[TheClimate.Vote] November 4, 2017 - Daily Global Warming News Digest

Richard Pauli richard at theclimate.vote
Sat Nov 4 11:57:01 EDT 2017


/November 4, 2017/

*(video) Federal Report: Climate Change Is Real, Humans Are The Cause 
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VSoDrpRRrU>*
Nov 3, 2017
The federal government study finds "no convincing alternative 
explanation" for the changing climate other than "human activities, 
especially emissions of greenhouse gases."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VSoDrpRRrU


*(video) Climate Prediction Center's Mike Halpert explains NOAA's 
2017-18 winter outlook 
<https://www.climate.gov/news-features/videos/climate-prediction-centers-mike-halpert-explains-noaas-2017-18-winter-outlook>*
...explains what parts of the United States are favored to experience 
unusually high or low winter temperature or precipitation in 2017-18
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/videos/climate-prediction-centers-mike-halpert-explains-noaas-2017-18-winter-outlook


*Trump administration releases report finding 'no convincing alternative 
explanation' for climate change 
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/11/03/trump-administration-releases-report-finds-no-convincing-alternative-explanation-for-climate-change>*
The Trump administration released a dire scientific report Friday 
calling human activity the dominant driver of global warming, a 
conclusion at odds with White House decisions to withdraw from a key 
international climate accord, champion fossil fuels and reverse 
Obama-era climate policies.
To the surprise of some scientists, the White House did not seek to 
prevent the release of the government's National Climate Assessment, 
which is mandated by law. The report affirms that climate change is 
driven almost entirely by human action, warns of a worst-case scenario 
where seas could rise as high as eight feet by the year 2100, and 
details climate-related damage across the United States that is already 
unfolding as a result of an average global temperature increase of 1.8 
degrees Fahrenheit since 1900.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/11/03/trump-administration-releases-report-finds-no-convincing-alternative-explanation-for-climate-change/
*White House Releases Report Contradicting Its Own Position on Climate 
Change 
<https://www.snopes.com/2017/11/03/white-house-releases-report-climate-change/>*
There is no "convincing alternative explanation" for recent warming 
besides human activity, a congressionally mandated study reports.
On 3 November 2017, the White House released a document known as the 
Climate Science Special Report 
<https://science2017.globalchange.gov/downloads/CSSR2017_FullReport.pdf> 
— a scientific study authored by scientists from academia and numerous 
federal agencies <http://www.globalchange.gov/agencies>, peer-reviewed 
by the National Academy of Sciences, and required by law to be released 
every four years.
That report's findings are at direct odds with the Trump 
administration's efforts to downplay or reject the scientific consensus 
on anthropogenic climate change, as they instead suggest that recent 
warming is unambiguously the result of human activity and that 
observational data does not support an alternative explanation:
This assessment concludes, based on extensive evidence, that it is 
extremely likely that human activities, especially emissions of 
greenhouse gases, are the dominant cause of the observed warming since 
the mid-20th century. For the warming over the last century, there is no 
convincing alternative explanation supported by the extent of the 
observational evidence.
In addition to warming, many other aspects of global climate are 
changing, primarily in response to human activities. Thousands of 
studies conducted by researchers around the world have documented 
changes in surface, atmospheric, and oceanic temperatures; melting 
glaciers; diminishing snow cover; shrinking sea ice; rising sea levels; 
ocean acidification; and increasing atmospheric water vapor...
https://www.snopes.com/2017/11/03/white-house-releases-report-climate-change/

*Climate Science Special Report* 
<https://science2017.globalchange.gov/downloads/CSSR2017_FullReport.pdf>
https://science2017.globalchange.gov/downloads/CSSR2017_FullReport.pdf


