Hot dam! Climate news that isn't terrible

There’s an unfortunate paradox for environmental podcasts; data shows a lot of people skip segments about the climate. But also… it’s the CLIMATE! We can’t NOT talk about it, right?

So how do we break through the malaise and make climate news feel less overwhelming? More surprising? Less depressing? For this episode, we rounded up a handful of stories that break the mold and make climate a more approachable topic for everyday discussion (or so we hope).

We look at a third-rail topic in environmental activism, hear about an unlikely, middle-of-the-night climate deal at COP27, and learn about one place where producing less renewable energy might just be the best thing for the environment.

Featuring Cara Buckley, Naveena Sadasivam, and Gillian Flaccus

Our free newsletter is just as fun to read as this podcast is to listen to. Sign-up here.

Hornbrook, California – 8 December 2022. US Interior Secretary Deb Haaland and other officials from California, Oregon, Native American tribes and the federal government stood atop a dam along the Klamath River to celebrate the decision to demolish the dam and restore the river that crosses the California-Oregon border.

SUPPORT

Outside/In is made possible with listener support. Click here to become a sustaining member of Outside/In. 

Follow Outside/In on Instagram or Twitter, or join our private discussion group on Facebook

LINKS

Earth Now Has 8 Billion Humans. This Man Wishes There Were None. By Cara Buckley for The New York Times.
(For more on population, you can read Are 8 billion people too many — or too few? and Should you not have kids because of climate change? It’s complicated. And you should also listen to our two-parter on this very subject: So Over Population [Part 1] and So Over Population [Part 2])

Inside the COP27 fight to get wealthy nations to pay climate reparations, by Naveena Sadasivam for Grist

‘Momentous:’ US advances largest dam demolition in history, by Gillian Flaccus for the Associated Press

News Roundup:

CREDITS

Host: Nate Hegyi

Reported, produced, and mixed by Felix Poon

Edited by Taylor Quimby, with help from Nate Hegyi, Justine Paradis, and Jessica Hunt. 

Rebecca Lavoie is our Executive Producer

Music for this episode by Blue Dot Sessions, Jharee, and Blackout Memories. 

Our theme music is by Breakmaster Cylinder.

Outside/In is a production of New Hampshire Public Radio

If you’ve got a question for the Outside/Inbox hotline, give us a call! We’re always looking for rabbit holes to dive down into. Leave us a voicemail at: 1-844-GO-OTTER (844-466-8837). Don’t forget to leave a number so we can call you back.

Audio Transcript

Note: Episodes of Outside/In are made as pieces of audio, and some context and nuance may be lost on the page. Transcripts are generated using a combination of speech recognition software and human transcribers, and may contain errors.


Nate Hegyi: I hate it when, like, things bump into microphones and they make that sound. Like…ugh, bugs me.

Felix Poon: Get that sound out of here.

Nate Hegyi: I'm grumpy. I'm grumpy because I'm sick.

Felix Poon: You sound not so bad, though. I think that's.

Nate Hegyi: Good. I'm working at it.

Felix Poon: You sound much better than you sounded yesterday. Yeah, So. Now I want to ask you a question.

Nate Hegyi: Shoot.

Felix Poon: How do you keep up with the news?

Nate Hegyi: Well, I used to use Twitter, but I don't use Twitter as much. All the people I followed are gone.

Felix Poon: Are they really? How much of them are gone? A lot of them.

Nate Hegyi: Oh, a lot of them, Yeah. But I also use I also use New York Times app. I listen to NPR all the time and then just talking with friends, that kind of stuff.

Felix Poon: You sound like a news junkie.

Nate Hegyi: I'm a huge news junkie. It's unhealthy. It was even worse when I was sick with COVID because I was just sitting there doom-scrolling everything.

Felix Poon: Yeah. Okay, but what about climate news? I mean, there's definitely an urgency to climate news, but at the same time, I know a lot of people would rather just look away because it just comes with so much dread and anxiety, right? Like, do you get that anxiety?

Nate Hegyi: I don't have dread or anxiety. When I look at climate change news, I don't feel that. But I know a lot of other people do. So I know this because there is actually internal data with the NPR one app, which is this app that you can just play NPR on demand. There's data that NPR has that shows which stories get skipped the most. And one of the most skipped genres of story is climate change news.

Felix Poon: Huh? Why do you think that is? I mean, like, maybe this is an obvious question, but why do you think that is?

