[TheClimate.Vote] April 8, 2018 - Daily Global Warming News Digest

Richard Pauli richard at theclimate.vote
Sun Apr 8 12:01:48 EDT 2018


/April 8, 2018/

[radio segment KCUR]
*(audio) Segment 1: Why global warming may be our military's biggest 
threat. 
<http://kcur.org/post/seg-1-how-climate-change-threatens-national-security-seg-2-inner-workings-supreme-court>*
While climate change may harm food production and lead to more intense 
wildfires, it also poses a hazard to our military. How can our armed 
forces respond? Today, we asked former Secretary of State Colin Powell's 
chief of staff, who was director of the Marine Corps War College, to 
shed light on how our nation's military leadership is changing its 
approach to environmental issues.
Retired Army Col. Lawrence Wilkerson 
<https://www.wm.edu/as/government/faculty-directory/wilkerson_l.php>, 
College of William & Mary distinguished visiting professor of government 
and public policy
Lawrence Wilkerson discusses the connections between climate change and 
national security.
Hear the 22 minute segment #1 
<http://kcur.org/post/seg-1-how-climate-change-threatens-national-security-seg-2-inner-workings-supreme-court> 
http://kcur.org/post/seg-1-how-climate-change-threatens-national-security-seg-2-inner-workings-supreme-court
http://kcur.org/post/seg-1-how-climate-change-threatens-national-security-seg-2-inner-workings-supreme-court
https://climateandsecurity.org/2018/04/06/climate-security-week-in-review-march-31-april-6/


[book blurb]
*Open Space: The Global Effort for Open Access to Environmental 
Satellite Data (Information Policy) 
<https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/open-space>*
by Mariel Borowitz
An examination of environmental satellite data sharing policies, 
offering a model of data-sharing policy development, case and practical 
recommendations for increasing global data sharing.

    Sharing data acquired by orbiting satellites is a key to making
    possible effective short- and long-term global management of Planet
    Earth. Mariel Borowitz's comprehensive and penetrating study of why
    many nations share Earth-observation data, but some do not, is an
    extremely valuable contribution to crafting a much needed
    international approach to such data sharing.
    John M. LogsdonProfessor Emeritus and Founder, Space Policy
    Institute, The George Washington University

Summary

    An examination of environmental satellite data sharing policies,
    offering a model of data-sharing policy development, case and
    practical recommendations for increasing global data sharing.

    Key to understanding and addressing climate change is continuous and
    precise monitoring of environmental conditions. Satellites play an
    important role in collecting climate data, offering comprehensive
    global coverage that can't be matched by in situ observation. And
    yet, as Mariel Borowitz shows in this book, much satellite data is
    not freely available but restricted; this remains true despite the
    data-sharing advocacy of international organizations and a global
    open data movement. Borowitz examines policies governing the sharing
    of environmental satellite data, offering a model of data-sharing
    policy development and applying it in case studies from the United
    States, Europe, and Japan - countries responsible for nearly half of
    the unclassified government Earth observation satellites.

    Borowitz develops a model that centers on the government agency as
    the primary actor while taking into account the roles of such
    outside actors as other government officials and non-governmental
    actors, as well as the economic, security, and normative attributes
    of the data itself. The case studies include the U.S. National
    Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the U.S. National
    Oceanographic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA), and the United
    States Geological Survey (USGS); the European Space Agency (ESA) and
    the European Organization for the Exploitation of Meteorological
    Satellites (EUMETSAT); and the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency
    (JAXA) and the Japanese Meteorological Agency (JMA). Finally, she
    considers the policy implications of her findings for the future and
    provides recommendations on how to increase global sharing of
    satellite data.

https://www.amazon.com/Open-Space-Environmental-Satellite-Information/dp/0262037181/ref=sr_1_1
https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/open-space
- - - - - -
[Not all share all information]
*Half of Earth's satellites restrict use of climate data 
<https://theconversation.com/half-of-earths-satellites-restrict-use-of-climate-data-93257>*
Mariel Borowitz | April 3, 2018
Scientists and policymakers need satellite data to understand and 
address climate change. Yet data from more than half of unclassified 
Earth-observing satellites is restricted in some way, rather than shared 
openly.
When governments restrict who can access data, or limit how people can 
use or redistribute it, that slows the progress of science. Now, as U.S. 
climate funding is under threat, it's more important than ever to ensure 
that researchers and others make the most of the collected data.
Why do some nations choose to restrict satellite data, while others make 
it openly available? My book, "Open Space," uses a series of historical 
case studies, as well as a broad survey of national practices, to show 
how economic concerns and agency priorities shape the way nations treat 
their data.
https://theconversation.com/half-of-earths-satellites-restrict-use-of-climate-data-93257


