With stronger storms, higher seas, and hotter days, climate change is disrupting the assumptions on which most of our modern systems were established. The insurance industry is feeling the acute impacts of increasingly extreme weather and disaster events, and regulatory policy has failed to keep up—putting communities and companies at risk of huge financial losses. 

That’s the message Woodwell Climate Research Associate Dominick Dusseau carried to policymakers during a congressional briefing in Washington DC on May 6. Woodwell Climate has conducted an extensive analysis of climate-caused vulnerabilities within the insurance industry. In a recent policy brief, Dusseau and Policy Analyst Jamie Cummings outlined major risks, as well as proposed regulatory solutions.

One of the chief concerns is the use of “catastrophe models.” Insurance companies calculate potential financial losses from natural disasters based on these models, which estimate the likelihood of something like a category 5 hurricane occurring in a particular year based on historical data. What these catastrophe models generally do not take into account are increases in the frequency and intensity of such events due to climate change. Additionally, population expansion in risk-prone areas continues to increase the potential for damage.

“Climate change is making extreme weather events less predictable and that uncertainty makes it harder for models to get it right,” says Dusseau.

This means the cost of existing insurance policies in high-risk areas like coastal or wildfire-prone communities may not reflect the actual risk to life and property. Alternatively, those insurers who do account for climate change might raise premiums out of the range of affordability or be unable to price high-risk areas appropriately due to regulation and decide an area is altogether uninsurable—a trend being felt acutely in California in recent years.

Catastrophe models are also proprietary, meaning the price of similar insurance policies can vary widely depending on which one a company uses, and lack of transparency leaves the public in the dark on what’s accounting for those differences.

“Depending on which model insurers use, the premiums could be significantly different,” says Dusseau. “This is one of the reasons that greater review and regulation of these models is necessary, so that the risks associated with those premiums are calculated accordingly.”

Solutions, Dusseau and Cummings propose, lie in coherent federal regulation. The brief proposes a national public catastrophe model and rules around fair and appropriate pricing, as well as more accessible public information about insurance. The report also proposes we explore alternative methods of insurance, like parametric policies that cover lost income when a certain metric, like temperature, breaches a threshold, like heat that makes working conditions unsafe.

To get this information into the hands of policymakers, Dusseau participated in a panel briefing for congressional staff hosted by the Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI). The briefing identified areas where Congress should play a role in bolstering the long-term resilience and insurability of communities. Dusseau highlighted areas of Woodwell’s report, speaking on the shortcomings of catastrophe models, as well as areas for improvement within the National Flood Insurance Program. 

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island provided opening remarks at the briefing. Whitehouse is the Ranking Member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and former chair of the Senate Budget Committee. Through both his current and former leadership positions, he has been a steadfast champion of climate mitigation and adaptation, underscoring the economic ramifications of climate change.

“The insurance industry makes trillion dollar bets anticipating what’s going to happen in the real world, and it also has a fiduciary duty…to get it right,” said Whitehouse.

The 100-year flood event currently impacts more than 840,000 structures and causes greater than $1.47 billion (2025 USD) in building damages across Ethiopia, according to a country-wide climate change risk assessment from the Woodwell Climate Research Center. The report, titled “Climate Risk Assessment: Ethiopia,” was released May 14 and offers granular projections on risk factors that will impact Ethiopia’s communities over the coming decades. 

“Ethiopia faces big climate risks like droughts, extreme rainfall, unreliable stream flows, and floods, but they’re not impossible to overcome. By using robust data, focusing on communities, and taking a joined-up approach (like Woodwell Climate Research Center suggests), Ethiopia can become more resilient and create a sustainable future for everyone. The time for action is now,” said Professor Engdawork Assefa with the Center for Environment and Development at Addis Ababa University. 

“The climate risk assessment enhances Ethiopia’s capacity to take targeted action, boosting its national climate goals under NDC 3 and supporting its case for equity in Loss and Damage frameworks. By offering a scientific foundation, it enables Ethiopia to strategically direct investments, policies, and partnerships toward a resilient future,” said Abas Mohammed with the Ethiopian Ministry of Planning and Development.  

The assessment, completed in collaboration with the Addis Ababa University and Ministry of Planning and Development, reveals that climate change will reshape weather patterns across Ethiopia, posing challenges to water availability for agriculture and flooding in the built environment. Key findings include:

“Climate shocks threaten food security, yet targeted investments in closing the yield gap—through improved seeds, irrigation, livestock practices, market access, and insurance—can help mitigate crisis impacts.,” said Dr. Abay Yimere, CEO of African Climate Center for Adaptation and Mitigation and Woodwell collaborator.

