[TheClimate.Vote] October 17, 2017 - Daily Global Warming News
Richard Pauli
richard at theclimate.vote
Tue Oct 17 08:39:18 EDT 2017
/October 17, 2017/
*
Wildfires Don't Just Burn Things Down. Their Smoke Is Creating a Public
Health Crisis.
<http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/climate_desk/2017/10/wildfires_are_creating_a_public_health_crisis_of_smoke_problems.html>*
In the new "Smoke Belt," it's raining ash and respiratory illnesses.
As climate change fuels increasingly large and frequent wildfires that
hit closer and closer to densely populated urban centers, the smoke they
produce is becoming a public health crisis.
"Over the past two days we've experienced unprecedented levels of air
pollution in the region," says Kristine Roselius, a spokeswoman for the
Bay Area Quality Management District. Things cleared up slightly on
Wednesday, but mercurial weather patterns make it hard to know if the
worst is still yet to come. "It's very difficult to forecast what the
air quality will be at any moment because we've still got active fires."
But in general, the forecast is not good. Roselius says they're
especially concerned about the elevated levels of PM2.5-very small bits
of liquids and solids suspended in the air, no bigger than 2.5
micrometers across. Particles this small can be inhaled into the deepest
recesses of the lungs, into the broccoli-shaped alveolar sacs, where
they bypass the body's filtration systems and slip directly into the
bloodstream. What exactly is in those tiny droplets and specks depends
on the source, the season, and atmospheric conditions. But it's the
amount of particulate matter more than the type that matters for health.
So first things first: protection. Public health officials like Roselius
are advising people with chronic respiratory illness to seek filtered
air, either in the city or outside the region. That means buildings with
high efficiency mechanical or electronic air cleaners, like these public
libraries in San Francisco. If you've got air conditioning at home, set
it to recirculate mode and make sure all your doors and windows are
tightly closed...
Your best bet: disposable respirators, like the ones found at hardware
stores and pharmacies. Look for ones labeled N95 and make sure they're
properly sealed around your face...
...on air pollution from past and projected future wildfires in the
American West, Liu and a team of scientists at Yale estimated that by
midcentury more than 82 million people will experience smoke waves-more
than two consecutive days with high levels of wildfire-related air
pollution. People in the new Smoke Belt-Northern California, Western
Oregon, and the Great Plains-are likely to suffer the highest exposure.
...Just as fire behaves differently in a city than it does out in the
wild, so does smoke. Urban areas, with their concrete roads and walls of
glass and steel, tend to stop a fire in its tracks. All those buildings
and alleyways prevent wind from blowing fresh embers around. But those
same aerodynamics mean that smoke gets trapped in cities. Liu's latest
research, which will appear in an upcoming issue of the American Journal
of Epidemiology, found that metropolitan areas, even ones very far away
from any actual wildfires, had much higher levels of particulate matter
in the air than rural areas. An urban smoke island effect, if you will.
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/climate_desk/2017/10/wildfires_are_creating_a_public_health_crisis_of_smoke_problems.html
-
*View Smoke Wave Map <http://khanotations.github.io/smoke-map/>*
http://khanotations.github.io/smoke-map/
*Going full Doomsday: Reporters must convey the perils of climate change
without paralyzing their audience
<https://www.cjr.org/special_report/wisconsin-climate-change.php>*
Rather, the goal of the project is to get people talking about what kind
of future they want and how to get there. Scenarios can be a powerful
way to get around the problem of disengagement, Dunwoody says. "Once you
get people to sit down and talk about them, you get huge impacts," she
says. "That interpersonal stuff forces people to wrestle with the issue."
In the meantime, some local reporters are doing what they can. In
August, Chris Hubbuch, a reporter at the La Crosse Tribune who covers
energy, transportation, and the environment, used the 10-year
anniversary of a deadly flood to discuss the local link between climate
change and severe storms
<http://lacrossetribune.com/houstonconews/news/local/when-the-river-comes-down-the-hill-more-frequent-flash/article_651e4b1f-eb79-58ca-90ed-0b1e45f6a6a6.html>and
how nearby communities are trying-and sometimes failing-to plan for
these events. Hubbuch says he doesn't seek out climate change stories,
but he does look for ways to connect climate change to local events. His
latest effort manages to get readers thinking without scaring the pants
off them.