[The Muscle car as Zombie Character]
*Rolling Thunder: The Coming Battle Over MPG, Emissions, and States' 
Rights 
<https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/267000-rolling-thunder-the-coming-battle-over-mpg-vs-emissions-and-states-rights>*
ExtremeTech
By Bill Howard on April 5, 2018
President Trump's move to loosen fuel economy standards will polarize 
the country: SUV and pickup fans versus hypermilers, climate-change 
doubters and deniers versus those worried about global warming, and 
spread-out middle America versus California and densely populated 
northeastern states.
It also pits America against most of the rest of the world that is 
trying to rein in fuel consumption and emissions.
There's also a simpler explanation: The administration is acknowledging 
America's love affair with bigger vehicles that burn more fuel in a time 
of relatively cheap gasoline - slightly more costly than the historical 
average, but as much as a dollar a gallon less than much of the past decade.
*"Cars That People Want and Can Afford"*
In the past week, the Trump administration, through EPA administrator 
Scott Pruitt, said fuel efficiency standards set by the Obama 
administration for 2022-2025 are "not appropriate." A coalition of 
Republican congressmen said in a statement,

    If automakers cannot produce the cars people want to buy at prices
    they can afford, that will quickly have an adverse impact on the
    auto industry, its workers, and even the environment as older,
    less-efficient cars will remain on our roadways. That is why we need
    reasonable and achievable improvements in fuel economy, and this
    determination is a step in the right direction … [the Pruitt
    proposal] reflects current realities and better mirrors what the
    car-buying public wants.

*America's Love Affair with Big Vehicles Continues*
For all that's written about hybrids and battery electric vehicles as 
the cars of the future, alternative fuel vehicles comprise only about 4 
percent of new vehicles sales. And half of those are diesel engines, 
mostly in pickup trucks and big SUVs. Some of the BEVs and plug-in 
hybrids go to buyers whose love of efficient cars goes hand in hand with 
their desire to ride solo in HOV lanes in coastal cities.
In March, each of the top six auto brands got at least half their volume 
from pickup trucks and SUVs: Fiat Chrysler got more than 90 percent, 
Ford and GM got more than 75 percent, and Toyota, Nissan and Honda got 
more than 50 percent. In March, sales of the new Lincoln Navigator 
(5,900-6,200 pounds) were up 102 percent, and transaction prices 
increased by $26,000 thanks to Black Label and Reserve models costing as 
much as $93,000. The Ford Expedition was also up 46 percent, and the 
Cadillac Escalade was up 14 percent. In comparison, the Toyota Prius was 
down 19 percent. The Chevrolet Bolt EV, Chevrolet Volt, and Nissan Leaf 
each had fewer than 2,000 sales in March.
*Rolling Back the MPG Standards*
The current fuel efficiency targets would have light-duty vehicles - 
passenger cars, crossovers, SUVs, and pickup trucks - average 51.4 mpg. 
That sounds high, and it is, because it includes various credits that 
aren't tied to how much fuel is injected into the engine. In real-world 
terms, the current standard means vehicles would have to achieve 36 
real-world miles per gallon. The actual number for 2025 efficiency 
hasn't been set, but it will likely be lower than the 54.5 mpg set by 
the Obama administration. The current administration describes a "lower 
trajectory" toward 2025. The current model-mix trajectory of the past 
year and a half puts automakers below 50 governmental mpg and below 35 
real-world mpg.
- - - - -
So, whatever happens to economy and emissions standards, history and 
demographics say the impact will come and go over the course of a couple 
years. In the meantime, enjoy cheap gas and big SUVs.
[Top Comment:]
Lonnie Veal