Nate Hegyi: I think people skip climate news because it's scary. It's predictable. It's not really that surprising. I mean, like new study shows, Arctic is warming. Big fire in California, probably spurred by climate change. Like these are pretty predictable stories.

Felix Poon: Yeah. Okay. Here's the deal. I think we need to do a roundup of climate news that is not predictable. Like, let's talk about climate news. That's surprising.

Nate Hegyi: Well, I really appreciate it when there's like a real WTF element to any story.

Felix Poon: Wtf. All right. Can I tell you a few wtf climate news that's happening right now?

Nate Hegyi: I'm ready. Yeah, let me hear him.

Felix Poon: Okay, so. Scientists with the US Department of Energy just had a breakthrough in nuclear fusion. They basically shot hundreds of lasers at a tiny pellet of hydrogen fuel. And fusion is what happens in the sun. So experts say it could one day provide unlimited renewable energy.

Nate Hegyi: That's pretty cool. It's not WTF, but it's pretty cool. No, no, I don't like what the.

Felix Poon: You're just what that. No, no, f just try.

Nate Hegyi: Again.

Felix Poon: All right? Nuclear fusion doesn't do it for me. Okay, How about this interesting fact? So, you know that rail strike that happened recently? Yes. So for those who don't know, the one where workers were demanding paid sick time, but ultimately, like Joe Biden and Congress like, force them to accept this contract without paid sick leave.

Nate Hegyi: Yeah.

Felix Poon: Well, did you know that a surprising player in that labor dispute were fossil fuel companies? They were lobbying on the side of the rail companies.

Felix Poon: So apparently nearly 70% of the nation's coal is transported by rail. It just goes to show that fossil fuels are really like, entangled with pretty much everything. And yeah, you know, research from 2019 showed that the four largest rail companies in the U.S., they poured millions of dollars into denying climate science and opposing climate policy.

Nate Hegyi: That's a good one. That's a WTF one. Yeah, I like that one. That one's a winner. Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding.

Felix Poon: So let me give you one last piece of news. Okay. The headline for this one reads, Why Knowing Your Neighbors Could Save You in the Next Climate Disaster. Researchers at Tufts University found in a new research study that the more connected people were with neighbors, the more likely they were to know about different resources and services that are offered during extreme weather.

Nate Hegyi:I'm almost wondering whether WTF, maybe we're throwing a little bit more more weight on WTF than we should be for this. Maybe we're trying to find what's cool, what's surprising, what shakes us out of the malaise of of climate change news the everyday humdrum of climate change news.

Felix Poon: Yeah, I like that. Okay.

Nate Hegyi: Yeah. All right. See that shaking out? The humdrum? That's what we can call it.

[THEME MUX]

Nate Hegyi: This is Outside/In - I’m Nate hegyi, here with producer Felix Poon. And today, we’re looking at some of the most interesting, surprising, not humdrum, maybe wtf, climate news stories out there

Felix Poon: So I’ve lined up a handful of journalists for you to talk to tell us these stories. We’ll hear about the return of the so-called “over-population” debate, we’re gonna talk about climate “reparations”, and we’re talking about why we’re demolishing hydropower dams when we need all the renewable energy we can get.

Nate Hegyi: Sounds like interesting stuff!

Felix Poon: It is.

Nate Hegyi: Stick around.

[THEME MUX]

<<FIRST HALF>>

Nate Hegyi: Okay, so I want to kick things off with a little trivia for you Felix - do you know how many people are born every single day on earth?

Felix Poon: On earth? Like the whole wide world, planet earth?

Nate Hegyi: Yup.

Felix Poon: Every day?

Nate Hegyi: Yup.

Felix Poon: I’m stalling here if you can’t tell. Um…I feel like, 100 thousand.

Nate Hegyi: Close ish

Felix Poon: 200 thousand.

Nate Hegyi: 360 thousand people born every single day. That’s the size of Cleveland, Ohio. A new Cleveland every day. All those new people are adding up.

Felix Poon: So back in November, the world passed a big milestone – there are now 8 billion of us humans roaming around.

Nate Hegyi: [whistles] lots of people are writing think-pieces on the subject of “over-population”.

Felix Poon: One of the stories that came out was from New York Times climate reporter Cara Buckley - she profiled a guy who heads something called the “Voluntary Human Extinction Movement.”

Nate Hegyi: Wait, the voluntary human extinction movement?

Felix Poon: Oh yeah, “voluntary” is a very important part of that title.