"If we accept that [climate change] is happening and that there are real
local impacts," says Hubbuch, "then it's a fair question to ask, What
are we doing about those impacts?"
https://www.cjr.org/special_report/wisconsin-climate-change.php
*Federal Court Dismisses Resolute SLAPP Suit Against Greenpeace
<http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/news/federal-court-dismisses-racketeering-case-against-greenpeace/>*
SAN FRANCISCO, October 16, 2017 - Today, the United States District
Court for the Northern District of California dismissed all claims in
the controversial case that major logging company Resolute Forest
Products [2] filed against Greenpeace Inc., Greenpeace Fund, and
Greenpeace International, Stand.earth and individual defendants,
including claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt
Organizations (RICO) act.
The court's decision sends a clear message to corporations that attacks
on core democratic values like freedom of speech and legitimate advocacy
on issues of public interest will not be tolerated. District Judge Jon
S. Tigar wrote in his order dismissing the case that "the defendants'
speech constituted the expression of opinion, or different viewpoints
that [are] a vital part of our democracy." Noting that "Greenpeace's
publications at issue rely on scientific research or fact", the judge
added that "[t]he academy, and not the courthouse, is the appropriate
place to resolve scientific disagreements of this kind."
Resolute will be allowed to amend its filing as a formality, but
Greenpeace is confident that any such attempt will meet a similar fate.
http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/news/federal-court-dismisses-racketeering-case-against-greenpeace/
*COMMUNITY-BASED EFFORTS AIM TO REPOWER PUERTO RICO FROM THE GROUND UP
<http://theenergymix.com/2017/10/15/community-based-efforts-aim-to-repower-puerto-rico-from-the-ground-up/>*
With at least 80% of Puerto Rico's transmission lines brought down by
Hurricane Maria, and a utility company that was bankrupt before the
storm hit, a community energy group that formed after Hurricane Sandy is
already delivering on-the-ground support to the U.S. territory, while a
local advocate sets out terms for the future of the island's shattered
electricity grid.
The common theme that brings the two strands together: While offers by
Tesla Inc. and several U.S. solar companies to repower Puerto Rico's are
welcome, and probably well-intended, they have to dovetail with efforts
to assert local control over the U.S. local electricity system.
The first phase in the three-part plan is "to bring as much energy to as
many people as possible as quickly as possible, using a proven, mobile
solar-electric system that targets the hardest-hit and most remote
communities first," the site states.
Phase 2 will aim to deliver mobile solar-electric kits to Puerto Rico's
78 municipalities by the end of 2017, setting up "solar hubs" in central
plazas or other community gathering points. "Our solar technicians will
train local residents during the cooperative installation. This 'each
one, teach one' style of job training can power up more than the solar
kits: it can help develop an island-wide work force capable of growing
with the green economy."
In Phase 3, ResilientPR will work through 2021 to promote solar
electricity for every household on the island.