    Looked at from another back-pocket POV ... Once you get over the New
    car smell and the thrill of the thrum of power, and that first drive
    off the lot when a car makes you feel like the technicolor ad- then
    it just becomes ... your vehicle.
    Then afterwards, the gas, the insurance, the maintenance, the
    statistical chance of a 'ding' (or worse) from an accident...all of
    that starts grabbing for your wallet on a regular basis. So moving
    towards vehicles with Higher MPGs, model longevity and other factors
    is a financial positive in the long run.
    Don't get me wrong...I LOVE a sexy looking car like any other guy.
    But there was a point when I kind of realized: I live in my House,
    Not my Car. That was when my financial POV shifted. Especially when
    I see that the Auto Makers are really more focused on getting
    everyone to buy a new vehicle every 2-3 years.
    There are folks who can afford to do that without even noticing.
    Then there's everyone else.

more at: 
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/267000-rolling-thunder-the-coming-battle-over-mpg-vs-emissions-and-states-rights
- - - - - -
[Auto change by Auto Dealer]
*Maine Auto Dealer Blasts Trump & EPA As States Gear Up For Legal 
Challenges 
<https://cleantechnica.com/2018/04/04/maine-auto-dealer-blasts-trump-epa-as-states-gear-up-for-legal-challenges/>*
Steve Hanley
Adam Lee is chairman of Lee Auto Malls, a business with headquarters in 
Lewiston, Maine, and founded by his grandfather in 1936. He and his 
partners manage 19 dealerships in eight cities across the state of 
Maine. Last August, he penned an op-ed piece for USA Today that pleaded 
with the EPA and the Trump administration not to roll back the Obama-era 
fuel economy rules for new cars.
*An Auto Dealer Speaks Out*
Now that the EPA has *decided to do exactly that 
<https://cleantechnica.com/2018/04/03/greedy-automakers-want-stable-emissions-rules-but-get-chaos-instead/>*, 
Lee has renewed his call to action. Because of my exalted status as a 
contributor to CleanTechnica, I received a copy of his latest manifesto 
in my email inbox yesterday. Here it is in its entirety.

    As a third generation car dealer, I finally have trucks and SUVs
    that get reasonable gas mileage. I can sell a full size truck and a
    variety of SUVs that get just less than 30 miles per gallon, all
    thanks to our current fuel economy standards. The list of cars and
    crossovers that finally get between 30-40 mpg is long, and these
    aren't even hybrids. As the number one Prius and Leaf dealer in the
    state of Maine, I am pleased to see that there is finally
    competition in this category. There was a long spell through the
    1980's and early 2000's when the average fuel economy of cars and
    trucks did not change.

    With stronger fuel economy standards, the automakers were jerked out
    of their efficiency complacency. Now almost everything on the road
    gets much, much better mileage. Just look at the Chevy Bolt, which
    goes 200 miles on a charge, and the Ram Eco Diesel, which gets
    almost 30 mpg.

    Can you imagine that in this day and age of space shuttles, drones,
    iPhones and refrigerators that can order their own food, we are
    really thinking of going backwards on advancing efficiency
    technologies for vehicles? Do you think Honda, Nissan and Toyota are
    planning to make cars that are less efficient? When did America
    start to believe that losing our competitive edge was a good thing?

    Our 82-year-old company survived the Great Recession, but it was a
    terrible. Lots of other car dealers did not survive. Chrysler and
    General Motors went broke. We cannot afford to sit by while the
    manufacturers and the government work to reverse money-saving fuel
    economy standards. When gas prices spike again, these standards will
    be our savior.

    The President keeps saying that these regulations are crushing the
    auto industry. Here is my question for the President and the
    Environmental Protection Agency: the last four years have been the
    best in the history of the U.S. auto industry. They have also been
    the most profitable for car dealers, ever. Why are we going to
    change the very regulations that are giving us these great cars,
    trucks and SUVs?"

more at: 
https://cleantechnica.com/2018/04/04/maine-auto-dealer-blasts-trump-epa-as-states-gear-up-for-legal-challenges/


[More risk warning -  thanks go to http://www.desdemonadespair.net/]*
Mass extinction with prior warning 
<https://www.fau.eu/2018/03/14/news/research/mass-extinction-with-prior-warning/>
Scientists from FAU have proved that warning signs for mass extinction 
do exist, contrary to previous assumptions.
*March 14, 2018
Mass extinctions throughout the history of the Earth have been well 
documented. Scientists believe that they occurred during a short period 
of time in geological terms. In a new study, FAU palaeobiologists and 
their research partners have now shown that signs that the largest mass 
extinction event in the Earth's history was approaching became apparent 
much earlier than previously believed, and point out that the same 
indicators can be observed today.

