[TheClimate.Vote] September 22, 2017 - Daily Global Warming News

[Richard Pauli]

/September 22, 2017/

*(video) Katharine Hayhoe on Climate and Extreme Weather 
<https://youtu.be/ztn39dT4nOM>*
"...whatever is happening we know that things are different now than 
they were fifty or a hundred years ago.
They're different in many ways because of air pollution because of ocean 
acidification and because of the warming of the planet and all of these 
are because we have been burning fossil fuels"
https://youtu.be/ztn39dT4nOM


*This year's extreme weather will have a serious effect on global wine. 
<https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-20/the-2017-wine-report-frost-fire-heat-affect-quality-quantity>*
A Napa heat wave hit 117 degrees, seriously damaging grapes. Plus, 
forest fires, frost, and hail around the northern hemisphere will mean 
smaller production this year and varying quality of the wines you love. 
Bloomberg News.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-20/the-2017-wine-report-frost-fire-heat-affect-quality-quantity


interview with Tim DeChristopher
*Climate Change Mitigation, Adaptation and Suffering 
<https://zcomm.org/znetarticle/mitigation-adaptation-suffering/>*
In this conversation, the Climate Disobedience Center's Tim 
DeChristopher looks at how the progressive movement's strategies need to 
change in now that climate change's real impacts are more obvious to the 
American public. He addresses the focus on carbon mitigation (policies 
for reduction in greenhouse gas emissions) in light of the now very 
evident need for climate adaptation (adjusting how we live to deal with 
the changes that come with a warming planet), and the resulting 
suffering (the human, material, and environmental costs of warming)
I think that's not yet fully internalized on the left, that we are in 
and increasingly moving into a radically different world where 
disruption and climate chaos is the norm, and where collapse is looming 
in front of us and where we’re going to be facing contraction. I don't 
think that's really been internalized yet, and so we talked about that 
at the Democracy Convention in our breakout group as well. It seems like 
even in spaces like that, most folks are still talking about how we can 
build this plane of democracy that takes off, when our real need is to 
build the parachute of democracy that can help us land more softly.
https://zcomm.org/znetarticle/mitigation-adaptation-suffering/
http://www.resilience.org/stories/2017-09-22/mitigation-adaptation-suffering/


Newly released *NGO Statement on Fossil Fuels, Petrochemicals,
and a Just Recovery from Hurricane Harvey. 
<https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxWS22wuFz5hcDZZSzhkMVBtSk0/view>* In 
only 48 hours, more than 130 organizations from the environmental 
justice, fossil fuels, anti-fracking, plastics and chemical safety 
movements joined this vital call for a clean and just recovery.

    September 21, 2017
    We, the undersigned organizations stand in support and solidarity
    with the thousands of
    Texans affected by Hurricane Harvey and the hazardous chemical
    releases that followed.
    While the full extent of the damage to these communities will not be
    known for weeks or
    months, one troubling trend is clear: the dense concentration of
    oil, gas, and
    petrochemicals facilities in the region has dramatically compounded
    the already
    severe impacts of climate change on Gulf communities. As Harvey's
    floodwaters shut
    down power grids and plants across Houston and the surrounding
    counties, we witnessed
    one petrochemical facility after another exposing communities and
    first responders to
    harmful levels of toxic pollutants.
    In addition to damaging approximately 100,000 homes in the Houston
    area, Harvey
    caused the uncontrolled release of 4.6 million pounds of air
    pollution from refineries and
    chemical plants across 13 counties, including known carcinogens.1
    Testing by the New
    York Times has confirmed the extensive presence of toxic chemicals
    in floodwaters
    across the region....

You can find the press release announcing the statement here: 130+ 
Organizations Demand A Just Harvey Relief Effort Without Subsidies for 
Fossil Fuel and Petrochemical Companies | Center for International 
Environmental Law.
NGO Statement on Fossil Fuels, Petrochemicals, and a Just Recovery from 
Hurricane Harvey 
<http://www.ciel.org/news/130-organizations-demand-just-harvey-relief-effort-without-subsidies-fossil-fuel-petrochemical-companies/>