The report underscores that while Ethiopia has established a strong policy landscape for climate action through several strategic initiatives, including the National Adaptation Plan (NAP) and the Climate Resilient Green Economy Strategy (CRGE), localized data insights are crucial for evidence-informed approaches to resilience. 

“Ethiopia has done excellent work on climate research and resilience, and it is an honor to be able to support those efforts with our science,” said Woodwell President Dr. Max Holmes. “We hope that this risk assessment will help our Ethiopian government partners prepare for additional climate change impacts and invest in adaptation.” 

Upcoming Workshop to Share Climate Analysis Skills

In conjunction with the report launch, Woodwell will host a capacity-sharing workshop after the report delivery in Addis Ababa. The workshop will provide participants with technical skills in climate data analysis fundamentals, including QGIS exercises and Google Earth Engine techniques.  

“Knowledge sharing and growing capacity is a crucial part of building climate resilience,” said Dom Dusseau, Lead Author on the report who will be facilitating portions of the workshop. “I am very excited for the bi-directional skill transfer that will be taking place.” 

The full-day workshop will include hands-on exercises, discussions on climate analysis methodologies, and resources for continued learning.

My first attempt at using Woodwell’s new Total Organic Carbon (TOC) analyzer began with a week of performing potassium chloride (KCl) nutrient extractions on 120 soil samples , and abruptly ended when the analyzer immediately failed to accurately measure total nitrogen correctly. While this disruption was frustrating, experiencing setbacks is a common part of lab work. 

Woodwell Climate Research Center has four labs used by researchers to prepare and analyze soil, plant, gas, and water samples. In the preparation labs, scientists spend hours filtering, treating, extracting, and grinding samples, usually hundreds at a time. My job involves doing biogeochemical analyses on soils and water to understand how nutrients and greenhouse gasses are affected by different land management practices. The projects that I have worked on include studying the role of cover crops on soil health, exploring the impacts of tropical agriculture on reservoir dynamics, and the impacts burning of arctic tundra on nutrient availability. As a result, I have become extremely familiar with the breadth of complex assays that Woodwell Climate’s labs offer. 

Performing these tasks can feel tedious, and facing boxes upon boxes of samples can be daunting. But when I put on some R&B and dig in deep, I’m able to transform the work into more of a meditation. Suddenly the rhythm of the music aligns with my pipetting, or how I change out samples while weighing, or my pace when cleaning and preparing materials for the next batch of samples. Recently, I spent an entire week grinding 500 soils for Woodwell Climate Carbon Program Director, Dr. Jon Sanderman’s Rangeland project. In the beginning, it was a little awkward finding the best approach to the grinding/cleaning dichotomy, which involves filling capsules with dirt, loading them onto a shaking instrument for grinding, storing the ground samples, then spending a decent amount of time cleaning up for the next set. With time, though, I caught a groove and the work became almost muscle memory. 

Once the preparation steps are complete, the samples are ready for analysis on our sophisticated instruments, which measure greenhouse gasses, nutrients, carbon and nitrogen levels, and other soil and water qualities. Analysis might seem like the more complex aspect of our work, but between automation and well-developed methods, data collection can be as simple as loading samples into the apparatus and pressing start. 

However, sometimes the instruments misbehave, and that’s where my biggest challenges begin. Troubleshooting is a very open ended process, so knowing where to start requires experience and in-depth understanding of the instrument. The answer to a problem can come from the manual, other lab users, or tech support, and often encountering an unfamiliar error can be the best way to learn the intricacies of equipment, and ultimately new skills. Since joining this lab, I have learned a good deal about electronics by having to check the performance of, and occasionally replace, components such as fusion boards, distribution boxes, and fuses. Similarly, software engineering has become less elusive to me. Familiarity with these and similar aspects of our instruments allows lab members the ability to restore harmony when they begin to misbehave. 

Despite the challenges, lab work is really fulfilling. Watching the seemingly endless queue of samples dwindle down to nothing is gratifying, and the data produced can provide long-anticipated answers to some of our biggest research questions. Trial and error is a tried and true way to learn, so needless to say, a lot of learning occurs in the lab. Lab results are rewarding by nature, because they drive the important work done at Woodwell Climate, but after an uphill battle, they become much more gratifying. Struggling with an instrument only increases my appreciation for smooth sailing and working through so many samples reminds me of the thorough research that all our scientists are doing every day. My work may seem aggravating at points, but it is very much worthwhile for the greater mission of mitigating climate change.