Mass extinctions are rare events that have catastrophic consequences. 
These events often completely change the course of evolution. For 
example, the rise of mammals - and therefore of humans - would probably 
not have been possible had dinosaurs not become extinct 65 million years 
ago. A meteorite hit the Earth plunging it into darkness and causing a 
huge drop in temperature. The subsequent hunger crisis wiped out more 
than 70 percent of all animal species. Man's ancestors were among the 
lucky survivors.

The consequences of the extinction of species that occurred around 250 
million years ago at the Permian-Triassic boundary were even more 
catastrophic...
- - - -
In a new study published in the March edition of the renowned magazine 
'Geology', a team of researchers from Germany and Iran have proved that 
this crisis happened over a longer period of time. Under the leadership 
of Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Kießling, Chair for Palaeoenviromental Research at 
FAU, who has also recently been appointed as lead author for the sixth 
World Climate Report, and Dr. Dieter Korn from the Museum für Naturkunde 
in Berlin, the scientists examined fossils in largely unresearched 
geological profiles in Iran . Their results show that the first 
indicators of a mass extinction were evident as early as 700,000 years 
prior to the actual event. Several species of ammonoids were killed off 
at that time and the surviving species became increasingly smaller in 
size and less complex the closer the main event became.
The warning signs of mass extinction are also visible today.
The factors that led to a mass extinction at the end of the Permian 
Period remind us very much of today, says Prof. Wolfgang Kießling. 
'There is much evidence of severe global warming, ocean acidification 
and a lack of oxygen. What separates us from the events of the past is 
the extent of these phenomena. For example, today's increase in 
temperature is significantly lower than 250 million years ago'...
more at: 
https://www.fau.eu/2018/03/14/news/research/mass-extinction-with-prior-warning/
- - - -
[Geology Journal]
*Pre-mass extinction decline of latest Permian ammonoids 
<https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/gsa/geology/article/46/3/283/526710/pre-mass-extinction-decline-of-latest-permian>*
Wolfgang Kiessling et al
Geology (2018) 46 (3): 283-286.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1130/G39866.1
Published: January 24, 2018
Abstract

    The devastating end-Permian mass extinction is widely considered to
    have been caused by large-scale and rapid greenhouse gas release by
    Siberian magmatism. Although the proximate extinction mechanisms are
    disputed, there is widespread agreement that a major extinction
    pulse occurred immediately below the biostratigraphically defined
    Permian-Triassic boundary. Our statistical analyses of stratigraphic
    confidence intervals do not comply with a single end-Permian
    extinction pulse of ammonoids in Iran. High turnover rates and
    extinction pulses are observed over the last 700 k.y. of the Permian
    period in two widely separated sections representative of a larger
    area. Analyses of body sizes and morphological complexity support a
    gradual decline over the same interval. Similar pre-mass extinction
    declines and disturbances of the carbon cycle have sometimes been
    reported from other regions, suggesting a widespread, but often
    overlooked, environmental deterioration at a global scale, well
    before the traditional main extinction pulse.

more at: 
https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/gsa/geology/article/46/3/283/526710/pre-mass-extinction-decline-of-latest-permian:


[Lump of coal]
*China is massively betting on coal outside its borders - even as 
investment falls globally 
<https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/06/china-is-massively-betting-on-coal-outside-its-shores--even-as-investment-falls-globally.html>*
CNBC But, beyond its borders, the country has been the world's biggest 
investor in coal power. "Chinese banks' and companies' investments in 
coal abroad are a cause of major concern because of their potential to 
lock in more climate warming emissions in our carbon-constrained world,"...
Globally, there was an increase in global coal consumption last year 
after two straight years of decline, according to data released last 
month by the International Energy Agency. The trend was driven by Asian 
demand, the IEA added.
more at: 
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/06/china-is-massively-betting-on-coal-outside-its-shores-even-as-investment-falls-globally.html