http://theenergymix.com/2017/10/15/community-based-efforts-aim-to-repower-puerto-rico-from-the-ground-up/
Climate Nexus <http://climatenexus.org/>
*Koch-Funded Texas Denier Tapped for CEQ: *The White House announced
last week that President Trump has officially nominated climate change
denier Kathleen Hartnett White to lead the White House Council on
Environmental Quality. White is currently a senior adviser to the
Koch-funded Texas Public Policy Foundation, and Politico reports that
her nomination is the third Trump administration post for alumni of the
far-right network. White previously served as the Texas CEQ chairwoman
under Rick Perry, a tenure Texas environmentalists have described
<https://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=890fbf5720&e=95b355344d>
as a "disaster." White has argued against classifying carbon dioxide as
a pollutant, claimed coal helped to end slavery and described renewable
energy as "unreliable and parasitic." White's nomination, on top of coal
lobbyist Andrew Wheeler's nomination to the number two spot at EPA
earlier this month, secures "a full house for the fossil fuel industry,"
Christy Goldfuss, who served as managing director of Obama's CEQ, told
the New York Times. For more on White's questionable CV, scroll down to
the Denier Roundup. (New York Times
<https://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=9bbd736df1&e=95b355344d>
$, Washington Post
<https://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=a5c762d81b&e=95b355344d>
$, AP
<https://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=e96c5275fc&e=95b355344d>,
Reuters
<https://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=9edba980b0&e=95b355344d>,
Bloomberg
<https://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=483292de89&e=95b355344d>,
Politico Pro
<https://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=7c44fdda37&e=95b355344d>
$, InsideClimate News
<https://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=4e53f2b022&e=95b355344d>)
*The Senate's top climate advocate explains why Congress is doing
nothing about global warming
<https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/16/16394818/sheldon-whitehouse-congress-climate>*
"Trajectory points on the horizon aren't part of our battle": Sheldon
Whitehouse on Democrats' climate strategy.
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), widely seen as the Senate's most active
advocate on climate change, says he is in routine communication with
"six to 10" Senate Republicans who, he says, privately support his
carbon tax bill but are unwilling to publicly back it. Only one Senate
Republican, South Carolina's Lindsey Graham, is willing to publicly
support that idea.
After the hurricane in Florida, one Republican mayor said: "If this
isn't climate change, I don't know what is."
To be sure, Republicans still hold power over which bills even come to
the floor with their bare majority, and Senate Majority Leader Mitch
McConnell certainly doesn't seem interested in bringing Whitehouse's
bill to a vote anytime soon. ("I don't think CO2 is a pollutant," Texas
Rep. Joe Barton told me when I asked about the possibility of climate
legislation. "You're creating CO2 asking me these questions.")
Former Vox reporter Brad Plumer argued, at length, that a conservative
carbon tax is a "dream" that "refuses to die," and said that the media
should be skeptical that the GOP would act on climate change until their
elected officials openly embrace it.
But Whitehouse thinks that interpretation is too pessimistic for his
Republican colleagues. The question isn't purely academic, because its
answer structures how progressives may choose to try to build a movement
for climate action.
Then you have the people in the corral - with Exxon and the US Chamber
and API and Americans for Progress and the whole rest of the ghouls -
that say, "If you dare touch this issue we'll punish you politically."
The reputation of the Republican Party hangs in the balance for future
generations. Let's say you're a Republican up in 2022 or 2024 - what's
your bet on how the public will look at this by then? What's your bet on
how people will view, "Oh, the climate has always been changing; oh,
this is a hoax." It's not a good outlook.
That was before Citizens United. [That Supreme Court decision] gave the
industry the power to create the kill zone in the first place - before
they could be mad as hell, and blow the whistle, and turn their faces
red, and write a $10,000 PAC check. They could not set up a $2 million
shell foundation to beat the crap out of you with ads in your
congressional district.
Our best scenario is that they try the partisan route again; they fail.
Trump is furious he's again been led into a boxed canyon of failure by
Republican leadership, and then we can say: Not only is there an
opportunity for tax reform, but we can make it stronger in some areas.
But here's the deal: You've got to be willing to sign on for this
[carbon pricing], which would make it the deal of the century for the
guy who says he understands the "Art of the Deal."
And then maybe we have a shot.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/16/16394818/sheldon-whitehouse-congress-climate
*San Francisco Is Suing Major Oil Companies to Protect its Citizens from
Climate Change
<http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2017/10/san-franciscos-sea-level-rise-daniel-herrera-port-seawall/>*
Sea level rise could lead to catastrophic flooding, and the city blames
ExxonMobile and BP.
The upgrades-which include an estimated $3 billion in sea level rise
mitigation and $2 billion in earthquake retrofitting-will come at a huge
cost to the city.
"Right now, we have zero construction dollars," Forbes says. To amass
the funds, the city and the port are planning ballot initiatives and
working with the US Army Corps of Engineers, which might chip in.
