste could save the average person about $375 a year.

You might actually be able to pay off some of that student loan, make a donation to a cause you care about, or you could just buy yourself something nice.

15. The good news is that public opinions around food waste are shifting.

A 2016 public opinion poll by Ad Council revealed that 74% of respondents felt the issue of food waste was important to them.

[rebelmouse-image 19477518 dam="1" original_size="4240x2832" caption="Photo by Max Delsid/Unsplash." expand=1]Photo by Max Delsid/Unsplash.

16. It's about time — because the impact of food waste is only increasing.

According to the Natural Resources Defense Council, the global population in 2050 is expected to demand 1.5 to 2 times more food than we needed in 2005. If waste levels remain the same, this will only intensify the environmental impact.

17. But if we could reduce the amount of food we're wasting, that impact won't be so drastic.

To meet the growing demands of our rising population, wasting less food could help reduce the need to grow more. By making better use of what we already have, we can lessen the effects of overpopulation.

18. And as it turns out, reducing waste isn't complicated. In fact, what you're throwing away doesn't even belong in the trash.

If you take a closer look at what you're throwing away, you'll start to notice that much of what constitutes going "bad" is cosmetic or easily fixed. While you might think wilted or softened veggies and bruised fruits aren’t any good, it doesn't actually mean they've gone bad. Learning the difference between “sell by” and “use by” dates can also be helpful in reducing that waste. And when in doubt, composting is always a better option.

[rebelmouse-image 19477519 dam="1" original_size="3000x1987" caption="Photo by Kelly Sikkema/Unsplash." expand=1]Photo by Kelly Sikkema/Unsplash.

19. It also helps to know how to properly store your food.

Many reasons we throw away food could be eliminated entirely by storing food properly. Avocados and pears, for example, will last a lot longer if you put them in the refrigerator after they're ripe, and — fun fact — carrots keep a lot longer if they're submerged in water (who knew?). And if Alexa is a part of your household, there’s a skill that can answer your food storage questions.

20. A little creativity with cooking goes a long way.

Wilted veggies? Throw them in a stir-fry. Mushy leftover fruit salad? Sounds like an awesome smoothie. If you aren't sure where to start, there are online recipe resources that make this a snap, and apps like Handpick can help you come up with the perfect recipe with whatever ingredients you have laying around.

21. Your freezer is a mighty weapon against food waste, too.

Making smarter use of our freezers can be another way to reduce food waste, yet most people underutilize them. Freezing leftovers in meal-size portions can be the perfect lunch for a rainy day.

[rebelmouse-image 19477520 dam="1" original_size="5760x3840" caption="Photo by Jason Leung/Unsplash." expand=1]Photo by Jason Leung/Unsplash.

22. When cooking bigger meals, plan ahead and do the math.

If you aren't sure exactly how much food to make, no problem! When throwing that summer potluck or pool party, tools like The Guest-imator can help you calculate exactly how much food to prepare to ensure none of it ends up wasted.

23. And remember, nobody's perfect.

Reducing food waste isn't about absolute perfection. That moldy piece of bread you threw away yesterday doesn't mean you've failed the planet — because, ew, no one should eat that, seriously (though while you’re at it, consider composting it instead!).

Taking it a step at a time is more than enough — because it's those small steps, when we all take them together, that make the greatest difference.

Learn how you can Save The Food