*Future Historians Will Look Back in Horror at Koch Network's Attacks on 
Climate Policy, says Author Nancy MacLean 
<https://www.desmogblog.com/2017/09/19/future-historians-will-look-back-horror-koch-network-s-attacks-climate-change-science-says-author-nancy-maclean>*
    For the first few weeks after publishing, all was going pretty well.
Nancy MacLean's book, Democracy in Chains: The Deep History of the 
Radical Right's Stealth Plan for America 
<http://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/533763/democracy-in-chains-by-nancy-maclean/9781101980965/>, 
was "deeply important" and a "feat of American intellectual and 
political history," said a review in Publishers Weekly.
The New York Times said the book joined an emerging corpus of important 
work of scholars and journalists that was "documenting the systematic, 
organized effort to undermine democracy and change the rules."
But it didn't take long for the apparatus of the "radical right" to 
swing into action, with attacks coming from many of the same individuals 
and institutions that the Duke University history professor documents in 
her book.
"At some point the libertarians, particularly people who are part of the 
apparatus in one way or another - either academics or the think-tanks - 
weighed in, and did the same thing with my work as they have done with 
climate science," says MacLean.
"They don't engage the central message but instead try and find what 
they imagine is a chink in the armor and they focus on that to try and 
undermine the credibility of the messenger rather than engage the 
substance of the message.  They are still going… they're very active."
Mostly, the personal attacks have been in the public sphere "in the 
guise of critiquing the work", although MacLean does admit to getting 
the occasional "hateful email."
The attacks are hardly surprising, given MacLean's central accusation 
that they have been complicit in a project to strangle democratic 
processes and demonise public authorities.
"In the US, the impact has been enormous and this Koch network has 
effectively taken over the Republican Party and turned it into a 
delivery vehicle for this project," she says.
"A classic example is on climate change when in the 1990s there was no 
significant difference between the parties in the US on whether climate 
change was happening.
"There were policy differences about how you would address it but there 
was no difference on the facts.
"But by 2014, only eight out of 278 Republicans in Congress would admit 
that climate change was man-made. That's an extraordinary development 
and I would explain that by the way that Charles Koch's donor network 
has applied Buchanan's insights into political economy to change the 
rules of American politics and to change the incentives."
"This moment will be looked at with horror by future generations. It's 
really frightening."
But there is a chink of light, according to MacLean. The historian says 
a common response from readers of her book is that it gives people hope 
they can now wrestle back the reins of democracy.
"If the majority understood what they were doing, they would stop it. I 
think that's a really powerful thing to know," she says.
"They are doing all of this in the knowledge that they can't win if they 
say openly what their end game is. If people work to patiently inform 
and activate the majority, then they could be stopped."
https://www.desmogblog.com/2017/09/19/future-historians-will-look-back-horror-koch-network-s-attacks-climate-change-science-says-author-nancy-maclean


*Resilience is Illegal in Florida* 
<http://www.dailyimpact.net/2017/09/19/resilience-is-illegal-in-florida/>
Posted: 19 Sep 2017
Let's say you live in Florida.
these new-age solar panels save you the trouble of buying and installing 
a separate inverter to bump the output from 12 volts - what the panels 
produce - to 120 volts - what most things in your house require.
You didn't do that because it gradually dawned on you...they never tell 
you this up front - that the panels require power from the grid to run 
the inverters. Know what that means? In a power outage, your new solar 
panels are useless. When the grid is down, your panels will churn out 
tons of 12 volt current that you can't use because you can't plug your 
panels into the grid. Now, because you're smart about these things, you 
didn't buy the new solar panels. To you, saving a few bucks by selling 
your excess solar-panel output to the power company is not as important 
as saving your butt in an emergency.
*Snag #1: If you install more than 10 kilowatts worth of solar panels, 
you must pay FPL up to $1,000 for the privilege*. Not for the panels, 
not for anything but the privilege. Why? Because they can.
*Snag #2:  You are not going to be allowed to go off the grid.* Even if 
you have installed enough solar power to run your house  and you want to 
do it, you are required by law to connect your system to the grid. And 
you have to pay a monthly fee for that privilege, too.
*Snag #3, aka The Big One: *You are prohibited by law from throwing that 
switch. <https://boingboing.net/2017/09/18/rep-ray-rodrigues.html>  
That's right. The law, written by FPL, requires you to install the 
switch and forbids you to use it. The rationale is that you might 
accidentally back-feed the grid and shock a lineman. You live in 
Florida, after all, and might not be able to distinguish between the 
label that says "ON" and the one that says "OFF."
This is the state that will not permit anyone in government to use the 
words "climate change," and that ignores the rising seas that are 
intruding at high tide into the streets of Miami Beach, Coral Gables, 
and countless coastal developments.
http://www.dailyimpact.net/2017/09/19/resilience-is-illegal-in-florida/


*Houston Geological Society Presentation 11 September 2017 
<http://www.artberman.com/houston-geological-society-presentation-11-september-2017/>*
Art Berman's latest presentation online, and the bottom line is that 
dreams of unlimited oil and gas production are a fantasy.  Future U.S. 
O&G shale production is wildly overstated:
http://www.artberman.com/houston-geological-society-presentation-11-september-2017/ 