[And it's still correct]
*Perhaps the clearest, most concise explanation of global warming you'll 
see 
<https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/4/6/1754837/-Perhaps-the-clearest-most-concise-explanation-of-global-warming-you-ll-see>*

    There is evidence that the greatly increasing use of fossil fuels,
    whose material contents after combustion are principally H20 and
    CO2, is seriously contaminating the earth's atmosphere with CO2.
    Analyses indicate that the CO2 content of the atmosphere since 1900
    has increased 10 per cent. Since CO2 absorbs long-wavelength
    radiation, it is possible that this is already producing a secular
    climatic change in the direction of higher average temperatures.
    This could have profound effects both on the weather and on the
    ecological balances.

In view of the dangers of atmospheric contamination by both the waste 
gases of fossil fuels and the radioactive contaminates from nuclear 
power plants, Professor Hutchinson urges serious consideration of the 
maximum utilization of solar energy...
There it is, easy as pie...
Which thoughtful expert wrote such a crisp summary of this all-important 
matter?
It was Marion King Hubbert, Chief Geology Consultant...for Shell Oil 
Company ... In 1962.
more at: 
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/4/6/1754837/-Perhaps-the-clearest-most-concise-explanation-of-global-warming-you-ll-see


[New Fame for UMaine]
* Daily Beast mentions Climate Reanalyzer in article on global warming 
<https://umaine.edu/news/blog/2018/04/06/daily-beast-mentions-climate-reanalyzer-article-global-warming/>*
University of Maine
April 6, 2018
Daily Beast 
<https://www.thedailybeast.com/four-reasons-snowy-springs-dont-disprove-global-warming> 
featured the University of Maine Climate Change Institute's Climate 
Reanalyzer in the article, "Four reasons snowy springs don't disprove 
global warming." The article states that a small swath of land from 
Maine to Georgia is not representative of the entire Earth's surface, 
and the warming effects of global climate disruption have not been as 
keenly felt there as elsewhere. The article points to the Climate 
Reanalyzer's global temperature data, which shows that on Jan. 1, half 
of the United States was much colder than average but nearly everywhere 
else in the world - including the West Coast - was much hotter than average.
https://umaine.edu/news/blog/2018/04/06/daily-beast-mentions-climate-reanalyzer-article-global-warming/
- - - -
[Maine in the Daily Beast]*
**Four Reasons Snowy Springs Don't Disprove Global Warming* 
<https://www.thedailybeast.com/four-reasons-snowy-springs-dont-disprove-global-warming>
For example, check out this global temperature data 
<https://www.climaterealityproject.org/sites/default/files/storm3.png> 
from the *University of Maine's "Climate Reanalyzer."* It shows that on 
Jan. 1, 2018, half of the United States was much colder than average but 
nearly everywhere else in the world-including the West Coast-was much 
hotter than average. That's just one day, of course, but you can page 
through the Climate Reanalyzer <http://cci-reanalyzer.org/> yourself and 
see how often the pattern repeats.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/four-reasons-snowy-springs-dont-disprove-global-warming
--
[Try the Climate Reanalyer ]
*Climate Reanalyzer is a platform for visualizing climate and weather 
datasets. <http://cci-reanalyzer.org/>*
The site is coded and maintained byDr. Sean Birkel 
<http://climatechange.umaine.edu/people/profile/sean_birkel>through 
support from theClimate Change Institute 
<http://climatechange.umaine.edu/>andSchool of Earth and Climate 
Sciences <https://umaine.edu/earthclimate/>of theUniversity of Maine 
<http://www.umaine.edu/>, and partial support from theNational Science 
Foundation <http://www.nsf.gov/>.
Here, you can access climate information using interfaces forreanalysis 
<http://cci-reanalyzer.org/reanalysis/monthly_maps/>andhistorical 
station data <http://cci-reanalyzer.org/clim/ghcn/>. Maps, timeseries, 
and correlation analyses can be plotted for gridded models. Station data 
and model timeseries can be exported in CSV format for use in 
spreadsheet software.
Climate is average weather, and so/Climate Reanalyzer/also provides 
access to weather forecast models. Get a 10-day forecast timeseries for 
your location by using the placename search at the top-right of every 
page.Forecast maps <http://cci-reanalyzer.org/wx/fcst/>from global and 
regional models are also available. These maps can be animated.
The most visited page on the site isToday's Summary 
<http://cci-reanalyzer.org/wx/DailySummary/>, which features several 
weather variables, including temperature departure for the current day 
relative to a recent climate baseline. The summary maps can be viewed 
Google Earth.
/Climate Reanalyzer/is continually being improved and expanded. Check 
ourFacebook page <http://www.facebook.com/ClimateReanalyzer>for updates.
http://cci-reanalyzer.org/