*US backs out of global oil anti-corruption effort 
<http://thehill.com/policy/international/358560-us-backs-out-of-global-oil-anti-corruption-effort>*
By John Bowden
The Trump administration said Thursday it would exit an international 
effort to fight corruption that targeted revenue from oil and natural 
gas extraction.
The U.S. will no longer participate in the Extractive Industries 
Transparency Initiative (EITI), a global initiative that requires member 
nations to disclose their revenues from oil, gas and mining assets, 
according to Reuters.
Under the agreement, the U.S. was required to reveal all the revenue it 
received from oil, gas and mining companies, and required those 
companies to publicly disclose the payments they make to the U.S. and 
other governments.
U.S. Office of Natural Resources Revenue Director Gregory J. Gould sent 
a letter to the EITI's board on Thursday announcing that the U.S. would 
exit the agreement "effective immediately."
"It is clear that domestic implementation of EITI does not fully account 
for the U.S. legal framework," Gould wrote in his letter...
http://thehill.com/policy/international/358560-us-backs-out-of-global-oil-anti-corruption-effort
-  See also THE EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRIES TRANSPARENCY INITIATIVE 
<https://eiti.org/> https://eiti.org/
EITI is struggling to satisfy all partners. While host governments and 
extractive firms are satisfied with the voluntary nature of EITI, NGOs 
and some donors would like to see the EITI process mandated. But if 
policymakers mandate EITI, it could compromise the mutuality inherent to 
partnerships. Multi-sectoral partnerships are successful where the 
partners perceive that compliance with the partnership outweighs the 
cost of non-compliance.
Moreover, *EITI has no teeth to ensure that governments with broader 
resistance to democratic practices feel the true penalties of 
non-compliance. The situation poses somewhat of a circular argument in 
that it implies that good governance will beget good governance. 
However, experience to date suggests that EITI presents important 
learning opportunities for governments and civil society alike, which 
could yield improved governance.*
Although EITI may empower civil society, extractive industry firms have 
more power and influence than civil society members. However, the global 
nature of EITI has to some extent strengthened civil society through 
appeal to global  transparency norms and the ''court'' of global public 
opinion.
Thus, although EITI is a limited partnership in many countries, a 
growing number of governments, NGOs, and donor organizations are now 
vested in EITI's success. However, for EITI to succeed as an 
anti-corruption counterweight, the partners must do more to ensure 
broader public engagement in decisions about resource rents. Only then 
will the public move beyond being a silent partner in the discussion 
encouraged by the EITI.


*New York State Wins Latest Round in Battle with Pipeline & Federal Agency*
In a move that is being widely celebrated by both activists and national 
environmental rights groups, this afternoon, the US Court of Appeals, 
Second Circuit in NY issued an emergency stay 
<https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_Ujbyr-GYMXaEo0c2VvTjByUzJ1Z2dIMmJxTXhTYXI4NzBn/view?usp=sharing> 
of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (FERC) "Notice to Proceed 
with Construction", issued on October 27, 2017 to the Millennium Valley 
Lateral Pipeline. The stay halts construction activities until a hearing 
can be held by a three judge panel.
The *US Court of Appeals, Second Circuit in NY issued an emergency stay: 
<https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_Ujbyr-GYMXaEo0c2VvTjByUzJ1Z2dIMmJxTXhTYXI4NzBn/view?usp=sharing>* 

Petitioner moves for an emergency stay of the "Notice to Proceed with 
Construction" issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on 
October 27, 2017, while the Court  considers the merits of its petition 
for a writ of prohibition on an expedited basis.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion for a stay of the Notice to Proceed 
with Construction is GRANTED pending consideration of the petition by 
the next available three-judge panel.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_Ujbyr-GYMXaEo0c2VvTjByUzJ1Z2dIMmJxTXhTYXI4NzBn/view?usp=sharing


*Trump's New NASA Chief Controls One of the Most Important Parts of 
Climate Science 
<http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2017/11/trump_s_nasa_pick_could_help_climate_change.html>*
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2017/11/trump_s_nasa_pick_could_help_climate_change.html


*From Miami to Shanghai: 3C of warming will leave world cities below sea 
level 
<https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/nov/03/miami-shanghai-3c-warming-cities-underwater>*
An elevated level of climate change would lock in irreversible sea-level 
rises affecting hundreds of millions of people, Guardian data analysis 
shows.
Data from the Climate Central group of scientists analysed by Guardian 
journalists shows that 3C of global warming would ultimately lock in 
irreversible sea-level rises of perhaps two metres. Cities from Shanghai 
to Alexandria, and Rio to Osaka are among the worst affected. Miami 
would be inundated - as would the entire bottom third of the US state of 
Florida.
https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/nov/03/miami-shanghai-3c-warming-cities-underwater