Lab Operations and Field Safety Manager, Steve Gaurin oversees the operations of Woodwell Climate’s four lab spaces, running them efficiently and effectively so researchers can generate the data they need for their studies. His day to day job involves regular maintenance on the complex machinery, troubleshooting glitches, maintaining safety procedures, and ensuring the Center’s scientists have the required materials to analyze samples and collect data. Here, Gaurin discusses what it actually takes to keep the lab running in top form.

SR: So, Steve, tell me about the Woodwell Lab.

SG: The lab is an essential piece of any research that takes place at the Center. It’s incredibly important to ensure our data is accurate and generated by reliable instruments; that’s a big part of my job.

We have four lab spaces at the Center— the main lab on the 3rd floor, our basement lab which is mostly used for soil sample prep, the gas chromatograph room, and somewhat disused at present, the shed lab.

SR: What do you wish more people knew about lab operations?

SG: The amount of effort and time and energy it takes to keep all these instruments running. They are incredible pieces of technology, but they’re also quite complicated, and there’s a number of different ways that they can go wrong. And they do. So when I say in a staff meeting, “all the instruments are working well” that’s a real statement, because it’s not always the case.

SR: And when problems with the instruments do pop up?

SG: It takes a lot of problem solving, almost like detective work to get to the bottom of it.

SR: Do you enjoy detective work?

SG: I enjoy it when we figure it out. Then it’s like one of the best feelings of my day. It feels like a triumph. The research assistants are happy, the PIs are happy. I’m happy. Everything’s good. 

SR: But I take it we don’t always figure it out?

SG: Yeah, as I mentioned, these instruments are incredibly complex, and there are a number of ways that they can fail. For example, one of the soil analyzers, it has so many different O rings at all its connection points and if any one of those O rings is a little bit askew, it’s going to fail a leak test. Or the problem could be the flange seal at the top of the combustion tube. Or any number of things. Even though it seems like these things are simple input-output devices, the technology, the electronics, the chemistry, the physics, everything that went into those is nothing short of remarkable.

SR: Sounds like it’s a tall order to keep all these complicated instruments running.

SG: It’s not just me. Any time that I’m trying to solve a problem with anything in the lab, I’m working with the research assistants. And in many cases, it’s those discussions and those interactions with them that really get to the heart of the problem—and to the solution. In our last case with the nutrient analyzer, it was a lot of sleuthing from Andie Norton that really identified the problem. It’s essential to have the input and ideas of the people who really run the instruments most often. 

SR: The lab, I imagine, also requires a lot of material resources to keep running.

SG: Yes. Most of the instruments run in the range of, say, 50 to 80 thousand dollars new. As we purchase new instrumentation, we also purchase service contracts for preventative maintenance visits and access to a technician, which is also incredibly valuable for troubleshooting. The other thing these instruments also need is consumables. You constantly need to be ordering those as supplies get depleted—chemicals, gas cylinders and the like. It’s not cheap but it’s crucial.

SR: What are your goals for the future of the lab?

SG:  I think that the main goals for the lab are to continue to maintain and keep striving for that level of reliability, excellence, and cutting edge research that we’ve been conducting since before I got here.

The Frontiers Planet Prize, the world’s largest science competition to enhance planetary health by fast-tracking innovative research, today announced National Champions from 19 different countries who now advance to the International competition, which will award three winners $1M each to scale up their research.

Read more on the Marine Biological Laboratory website.

I’m a field research scientist. What does this mean? I enjoy being outside, in forests and wetlands, studying the environment up close and personal. One of my favorite places to work and explore over the course of my career has been Howland Research Forest in central Maine. 

Dominated by red spruce, eastern hemlock, and red maple, this mature northern forest feels old. There is a 400 year old yellow birch that was already a mature tree during the American revolution. The ground is soft— spongy with a lot of “holes” where past trees have fallen and roots decomposed. My feet often plunge into these holes, which can sometimes be filled with water.

The Howland Forest Research station was established in 1986 by the University of Maine in partnership with a packaging and paper company, International Paper. My first trip to Howland Forest was in 1998 and at the time the research center was just a collection of trailers housing equipment. I had never seen so much mouse poop in a building. 

