Global oil giant Shell continued operating a compromised pipeline in Nigeria’s Niger Delta despite knowing it posed a pollution risk in the surrounding coastal wetland environment, newly disclosed internal company communications reveal. The emails and memos, reviewed by Mongabay, show senior leadership knew of the poor conditions of the 97-kilometer (60-mile) Nembe Creek Trunk Line as early as 2008. Despite concerns it was operating outside technical integrity standards and proposals to shut it down, a top executive decided to keep pumping oil through the line. Carrying 150,000 barrels of oil per day to the export terminal at Bonny Island Rivers state, the Nembe Creek Trunk Line is a critical oil artery in Nigeria. Throughout the years, theft from the pipeline using illegal connections caused spills into the vast mangrove ecosystem of true (Rhizophora sp.) and flowering black (Avicennia sp.) tree species. An internal 2013 Shell document coded such tampered lines as “red,” requiring either their immediate shutdown or immediate action to remove all illegal connections. Locals from the nearby riverine Bille community said the oil spills killed about 2,000 hectares (4,900 acres) of mangrove swamps around the village while impacting an area of 13,200 hectares (32,600 acres). The contaminated waterways and degraded ecosystem, they told Mongabay, killed fish and other aquatic life. Satellite imagery surrounding the village shows massive degradation of the mangroves. “The aquatic life is gone. Our people can no longer go to the river and catch reasonable fish — they can’t even find the fish in the…This article was originally published on Mongabay

At a time when climate politics in the United States and globally remain deeply polarized, Will Hackman, a climate advocate and political operative, argues that the climate movement needs a new language — one rooted less in doom, guilt and abstract planetary crisis, and more in people’s everyday lives, health, safety, costs and communities. In his new book, Radically Reframing Climate Change: A Guide to Saving Ourselves, he makes the case that climate advocates have too often spoken to those who already agree with them, while failing to reach people who may be cautious, doubtful or simply disconnected from the issue. The challenge, he says, is not only scientific or technological. It is political, cultural and communicative. In the United States, climate change remains politically polarized, with surveys showing that Republicans are less likely than Democrats to view it as an urgent threat, making climate messaging particularly challenging across ideological divides. Mongabay spoke with Hackman over video call about climate messaging, grassroots activism, fossil fuels, political polarization, and why he believes the climate movement must rebuild, creating a broader and more hopeful constituency. Mongabay: You write in your book that much of climate messaging has been framed around fear, guilt and apocalypse. Is that still the right way to talk about climate change? Will Hackman: I think the nature-based messages — polar bears, melting glaciers, “there is no planet B,” “save the planet,” “world on fire” — work for people who already care about climate change. But they do not…This article was originally published on Mongabay