*(YouTube Video) Art Berman- Permian Basin Reserves May Be Smaller Than 
We Thought <https://youtu.be/xtEZY59EthU?t=32m10s>*
At 34:00 minutes, you will find Art's graph that shows 
debt-to-production ratio, and debt is off the charts.
Art Berman shows how he estimated Permian basin unconventional reserves 
using public company report filings.  Has the reserves may be smaller 
than what people think.  Berman estimates 3.7 billion barrels of proved 
Permian Basin tight oil reserves. He argues again the assertion that the 
US can regain "energy dominance" over countries like Venezuela, Russia 
and Iran.
Berman also discusses energy prices and the economics of US debt. 
https://youtu.be/xtEZY59EthU?t=32m10s
  former hedge fund manager Deborah Rogers who figured out around 2010 
that the finances weren't working out for oil and gas companies. 
http://shalebubble.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/SWS-report-FINAL.pdf
.*Why Oil Prices Can't Bounce Very High; Expect Deflation Instead 
<https://ourfiniteworld.com/2017/09/06/why-oil-prices-cant-bounce-very-high-expect-deflation-instead/>*
Economists have given us a model of how prices and quantities of goods 
are supposed to interact.
https://ourfiniteworld.com/2017/09/06/why-oil-prices-cant-bounce-very-high-expect-deflation-instead/


*New Mexico Doesn't Want Your Kids to Know How Old the Earth Is 
<http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/09/new-mexico-remove-climate-change-evolution-public-education/>*
Or why it's getting warmer.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/09/new-mexico-remove-climate-change-evolution-public-education/


Book Review
*Enviromedics 
<http://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2017/09/new-book-warns-climate-change-is-making-us-sick.html>*
New book warns climate change is making us sick
Co-authored by Stanford wilderness medicine expert Paul Auerbach, 
Enviromedics describes the frightening effects of climate change on health.
In 2008, Jay Lemery, MD, an emergency physician in Colorado, read a 
commentary about the effects of global climate change on human health. 
The author was Paul Auerbach, MD, professor of emergency medicine at 
Stanford and one of the world's leading authorities on wilderness medicine.
Published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, the 
article caught Lemery's attention.
"What I immediately thought was we need to have a physician movement 
around this," said Lemery, associate professor of emergency medicine at 
the University of Colorado and section chief of wilderness and 
environmental medicine.
Now, a decade later, Lemery has co-authored a book with Auerbach that 
delves into the growing health issues touched upon in that 2008 article 
- the countless, frightening ways that climate change is increasing 
allergens, creating toxic algal blooms, inducing heat stress, causing 
air degradation, and creating water and food insecurity. The book, 
Enviromedics: The Impact of Climate Change on Human Health, not only 
calls on physicians, but everyone on the planet, to take note. The book 
is scheduled to be published in October.
The two physicians have treated patients with most of the illnesses and 
conditions described in the book. Global warming, as far as they know, 
is not causing new disorders, but rather spreading them and making them 
worse. "This is an inventory of what happens when our environment goes 
haywire, and all the checks and balances of an ecosystem are gone," 
Lemery said. "We should all pause. We should all worry."
http://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2017/09/new-book-warns-climate-change-is-making-us-sick.html


The Fossil Fuel Resistance map is live today! 
<https://fossilfuelresistance.org/#map>
Again, we'd love support amplifying this on social media for those who 
are able & interested. The sharing toolkit to make that easy for you all 
is right here. 
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Uyg0snocHeutEWu5cde-oFnnIYx_T_LKMfFwoOW05TI/edit#heading=h.kyat1kdc3270>
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Uyg0snocHeutEWu5cde-oFnnIYx_T_LKMfFwoOW05TI/edit#heading=h.etrbdf13rbuk