Howland was one of the first sites ever dedicated to measuring the net exchange of carbon between a forest and the atmosphere. Its support comes from the Ameriflux Network, a grass roots, science driven network of research stations spread across North and South America that monitors the flow of carbon and water across ecosystems. In these early years, Howland forest also served as a training site for testing out NASA’s remote sensing capabilities. At one time, Howland Research Forest was the most photographed site on earth from space. Soon the well used trailers were replaced with multiple buildings to accommodate the ever expanding research. The mice were evicted. 

Howland forest was selectively harvested over 100 years ago, evidenced by cut stumps, but the forest has remained intact, growing under natural conditions since then. Most trees range between 100-120 years old. In 2007, International Paper was scheduled to harvest these mature trees. Recognising the value of maintaining a continuous long-term record of observations, scientists from Woodwell Climate Research Center, The University of Maine (UMaine Orono), and the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) partnered with the Northeast Wilderness Trust (NEWT) to purchase the forest. The Howland Research forest, now owned by NEWT, was protected in a forever wild state. This science and conservation partnership saved an invaluable mature natural forest and research site. As scientists continued to collect data over the next decades, we would learn just how important this partnership was to our understanding of mature forests.

Long-term measurements of carbon exchange between the forest and the atmosphere are being taken from the top of a tower, as part of the Department of Energy (DOE) supported Ameriflux Network, and paired with measurements on the ground. It’s the measurements on the ground where I come in. Myself and collaborators at UMaine Orono, USFS and a host of other scientists and students over the decades have measured carbon exchange from soils, tracked changes in temperature and moisture, and taken tree inventories. 

Mature forests contain large stores of carbon in their tree stems, foliage, roots, and within the soils, accumulated over decades of growth and decomposition. Allowing mature forests to continue to grow, untouched, is beneficial to maintaining carbon stores along with the natural biodiversity and water cycling, often collectively called “ecosystem services”.  

Over the last 25 years, Howland Research Forest has seen the warmest, driest, and wettest years. Observations show an increasing trend in the net uptake of atmospheric carbon (as carbon dioxide) into this mature forest, meaning that Howland forest is continuing to take up and store more carbon each passing year.

If the forest had been harvested in 2007, observations spanning that shorter time frame would have indicated a decreasing trend in net net carbon uptake, meaning that Howland Forest was taking up less carbon each passing year.  

Although Howland Forest continues to take up carbon, the overall number of live trees has been declining (17% decline since 2001 in live trees, particularly red spruce and northern white cedar) and  the number of dead trees has nearly doubled since 2001. Theoretically, fewer live trees would indicate less carbon uptake, but that is not happening. The mature, large diameter trees continue to grow; although there may be fewer in number, they continue to take up significant amounts of carbon.

Tree species can differ in how they respond to environmental changes as well as how carbon is allocated within the tree and across a mature forest ecosystem. Teasing out these complex, multi-scaled, multispecies responses requires long term studies. However,  given the challenges to acquiring and sustaining funding for long-term studies, it’s unusual to have this type of paired dataset like we have at the Howland Research forest. This would not have been possible without the forward-looking vision of scientists and NEWT, and the consistent support from the Ameriflux Network.   

Thanks to its preserved, forever-wild status, a new generation of scientists has the opportunity to continue this work, building on our understanding of the mechanisms driving climate resilience in this mature northern forest.  

The partnership between science and conservation is a victory for both. Results from the Howland Research Forest demonstrate the need to continue supporting long-term studies to fully understand how natural, mature forests respond to a changing climate. Conservation organizations and land trusts are preserving and restoring critical habitats across the U.S. and the globe. This is an opportunity to build alliances between science and conservation, to inform how natural ecosystems function and the impact of restoration efforts on the ecosystem services that we all benefit from, while preserving natural spaces for future generations. 

The last decade has shattered global temperature records, with all 10 of the planet’s warmest years occurring since 2015. Under the Paris Climate Agreement, countries across the world are working to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius by decreasing their heat-trapping greenhouse gas emissions. But researchers say more action is needed to protect us from the worst impacts of climate change. 

“We’re beyond the point where emission cuts alone are going to keep us within a safe climate range. We need to remove carbon from the atmosphere,” Dr. Jonathan Sanderman, carbon program director and senior scientist at Woodwell Climate Research Center, says. “And there’s really two ways of doing that: tech-based solutions, like direct air capture or other engineering-based solutions, or we could try to reverse the last several 100 years of degrading nature and pull more carbon back into the biosphere.”