Nate Hegyi: I mean, depending on how you hear it, it either sounds like a joke, or it sounds very very ominous.

Felix Poon: Yeah, definitely

Nate Hegyi: But yeah, it is a controversial topic, and before I was host… Outside/in did a big two-part episode on how fears and predictions about over-population have been A) wrong, ad B) enmeshed with a lot of racist rhetoric and stuff about eugenics.

Felix Poon: So … how do you talk about a milestone like 8 billion people on the planet then?

Felix Poon: We called up Cara Buckley to talk about her piece, and the thorny subject of over-population.

<<CARA BUCKLEY 2-WAY>>

Nate Hegyi: Cara, welcome to the show.

Cara Buckley: Thank you for having me. Delighted to be here.

Nate Hegyi: 8 billion human beings on the planet. Why does that milestone matter and what does it mean?

Cara Buckley: It matters because…look, our human population in the last 50 years has doubled. And it's come at huge, huge costs to the rest of the living world. You know, wildlife populations have plummeted 70%. In in the environmental movement, population used to be of great concern. I mean, even David Attenborough told the BBC, you know, that he could think of few problems that wouldn't be solved if there were less people. But it's really become such a hot potato to even talk about in the climate movement, whether even the world is quote unquote overpopulated because there has been such problematic associations with population policies before…those are just some of the reasons why this is a big deal.

Nate Hegyi: So you profiled a guy named Les Knight recently. What's the story of Les Knight?

Cara Buckley: Yes. He's the most chill cultural flamethrower I've ever met, although I don't know how many people fall into that category. He is somebody who in the 1970s, He became interested in deep ecology and he became deeply convinced that one of the best things people could do to help the Earth is to not have children. And so he started something that in in the 1980s, he christened the Voluntary Human Extinction movement. And he's been espousing these beliefs for 50 years. Yeah. And he believes that everyone should, be able to decide whether or not to have children, have complete access to birth control, have complete access to abortion, but with the underlying belief that there are too many people and that people are bad for the environment.

Nate Hegyi: Does he expect people to take him seriously about this?

Cara Buckley: I would say yes and no. I saw less as kind of a bit of a court jester. I mean, the name Voluntary Human Extinction movement is obviously very inflammatory. But once people react to the shock of that and not everybody, by the way, reacts in shock to that. You know, as younger people, people of reproductive age today are increasingly saying they're very concerned about the climate. It's making them question whether or not to have children. But once people who do react and shock to it sort of might who engage with the ideas, they might find that he actually does expect them to take this very seriously. So it's sort of an audacious way of maybe gaining attention. And then he sort of goes off in another strain. It's called anti-nataliism, which is another, you know, controversial philosophy. But it basically holds that human life is suffering. It's really it's really hard to be a human. So it's ethical not to create more humans. But his main thrust is the ecology and concerns about the environment.

Nate Hegyi: A bulk of the population. Growth is happening in countries with very low carbon emissions, you know, places with the highest emissions. The US, European Union, China have very low birth rates. doesn't it … it strikes me that the problem is consumption, not necessarily population. Right.

Cara Buckley: Well, Isn't it both? Doesn't every human need to consume?

And you know, the guy who's Dennis Hayes, who started Earth Day, he sort of described a green silence around the issue of population. He said to be American is to be wasteful. So more people are more people want more stuff.

And I think that one of the things that's very touchy around this is, you know, people in developing countries, bipoc populations have have borne the brunt often of efforts towards population control and forced sterilization. So it's it can be really, really thorny.

you know, project drawdown lists educating girls as one of one of the most beneficial, maybe helpful potent climate solutions. Because if girls are educated, if they're given access to sexual health, education and contraception, they chances are and usually, you know, they have a career, they'll have fewer children, and fewer children means less, less demands on the earth.

And so, you know, underneath the swirling controversy, if it even could be called that around whether population and overpopulation are issues, there's a consensus that giving people total control over their reproductive rights, having total access to birth control, different kinds of contraception, to abortion decisions is is a climate solution.

Nate Hegyi: Cara, this has been such a great conversation. Thanks for joining us.

Cara Buckley: Very happy to be here.

[MUX TRANSITION]

Felix Poon: So there were a lot of interesting pieces that came out at about the same time Cara’s piece did, there was one on Vox that argued what we really should be worrying about is “under-population”, especially in places with birth rates that are too low to keep the economy growing.

Nate Hegyi: And then there was a Washington Post article about the climate footprint of having kids and it questions whether it’s really as bad as we think it is.