*(CBC Video) Climate change: what to expect and are there really two 
sides? | Ask Bob <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRQvxLuvtX0>*
The National
Many view climate change as the most pressing issue of our time. But 
how, specifically, is it going to affect us and our planet? Is there 
still time to make a difference? And what does it mean to believe "both 
sides" of climate change science? CBC's Bob McDonald weighs-in.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRQvxLuvtX0


*(video) Energy Secretary Rick Perry Says Fossil Fuels Can Prevent 
Sexual Assault 
<https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/rick-perry-says-fossil-fuels-can-prevent-sexual-assault-n816896>*
Fossil fuels can help prevent sexual assault, Energy Secretary Rick 
Perry said Thursday.
Perry described his belief at an energy policy event in Washington 
hosted by Axios and NBC News, while talking about how bringing power to 
African villages would save lives.
"But also from the standpoint of sexual assault, when the lights are on, 
when you have light that shines, the righteousness, if you will, on 
those types of acts," Perry said. "So from the standpoint of how you 
really affect people's lives, fossil fuels is going to play a role in 
that. I happen to think it's going to play a positive role."
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/rick-perry-says-fossil-fuels-can-prevent-sexual-assault-n816896
--
*Parsing fossil fuels, sexual assault and Rick Perry 
<https://www.axios.com/parsing-fossil-fuels-sexual-assault-and-rick-perry-2505627563.html>*
For the record: "The Secretary was making the important point that while 
many Americans take electricity for granted there are people in other 
countries who are impacted by their lack of electricity," a spokeswoman 
for Perry said by email.
Go deeper:
Andy Revkin, longtime climate change reporter, defended Perry's 
commentsin a series of tweets. 
<https://twitter.com/Revkin/status/926135042283274241>
Perry's comment in full:
"I just got back from Africa, I'm going to finish up with this, because 
I think I heard a lady say there are people dying. Let me tell you where 
people are dying, is in Africa, because of the lack of energy they have 
there. And it's going to take fossil fuels to push power out into those 
villages in Africa, where a young girl told me to my face, 'one of the 
reasons that electricity is so important to me is not only because I'm 
not going to have to try to read by the light of a fire and have those 
fumes literally killing people.' But also from the standpoint of sexual 
assault. When the lights are on, when you have light that shines, the 
righteousness, if you will, on those types of acts. So from the 
standpoint of how you really affect people's lives, fossil fuels is 
going to play a role in that. I happen to think it's going to play a 
positive role."
https://www.axios.com/parsing-fossil-fuels-sexual-assault-and-rick-perry-2505627563.html