[Sunday Sermon Clive Hamilton]
*The Theodicy of the "Good Anthropocene" 
<https://clivehamilton.com/the-theodicy-of-the-good-anthropocene/>*
24 JUNE 2015
To the dismay of those who first proposed it, the Anthropocene is being 
reframed as an event to be celebrated rather than lamented and feared. 
Instead of final proof of the damage done by techno-industrial hubris, 
the 'ecomodernists' welcome the new epoch as a sign of man's ability to 
transform and control nature.
Although the ecomoderns write as humanists, they construe the new epoch 
in a way that is structurally a theodicy, that is, a theological 
argument that aims to prove the ultimate benevolence of God.
The 'good Anthropocene' argument is founded on a belief in the ultimate 
benevolence of the whole, a goodness that in the end transcends and 
defeats the structural obstacles, sufferings and moral lapses that seem 
to threaten it. …
A talk to the Breakthrough Institute Dialogue, Sausalito, 22 June 2015
https://clivehamilton.com/the-theodicy-of-the-good-anthropocene/
- - - - - -
[to the Breakthrough Institute July 14, 2015]
A Good Anthropocene?
*Competing Visions of Our Environmental Future 
<https://thebreakthrough.org/index.php/dialogue/can-we-have-a-good-anthropocene>*
Human ingenuity has allowed the species to transcend every supposed 
ecological limit in the past, but will it be enough to surmount the 
challenges of a new geologic epoch, the Anthropocene? There are many 
reasons to believe in the possibility of a "good Anthropocene," says the 
opening panel of the 2015 Breakthrough Dialogue, but concerted political 
and social action - not techno-utopian thinking - is needed.

Mark Lynas, author of The God Species and Six Degrees, opened the 
discussion by pointing to humankind's remarkable achievements in recent 
history. Globally, a demographic transition is underway in which birth 
rates are plummeting. More productive forms of agriculture use less 
land, allowing forests to regrow in the United States, Poland, and 
Vietnam. Western countries have seen peak consumption of various 
materials including steel, concrete, paper, and wood.

These trends give empirical weight to what Lynas's belief in a good 
Anthropocene. Citing the opening passage of Charles Dicken's A Tale of 
Two Cities, Lynas emphasized that humans will ultimately decide what 
kind of planet they inhabit by actively "using science and technology as 
[their] most potent tools for first identifying and then solving problems."

Encouraging as these decoupling trends are - whereby economic growth 
does not come at the expense of the environment  - they might not be 
occurring fast enough to make a difference.

Clive Hamilton, an ethicist at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and 
Public Ethics, argued that humans have already entered a frightening 
period in planetary history. There is no way to make the Anthropocene 
good, he says, only "less bad."

"By the end of the century it will very likely be hotter than it has 
been for 15 million years," he said. "In short, the Earth system is now 
operating in a different mode and nothing we can do now, even ending the 
burning of fossil fuels in short order, can get it to 'bounce back' to 
the Holocene."

At one level, the concept of a good Anthropocene tends to mask the 
negative impacts we are currently experiencing, such as the California 
mega-drought. But at a deeper level, argues Hamilton, the concept is a 
theodicy, "founded on a belief in the ultimate benevolence of the whole, 
a goodness that in the end transcends and defeats the structural 
obstacles, sufferings, and moral lapses that seem to threaten it."

The ecomodernist appeal to a "good Anthropocene" (sometime in the 
distant future), in turn, breeds complacency - best summed up by the 
phrases "everything happens for the best."

Steve Fuller, a philosopher at the University of Warwick, challenged the 
notion that providence leads to passiveness:

"It's not just about silent suffering, but perseverance in the face of 
resistance," Fuller said. "One can believe that even though you're faced 
with challenges in short-term, there will be gain in the longer term, 
and that is the spur to action."