Felix Poon: Yeah, it’s complicated to try and crunch the numbers on that.

Nate Hegyi: If you want to learn more about this topic - definitely listen back to our two-part episode… it explains why over-population is such a third-rail in environmental circles (and why that’s probably a good thing?)

Felix Poon: We’ll put links to all that stuff in the show notes and on the website.

Nate Hegyi: If you’ve got a climate story that you’ve been following and thinking about lately, let us know. Why does it interest you? Why is it important? Email us at outsidein@nhpr.org, or you can tag us on Twitter or Instagram, we’re @ outsideinradio.

Nate Hegyi: Anyway, we’ll be back, right after this break.

<<MIDROLL BREAK>>

Nate Hegyi: Hey you’re listening to Outside/In, I’m Nate Hegyi, here with producer Felix Poon.

Felix Poon: Nate… you know what reparations are right?

Nate Hegyi: Yes, it’s essentially giving compensation – could be like money or land – to folks who suffered abuse or injury. Like I know it’s a hot topic in Congress in recent years about whether to give reparations to the descendents of enslaved people here in the U.S.

Felix Poon: Right… but, have you ever heard of climate reparations?

Nate Hegyi: I’ve heard of it, but I really don’t know much about it.

Felix Poon: So it is a thing that gained huge traction recently. Back in November, countries from around the world got together to take stock of whether we’re meeting our climate goals –

Nate Hegyi: Right, COP27

Felix Poon: Yup.. the big conference that was held in Egypt. And historically, it’s been hard to get all of these countries to agree on anything around climate… But in the eleventh hour, they struck a deal on climate reparations.

Nate Hegyi: To help us understand what that actually means, we brought in Naveena Sadasivam. She’s a staff writer at Grist who covered COP27.

<<NAVEENA SADASIVAM 2-WAY>>

Nate Hegyi: Naveena, thank you for chatting with us.

Naveena Sadasivam: Thanks for having me, Nate.

Nate Hegyi: So help us understand what are climate reparations and why are some nations calling for them?

Naveena Sadasivam: Yeah, If you look at the carbon dioxide emissions between 1850 and 2015, 80% of those emissions are coming from the G7 countries, which include the US. And the US alone is responsible for something like a quarter of those emissions. But the worst effects of climate change are being felt by the developing world.

So when you think about the effects of climate change, think about the the hurricanes that are getting more intense, more frequent. Think about the drought that is lasting longer these days, the intense rainfalls. So the developing world needs resources to adapt to all of these different sort of changes that we're seeing and to address them. Right.

And so the idea is that under the United Nations, the developing world has been calling for a fund that primarily developed countries would pay into this fund and developing countries would be able to draw out from this fund.

Nate Hegyi: Mm hmm. And what changed that got developed countries to take these calls for loss and damage seriously.

Naveena Sadasivam: Yeah. it started in 1991 when the small island nation of Vanuatu, which is in the Pacific, that first called for loss and damage and had suggested an insurance scheme to help them deal with sea level rise.

But really, I would say it's taken off in the last decade or so. It became the third pillar of the Paris Agreement in 2015. And last year at COP 26 in Glasgow, there was a big push to get loss and damage recognized, to get a fund for loss and damage established.

Another thing that happened is the terrible floods in Pakistan over the summer, which left a third of the country underwater. That's just unfathomable. And I think it got a lot of media attention rightly, and there was a lot of calls for loss and damage that were tied to those to the flooding event that took place. And so that also gave it some momentum. And coincidentally, the head of the G 77 negotiating bloc this year is Pakistan. So they had all this moral urgency going into these talks.

And that that is basically sort of where our story starts and sort of leads into COP 27 this year.

Nate Hegyi: And if my memory serves me correctly, it was a little bit of a surprise that these developed nations agreed to climate reparations during COP 27. So like, how did that happen?

Naveena Sadasivam: Yeah, absolutely. If you had asked me just two months ago whether I thought this was probable or even possible, I would have said no, it doesn't seem probable and it seems like a bit of a long shot.

Naveena Sadasivam: so there was a lot of pushback the first week. And in the second week, you saw a lot of attempts to break up the unity that existed between developing countries. So on the one hand, you have G7 countries, which are the developed countries, and then on the other hand, most of the developing countries are represented by the G 77 and China, and they kind of act together as one sort of negotiating bloc. And so those are the two sort of competing forces, you could say.