While both solutions are likely needed, Sanderman and others at Woodwell Climate are focused on using the power of natural environments, such as forests, wetlands, agricultural land, and rangelands, to reduce carbon in the atmosphere. These methods, called nature-based climate solutions, help combat climate change in three major ways: decreasing greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation, capturing and storing carbon from the atmosphere, and building ecosystems more resilient to climate hazards such as flooding and wildfires, according to the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). 

Natural climate solutions could contribute more than 30% of the cost-effective climate solutions needed globally in the next few decades. They could also save countries hardest hit by climate change $393 billion in 2050 and reduce climate hazards by 26%. 

Storing carbon on land

Sanderman researches one of Earth’s largest carbon pools: the soil. Plants release carbon they’ve absorbed from the atmosphere back into the ground when they die, which stores a total of about 2,500 gigatons of carbon globally. 

“Soils hold four times as much as trees do — about three times as much as the atmosphere,” Sanderman says.

Good land management can stabilize the amount of carbon in soil, but soils across the world have degraded substantially due to cultivation and overgrazing around the turn of the century. 

Storing carbon in the ground not only reduces the level of this greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, but carbon is the backbone of soil organic matter, which is a key regulator of soil health and crop yield consistency. It helps reduce erosion, keep soil structure in place and retain water. Carbon is often used as an indication of soil quality, with healthy soils usually containing about 2% organic carbon. Yet, precisely determining how much carbon is stored in soils worldwide — and which land management techniques lead to the most efficient carbon storage — is tricky. 

Rangelands as a nature-based climate solution

Sanderman is working with Dr. Jennifer Watts, the Arctic program director and an associate scientist at Woodwell Climate, to understand how much carbon dioxide U.S. rangelands are helping capture. These lands have big potential for sinking carbon: Rangelands make up about 31% of land area across the U.S. and about 54% across the world. Using both field data and satellite data, Sanderman and Watts are creating models of overall rangeland health in the U.S. Using this information, they can then quantify how much carbon is gained or lost over time under different scenarios.

“We are hoping, with our integrated system, to be able to provide the ability to scan all landscapes to determine their carbon status, and then go back in time and look at the trajectories of change,” Watts explains. “And provide that information directly to the land managers so they can make really informed decisions on where they should invest conservation work. At the same time, it’s great for us, because as an output, we get to quantify how much carbon is being gained versus lost in certain places and what the climate benefits are.”

Capturing Methane

While carbon dioxide is one of the most abundant and long-lasting greenhouse gases, methane is far more efficient at trapping heat in the atmosphere. Per molecule, it’s about 80 times more harmful in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide, though it lasts an average of only a decade in the air, whereas carbon dioxide can persist for centuries. Nevertheless, reducing methane emissions by 45% by 2030 could help us reach our goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C, per the United Nations. 

Cutting anthropogenic methane emissions should be prioritized, but using nature-based solutions to increase uptake can also help bring down methane concentrations in the atmosphere. Although forests and soils play a smaller role in methane cycling, “When you start thinking about how much they can do over large areas, the numbers really get big,” Watts says. “And then it makes a huge difference.”

In northern forests across the U.S., Woodwell Climate researchers have set up methane monitoring systems, including specialized towers that measure the exchange of greenhouse gases, energy, and water between the ecosystem and the atmosphere. The team also analyzes soil samples from the forest to see exactly where methane-consuming and methane-producing microbes are thriving. 

The team has discovered a unique feature of the Howland Research Forest in Maine: It is an overall methane sink — though exactly why remains unknown. But by understanding more about how and under which conditions these methane-consuming microbes live, forest managers can change their strategies to harness the creatures’ natural power to reduce the effects of climate change. 

To combat the climate crisis, we must do “a lot of things simultaneously,” Watts says, including using good land management practices to capture and store greenhouse gases.

“Working with nature has a lot of advantages, because you’re optimizing the health of ecosystems, at the same time providing ecosystem services, not just for climate but also for local communities,” Watts says. “If we identify how to do this effectively, we’re really unleashing the power of something that’s already there, and then trying to work with it instead of against it.”

A Permafrost Pathways study informed one of the biggest headlines in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) 2024 Arctic Report Card, sending a clear but alarming message to the world: more than one-third of Arctic-boreal region has shifted to a source of carbon. The sobering results, mentioned in over 700 news stories from 42 countries, shed light on the urgency of Arctic research.

Read more on Permafrost Pathways.