*Deniers' New Dodge is "All Energy Matters" and "Very Fine Scientists on 
Both Sides." 
<https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/11/2/1711914/-Deniers-New-Dodge-is-All-Energy-Matters-and-Very-Fine-Scientists-on-Both-Sides>*
All year we've been watching as Trump nominees squirm to answer direct 
congressional questioning about climate change. For the most part, 
they've avoided embracing Trump's idea that it's all a Chinese hoax. 
Gone, too, is the old axiom of "I'm not a scientist, but…" Instead, they 
give more seemingly nuanced but similarly silly answers.
The most recent example was at yesterday's hearing for Oklahoma Rep. Jim 
Bridenstine, Trump's nominee to lead NASA. At a lively hearing 
<https://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=24688afe21&e=95b355344d> 
(where Twitter reports Brindestine was grilled to the point of turning 
red 
<https://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=8aab148e4d&e=95b355344d>), 
he acknowledged that climate change is already causing destruction, that 
carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, and that greenhouse gases cause 
climate change. But like all the other deniers 
<https://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=f611256bb6&e=95b355344d>, 
he refused to acknowledge 
<https://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=4e882362b7&e=95b355344d> 
the degree to which humans are responsible for warming and suggested 
natural cycles could be playing a role in progressively warmer temperatures.
The correct answer, per the leaked National Climate Assessment 
<https://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=f721b7e664&e=95b355344d>, 
is that human activity is responsible for 92-123% of the warming trend 
experienced between 1950 to 2010. In the absence of carbon pollution, 
natural factors would have us cooling slightly. But we're emitting so 
many greenhouse gasses that we've overcome that natural trend, and thus 
the odd 123% attribution. (NASA's Gavin Schmidt has been trying to 
explain 
<https://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=d19baf28dd&e=95b355344d> 
this concept to Judith Curry for years.)
But to acknowledge this truth would be to accept that fossil fuels are a 
major problem and that the solution is to curb their use by embracing 
renewable energy. Because that answer would be unacceptable to Trump's 
fossil fuel friends, we hear asinine statements like the one from our 
new ambassador to Canada, Kelly Craft. As a Republican fundraiser 
married to a coal-owning billionaire, she's as close to wed to fossil 
fuel friendly talking points as one can get. Which explains why she made 
the bizarre statement that when it comes to climate change, she believes 
"both sides of the science 
<https://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=01720d8b35&e=95b355344d>."
Unfortunately, Craft will be getting some messaging support from outside 
the administration, specifically from the newly formed Consumers Energy 
Alliance 
<https://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=7f7bb6c47b&e=95b355344d>. 
This industry group is supposedly speaking on behalf of energy 
consumers, and, according to their president, "the most important 
voice--families." Their list of members include 
<https://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=0ba05d7624&e=95b355344d> 
89 energy companies including Exxon, Shell and Chevron, and over a 
hundred manufacturing associations and business groups, and not a single 
member appears to be in any way family focused. (Weird, huh?)
Formed to push back on the success of the Keep It In The Ground 
movement, CEA's president told the Washington Examiner 
<https://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=b06f579b0f&e=95b355344d> 
the organization would be pushing an "all lives matter"-type response 
(terminology ours) Meaning: yes, CEA supports solar and wind, but not if 
it means displacing oil and gas. In other words, this organization is 
just out to protect the status quo.
So just like "all lives matter" is a way to deliberately misinterpret 
<https://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=987008c6ad&e=95b355344d> 
the call for justice inherent in "Black lives matter," and just like 
Trump's insistence 
<https://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=55d0214085&e=95b355344d> 
that "both sides" were to blame for the death of Heather Heyer and that 
there were "very fine people" among Nazi marchers elevates white 
supremacists to the same level as those opposed to fascism, these 
talking points are transparently bad-faith efforts to distract from real 
problems by equivocating two very obviously opposed positions.
The two sides of climate science are right and wrong. You can't honestly 
believe both simultaneously. And we can't address these problems without 
reducing fossil fuel use and increasing renewables. Pushing an "all 
energy matters" platform is disingenuous, and claiming "both sides" of 
the science are very fine is wrong.
Not that being wrong has ever stopped Trump or his appointees before.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/11/2/1711914/-Deniers-New-Dodge-is-All-Energy-Matters-and-Very-Fine-Scientists-on-Both-Sides