One of the issues that was repeatedly brought up by developed countries is they were saying, we need to bring in countries, let's say, like China, why isn't China paying into it? Why aren't Gulf countries like Saudi Arabia or Qatar paying into it? Right. And so they were trying to expand that donor base, which would then essentially break up the unity that you had within the developing countries.

But I think one real turning point came about in the last two days of the conference where down to the wire, you know, there's not a whole lot of progress happening. The US had been a big obstructor, had been trying to block progress on loss and damage for years and the US and EU worked kind of hand in hand.

And in the middle of the night, the European Union's chief negotiator, Frans Timmermans, you know, takes the mic and says, you know, as a compromise, we will agree to a loss and damage fund as long as it expands the donor base. And so that was kind of a defining moment of COP 27 I think is that middle of the night discussion that was taking place and the EU chief stepping forward and the US became isolated and then the US essentially kind of came on board saying as a compromise, we’re willing to commit to a loss and damage fund.

Nate Hegyi: so what is next now that they've agreed to, you know, this loss, putting money into this loss and damage fund, like what happens next?

Naveena Sadasivam: The next step is this transition committee is going to meet over the next year. where they're going to iron out all of the thorny details that they didn't get to at COP 27. So this crucial question of who is going to pay into the fund?

Also, the question of which countries get to draw from it, how do you prioritize countries that are least developed and small island nations and so on? So a lot of those details are going to be ironed out in the next deal.

Nate Hegyi: And to you kind of looking at this, this how this all played out, what was the most what's the most surprising thing about about what's happened in this fight to you

Naveena Sadasivam: Yeah, I think the most surprising thing is that advocacy and the pressure campaign from the developed sorry, from the developing world worked.

[MUX IN]

So I think that's that has been the biggest surprise for me as I follow this over the months.

[MUX SWELL]

Nate Hegyi: Naveena, thanks so much for talking to us.

Naveena Sadasivam: Thanks for having me.

[MUX TRANSITION]

Felix Poon: So Nate, question: When you hear the words renewable energy, what sources do you think of first?

Nate Hegyi: Wind and Solar, hands down. The dynamic duo.

Felix Poon: Right, me too: but what’s often left out is the 2nd biggest source of renewable energy in the U.S.: hydropower.

Nate Hegyi: Dammit. You see what I did there? Do you see what I did there Felix?

Felix Poon: What did you do?

Nate Hegyi: Damn it.

Felix Poon: What?

Nate Hegyi: Damn it.

Felix Poon: Oh!

Nate Hegyi: That’s my pun for the episode. It’s not even that good.

Felix Poon: Oh, wow. Well, anyways…So here’s the news part: U.S. regulators have approved what will be one of the biggest dam demolition projects in the world - four huge dams on the Klamath River in California.

And so from a climate perspective, you might hear that and think, that can’t be good. Less hydropower?

Nate Hegyi: But actually dams have their own environmental problems: toxic algae blooms, cutting off salmon runs, stuff like that.

Here to tell us more about the historic Klamath River dam demolition is Gillian Flaccus. Gillian is a reporter and videojournalist for the Associated Press in Oregon.

And seh wrote about how people from the Yurok and Karuk tribes pushed for this agreement, and what it means.

<<GILLIAN FLACCUS 2-WAY>>

Nate Hegyi: Thanks for coming on the show.

Gillian Flaccus: Hi. Thanks for having me.

Nate Hegyi: So. Let's just big picture what happened? What what makes this a big deal?

Gillian Flaccus: This is a really big deal because these dams have been on this river in some cases for about a century. And they prevent the salmon that are native to the river and are part of the at the heart of the culture and subsistence of these tribes from navigating all the way up to their natal streams. And so bringing these dams down was really critical, I think, to the salmon and also to the tribe, these two tribes and others in the area to reconnect and reclaim their ancestral way of life and their ancestral territory.

Nate Hegyi: Right. And, you know, with with these these dams coming down. Obviously, dams have been a source of of renewable power for for the West. I mean, like are people going to be losing power or stuff like that or is this does this hit the energy grid whatsoever?

Gillian Flaccus: No, I mean the reality of this dam demolition plan is that Pacificorp, which operates these four dams, says that the power generated by these dams is less than 2% of its total portfolio,

They've diversified with wind and solar and other sources of clean energy. And so they don’t really need these dams anymore. And for them, it really is a business decision because … the hydroelectric license on these dams has been expired for a while…but if they were to apply for a full renewal to get those licenses back, they would have had to do hundreds of millions of dollars of retrofitting and work and repairs on these dams to make them meet current environmental standards. And so for them, paying their share of the dam demolition plan is going to wind up being a lot cheaper than doing the retrofits that they would need to make these dams acceptable in the modern era. And also, they don't really lose any any energy from their power portfolio or very, very minimal.