ClimateNexus Hot News <http://climatenexus.org/>
*Potential Hope for Paris Goals Overshadowed by Denier Spin in Coverage* 
<http://mailchi.mp/climatenexus/states-progress-on-paris-maria-steamrolls-puerto-rico-more?e=95b355344d>
Science reporting is notoriously hit-or-miss, as reporters struggle to 
simplify complex science into something digestible for the public. 
Sometimes this means high-quality explainers 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=06e8c6657a&e=95b355344d>. 
Other times, pieces can create misleading oversimplifications or 
generate political spin. But usually, one study doesn't generate both 
simultaneously. This week, we've seen an exception thanks to new 
research 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=cfa807b948&e=95b355344d> 
claiming that, in the words of one of the study author's, "the 1.5C 
warming limit is not yet a geophysical impossibility. 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=7f5c36fab8&e=95b355344d>"
In short: the idea of a warming pause/hiatus provides a smidge of hope 
of meeting Paris goals if we ramp up climate action. But because the 
pause isn't real 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=f405fecefa&e=95b355344d> 
and models and observations seem to line up fine 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=b80093b389&e=95b355344d>, 
the study probably isn't too accurate, and we're still in deep trouble.
We're sidestepping the many 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=2f00863549&e=95b355344d> 
legitimate 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=0b5ca74862&e=95b355344d> 
scientific 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=b790da1342&e=95b355344d> 
criticisms 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=61404d883c&e=95b355344d> 
of the study, particularly its seemingly "not true 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=a1c5a0461e&e=95b355344d>" 
reliance on model-observation 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=5fd6f94e42&e=95b355344d> 
differences (or lack thereof 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=74a1066ac7&e=95b355344d>). 
See Carbon Brief for that kind 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=3518863550&e=95b355344d> 
of fact check. And we will nobly refrain from gloating 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=e961ee9714&e=95b355344d> 
about how this criticism of climate models debunks denier arguments 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=5337d1f5ce&e=95b355344d> 
about groupthink and gatekeeping. Instead, we'll turn to how the study 
was "dangerously misinterpreted 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=545a21ba3b&e=95b355344d>" 
by conservative media to advance its anti-science narrative.
Over at the Daily Mail, science reporter Shivali Best's piece 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=1ac2c9aa5e&e=95b355344d> 
reflected the study author's original framing: Best covers the study as 
a piece of good news, suggesting that the Paris goals could be within 
reach. The next day, however, conservative Member of UK Parliament 
Graham Stringer provided the denier take 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=15a33c5d70&e=95b355344d> 
f 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=23687a6dbc&e=95b355344d>or 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=d0fdba97ee&e=95b355344d> 
t 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=260499faf1&e=95b355344d>he 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=dad78b596f&e=95b355344d> 
M 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=1ab10fa612&e=95b355344d>ai 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=73c98fbc2d&e=95b355344d>l, 
writing that the study "shows how the apocalyptic predictions of the 
green lobby have been exaggerated."
Ben Webster at The TimesUK 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=b2b3e512ac&e=95b355344d> 
and James Delingpole's Sun column 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=3cb2aaa98d&e=95b355344d> 
a 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=9ce9dceef3&e=95b355344d>ls 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=7a91ca7352&e=95b355344d>o<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=3852d06e80&e=95b355344d>us 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=a40b321d99&e=95b355344d>e<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=1fda39f105&e=95b355344d>Stringer's 
"the greens are too dramatic" 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=b132e42bde&e=95b355344d> 
f 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=651faf0832&e=95b355344d>ra 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=56ed3b32fb&e=95b355344d>mi 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=6bbe4e56cf&e=95b355344d>ng 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=2b088d32f5&e=95b355344d>. 
In his piece, good ol' James claims with his usual over-the-top 
hysterics that warnings have been "at best an exaggeration, at worst a 
­disgraceful fabrication" and that with this study, "scientists have 
fessed up to their mistake." At Breitbart 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=c399f55e06&e=95b355344d> 
he claims that "we climate skeptics have been proved right yet again" 
and the "snooty alarmist scumbags" should apologize.
For deniers, it's confirmation they have been right all along. What's 
more, since the study supposedly says the IPCC's climate models 
overestimate warming, there's no need to take urgent action on climate 
change. Both of these claims, according to a clarification from the 
study authors 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=d93bb2f723&e=95b355344d>, 
are "false."
They may have a hard time impressing this on the larger denier media. 
"Have scientists really admitted climate change sceptics are right?" one 
Telegraph headline asks 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=b74b8e2693&e=95b355344d>.
No. No, they have not. Will that stop hacks 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=5a5a1975cd&e=95b355344d> 
like 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=982a15c7c5&e=95b355344d> 
Delingpole 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=dbce30e872&e=95b355344d> 
and Bastasch 
<http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=8bc7950190&e=95b355344d> 
from using the study to advance a narrative? Only if they're acting in 
good faith.
So if this study shows anything, which we're dubious it does, it's that 
while keeping warming under 1.5C may not yet be a geophysical 
impossibility, deniers arguing in good faith probably is.
http://mailchi.mp/climatenexus/states-progress-on-paris-maria-steamrolls-puerto-rico-more?e=95b355344d


*This Day in Climate History September 22, 2009 
<http://youtu.be/QvDg4BMTGE8>-  from D.R. Tucker*
September 22, 2009: President Obama addresses the UN on climate change.
http://youtu.be/QvDg4BMTGE8

/------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
////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/20170922/9dd1adc0/attachment.html>