*This Day in Climate History November 4, 1995 
<http://www.cnn.com/US/9511/clinton_radio/11-05/c_script.html> -  from 
D.R. Tucker*
November 4, 1995: In his weekly radio address, President Clinton declares:
*CNN transcript   PRESIDENT CLINTON: *
What I have to say today is clear and simple. Under the cover of 
balancing the budget, the Republican Congress is going after the 
essential environmental protections that have guaranteed the health and 
safety of all Americans for a long time now. And I am determined to stop 
them.
I'm for balancing the budget. It's part of my vision to keep the 
American Dream alive for all Americans in the 21st century. It's a core 
part of our strategy to promote economic growth, common sense 
government, and the mainstream values of responsibility, opportunity, 
work, family and community.
But protecting our environment is a fundamental community value for all 
Americans. And it can't be sacrificed to balance the budget.
Because we cherish our children, we want to be sure the water they drink 
and the food they eat won't make them sick. Because we honor our 
parents, we want the air they breathe to be clean so they can live long 
and healthy lives and not be house bound by smog. Because we believe 
that what God created we must not destroy, each of us has a sacred 
obligation to pass on a clean planet to future generations.
For nearly three decades, all Americans have agreed we must do what we 
have to protect our environment. And America is cleaner and healthier 
because of it.
Since our environmental laws were put in place, toxic emissions by 
factories have been cut in half; lead levels in children's blood have 
dropped 70 percent; Lake Erie, for example, once declared dead, is now 
teeming with fish.
But all this progress is now at risk. In the last few months, a small 
army of lobbyists for polluters has descended on Capitol Hill, mounting 
a full-scale assault on our environmental and public health protections. 
And this Congress has actually allowed these lobbyists to sit down and 
rewrite important environmental laws to weaken our safeguards.
And now they're trying to use the budget bill to further weaken these 
protections. It's an incredible fact that this Republican budget 
actually singles out the environment and its protections for extra cuts. 
This budget will mean dirtier water, more smog, more illness, and a 
diminished quality of life.
Here's how. It's plain that there are two ways to legalize pollution. 
You can change the laws or just stop enforcing them by firing the 
enforcers. The pollution lobby knows it could never repeal half our 
environmental protections, so the Republican budget cuts the resources 
for environmental enforcement in half. Quite simply, it just pulls the 
cop from the environmental beat.
The budget also would cut off money now going to communities to invest 
to keep their drinking water clean. And the cuts mean that toxic waste 
clean-ups across America would slow to a crawl.
The Republican leadership even tried to slip 17 special interest 
provisions into the spending bill, loopholes that would end enforcement 
of the Clean Air and the Clean Water Acts, let more dangerous arsenic 
into our drinking water, allow raw sewage on our beaches.
I'm happy to report that earlier this week a bipartisan majority of the 
House, on the third try, rejected the efforts of the Republican 
leadership. But this fight isn't over....
...As President, it is my duty to protect our environment. And on my 
watch, America will not be for sale.
On the other hand, we do have to be vigilant to make sure environmental 
protection doesn't become a tangle of red tape and bureaucracy. So we're 
stripping away thousands of pages of unnecessary rules and regulations 
and changing the way we protect the environment.
Instead of a long list of do's and don'ts, we're telling responsible 
businesses, if you can meet the tough pollution goals, you figure out 
how to do it as cheaply and efficiently as you can. That's the way to 
cut regulation without hurting public health.
After all, America's families don't care much about the rules and 
regulations, they look at the results -- at a son who comes home from a 
playground with a rash from playing near an industrial site; or a 
daughter with asthma simply because she breathed the air.
My fellow Americans, let's never forget, the decisions we make today 
will live on long after we're gone. I don't think we Americans have lost 
our sense of the past or our dedication to the future. We're balancing 
the budget in a way that will be good for future generations. That means 
that in balancing the budget we have to preserve the planet--clean air, 
clean water, safe food, a decent environment--for those future 
generations, too. Thanks for listening.
http://www.cnn.com/US/9511/clinton_radio/11-05/c_script.html
/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
//Archive of Daily Global Warming News 
<https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/2017-October/date.html> 
//
/https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote//
///
Send email to subscribe <a%20href=%22mailto:contact at theClimate.Vote%22> 
to this mailing. /

        *** Privacy and Security: * This is a text-only mailing that
        carries no images which may originate from remote servers.
        Text-only messages provide greater privacy to the receiver and
        sender.
        By regulation, the .VOTE top-level domain must be used for
        democratic and election purposes and cannot be used for
        commercial purposes.
        To subscribe, email: contact at theclimate.vote with subject: 
        subscribe,  To Unsubscribe, subject: unsubscribe
        Also youmay subscribe/unsubscribe at
        https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/theclimate.vote
        Links and headlines assembled and curated by Richard Paulifor
        http://TheClimate.Vote delivering succinct information for
        citizens and responsible governments of all levels.   List
        membership is confidential and records are scrupulously
        restricted to this mailing list.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/attachments/20171104/e7e522a1/attachment.html>


More information about the TheClimate.Vote mailing list