Nate Hegyi: So it's not a big loss for them.

Gillian Flaccus: It's not a big loss for them. And they get good public relations. They get they get to look good. So.

Nate Hegyi: Now, how do you actually remove these dams? Like how long is this going to take and what happens when they're gone?

Gillian Flaccus: as far as the dams themselves, they will draw down the water in these reservoirs gradually, very carefully, and they will actually I believe there is some discussion. I don't want to overstate this, but of temporarily re channeling the river into a underground tunnel that was constructed back when the dams were built in the first place, and then bringing the river back into its original channel after this is done. There's a lot of sediment and silt behind those dams that will, you know, some of it will go down the river when those dams come down. And so there's going to be a period of time where the river will actually be a little worse off and it'll be saltier and sludgy or and such like that. But eventually, within five years, we know from looking at other dam removals the river should be even healthier than it is now.

Nate Hegyi: Mm hmm. And … just how important are salmon to the U.S. and crew? I mean, what what do salmon mean to those two tribes?

Gillian Flaccus: both tribes believe that they were Their purpose on this earth is to watch out for the for the salmon, you know, to care for the salmon. And, you know. You'd have to ask a tribal member to to, you know, be more deeply specific about that. But they speak passionately about the salmon and it really is the entire community revolves around salmon and the salmon you know, fishing season and and and the stories and the traditions.

Nate Hegyi: And one thing that struck me is like we've seen some other attempts to assert tribal sovereignty fail in this country, like most notably probably Keystone XL, the Keystone XL pipeline protests in 2016. How did these two tribes accomplish this?

Gillian Flaccus: Well, it wasn't just the tribes. I mean, it was obviously a coalition of parties, but they were definitely a driver of this this fight. And this dates back about 20, 20 years or so when there was a salmon kill in the river. After a particularly bad summer. When there's not enough oxygen in the water in the river or when or in the water gets to warm, it can affect the health of the salmon.

And starting at that point, there started to be real activism around this issue. And the activism focused more around tribal sovereignty, environmental issues, but as well as tribal sovereignty. And it's been a very, very long road. There have been multiple twists and turns. And the deal that ultimately resulted in these dams coming down or soon to come down basically fell apart or almost fell apart, was on a razor, razor thin edge at several times during the process.

Nate Hegyi: And are you seeing similar efforts to remove dams like this across the country?

Gillian Flaccus: Yes, definitely. There's a move, a real push in the United States to remove dams, and the largest dam removal to date was on the Olympic Peninsula in Washington State. That was ten years ago. And so this one would surpass that. And that one was incredibly successful. And and that river, the Elwha River, has come back to life in ways that even scientists could not have predicted. But, yes, nationwide, there's a lot of small like very small dams, very old dams that are coming down for the same reasons they need to renew their hydroelectric licenses. It's not really worth it. And and it's better for the rivers.

[MUX]

Nate Hegyi: That's great. Well, Gillian, this has been wonderful. Um, thanks so much to, uh, thanks so much for talking with us.

Gillian Flaccus: Sure. No problem.

Nate Hegyi: Alright so that’s, yeah, so that’s our show.

Felix Poon: Yeah.

Nate Hegyi: I feel a little bit more informed now. And I think you found some good surprising ones. I like that. I like this segment.

Felix Poon: Yeah, but what do you, our listeners think? Were these surprising to you? Was there a wtf element to them? Did you want to skip any of these stories?

Nate Hegyi: Well, they’ve made it this far already, right? So that’s gotta be saying something.

Felix Poon: But…let us know, what kind of stories do you want us to cover? Hopeful stories? Surprising stories?

Nate Hegyi: Send us an email at outsidein@nhpr.org. Or hit us up on social media, we’re at outsideinradio.

[OI theme mux]

<<CREDITS>>

This episode of Outside/In was produced by Felix Poon. It was edited by Taylor Quimby, with additional editing help from me Nate Hegyi, Justine Paradis, and Jessica Hunt.

Rebecca Lavoie is our executive producer.

Music in this episode was from Blue Dot Sessions, Jharee, and Blackout Memories. Our theme music is by Breakmaster Cylinder.

Outside/In is a production of New Hampshire Public Radio.