Meanwhile, the city attorney's office has decided to try a new approach.
On September 19, San Francisco filed suit against five of the nation's
largest oil companies demanding they pay for the updates the city needs
to protect its residents against climate change. The suit, filed in San
Francisco County Superior Court, argues that the corporations-Chevron,
ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil, Shell, and BP-promoted fossil fuels as
"environmentally responsible and essential to human well-being" amid
multiple warnings that the planet was in danger.
The lawsuit cites a slew of examples alleging that the oil companies
continued promoting their product when they knew it would harm the
environment. A 1968 Stanford Research Institute report, for example,
warned the American Petroleum Institute and its members (which includes
all of the defendants) that sea level rise and changes to the earth's
environment were almost certain. "There seems to be no doubt that the
potential damage to our environment could be severe," the report reads.
"They made a choice to pursue a business strategy for their profit
motive," San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera says. "Now they're
going to have to pay."
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2017/10/san-franciscos-sea-level-rise-daniel-herrera-port-seawall/
*Geoengineering is not a quick fix for climate change, experts warn
Trump
<https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/oct/14/geoengineering-is-not-a-quick-fix-for-climate-change-experts-warn-trump>*
Leading researchers and campaigners express concern that geoengineering
research could be used as an excuse not to reduce CO2 emissions
Leading climate scientists have warned that geoengineering research
could be hijacked by climate change deniers as an excuse not to reduce
CO2 emissions, citing the US administration under Donald Trump as a
major threat to their work.
"At the best climate engineering is a supplement, and it could be that
we shouldn't do it," he insisted. "Our work is to inform better choices
and it would actually be very useful to know for sure it didn't work.
Right now there are heads of state and others in leadership who are
explicitly assuming it could work, that it's there if we need it. But
let's say we found something deep in the climate models which suggested
we were overoptimistic about solar geoengineering, then I would say
'abandon it'. That would be great. I'd love to publish that."
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/oct/14/geoengineering-is-not-a-quick-fix-for-climate-change-experts-warn-trump
*Reposting: Jimmy Stewart on Solar Energy – 1938
<https://climatecrocks.com/2017/10/16/reposting-jimmy-stewart-on-solar-energy-1938/>*
https://youtu.be/bxWI6HEvyDQ
Clip from "You Can't Take it With You", directed by Frank Capra in 1938.
Perrenial staple of high school drama clubs.
https://climatecrocks.com/2017/10/16/reposting-jimmy-stewart-on-solar-energy-1938/
*This Day in Climate History October 17, 2007
<http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/17/us/politics/17climate.html?_r=0&pagewanted=print>
- from D.R. Tucker*
October 17, 2007: The New York Times reports:
"While many conservative commentators and editorialists have mocked
concerns about climate change, a different reality is emerging among
Republican presidential contenders. It is a near-unanimous recognition
among the leaders of the threat posed by global warming.
"Within that camp, however, sharp divisions are developing. Senator
John McCain of Arizona is calling for capping gas emissions linked to
warming and higher fuel economy standards. Others, including Rudolph
W. Giuliani and Mitt Romney, are refraining from advocating such
limits and are instead emphasizing a push toward clean coal and other
alternative energy sources.
"All agree that nuclear power should be greatly expanded.
"The debate has taken an intriguing twist. Two candidates appealing to
religious conservatives, former Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas and
Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas, call for strong actions to ease the
effects of people on the climate, at times casting the effort in
spiritual terms just as some evangelical groups have taken up the
cause.
"The emergence of climate change as an issue dividing Republicans
shows just how far the discussion has shifted since 1997, when the
Senate voted, 95 to 0, to oppose any international climate treaty that
could hurt the American economy or excused China from
responsibilities."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/17/us/politics/17climate.html?_r=0&pagewanted=print
/---------------------------------
///Archive of Daily Global Warming News - Since 2016
<https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/> //
//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/20171017/b8ecd04a/attachment.html>
More information about the TheClimate.Vote
mailing list