Radical political change is necessary, agreed Hamilton, who described 
his principal objection to An Ecomodernist Manifesto as its lack of 
discussion of present-day politics that impede action on global 
challenges like climate change.

"Obviously technological change is needed; everyone believes that," he 
said. "[But in the manifesto] there's no analysis of what the problem 
is. There's no mention of fossil fuel lobby, dirty money, politics, 
denialism, and there's no mention of Exxon and the Koch brothers."

Lynas pushed back on this, arguing that climate change denialism is a 
political phenomenon that is partly a reaction to the capture of the 
climate change issue by the Left and the "insistence that only 
anti-capitalist approaches are viable solutions."

While the fossil fuel lobby has played some role in raising skepticism, 
argued Lynas, in his 15-year involvement with climate negotiations, the 
biggest point of contention has been what kind of development pathways 
developing nations will take.

Across the globe, poor countries such as Bangladesh are choosing to 
build coal-fired power plants to move away from using wood, which 
destroys forests and causes indoor air pollution that kills millions 
annually. In the ecomodernist view, this is a good thing even if brings 
out more carbon dioxide emissions. Development involves accelerating 
poor countries further up the energy ladder, from using wood and dung, 
to coal, gas, and eventually zero-carbon sources like solar and nuclear.

"The hope is - and I don't believe this is somehow predestined or 
designed - that we will be able to achieve enough of development to 
avert the worst impacts of climate change," argued Lynas.

"My critique of the technofix is when technology substitutes for 
political change, which is necessary for bringing about that 
technological revolution," replied Hamilton.

A good degree of change may need to come within environmental ranks 
first, countered Lynas, who pointed to environmentalists' opposition to 
technologies such as nuclear power and genetically modified foods.

"Yes environmentalists make mistakes, for one, I think the opposition to 
GMOs has been a serious error," said Hamilton. "I think the dangers of 
nuclear power have been seriously overblown, but to blame the 
environmental movement as opposed to the fossil fuel industry, doesn't 
make any sense."

 From the tenor of the debate, the Anthropocene - whether defined as 
good or bad - is unlikely to be passive.

"An embrace of technology does not imply a passive techno-optimism or an 
ignorance of the policy changed needed," said energy analyst Jesse 
Jenkins. "We have to leave behind in the discussion that anyone here 
looks at challenges ahead and says everything will be fine, leave it to 
fate."
Read the transcript of Mark Lynas's presented remarks here. 
<http://www.marklynas.org/2015/06/a-good-anthropocene-speech-to-breakthrough-dialogue-2015/>
Read the transcript of Clive Hamilton's presented remarks here. 
<http://clivehamilton.com/the-theodicy-of-the-good-anthropocene/>
https://thebreakthrough.org/index.php/dialogue/past-dialogues/breakthrough-dialogue-2015
https://thebreakthrough.org/index.php/dialogue/can-we-have-a-good-anthropocene


[Tip of South America drought]
*Most Expensive Weather Disaster of 2018: a $3.9 Billion Drought in 
Argentina and Uruguay 
<https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/most-expensive-weather-disaster-2018-39-billion-drought-argentina-and-uruguay>*
Dr. Jeff Masters  ·  March 30, 2018,
A severe lack of rainfall during over southern South America during the 
summer of 2017 - 2018 has led to the worst drought in decades over 
portions of Argentina and Uruguay. According to insurance broker Aon 
Benfield, total losses are near $3.9 billion, making the drought the 
most expensive weather-related disaster on the planet so far in 2018-and 
the most expensive disaster in the history of both Argentina and Uruguay.

Hardest-hit was Argentina, where the Buenos Aires Grain Exchange 
predicted that the drought would likely cause an economic loss of $3.4 
billion. Argentina's 2018 soybean harvest is expected to be near the 
record-low harvest of the drought year of 2009; both severe droughts 
occurred during weak La Niña events. According to EM-DAT, the 
international disaster database, the $3.4 billion cost of this year's 
drought exceeds a $3 billion flood (2018 dollars) from October 1985 as 
Argentina's most expensive disaster on record.

The lack of summer rainfall this year in Uruguay has led to the worst 
drought conditions in that nation since 2008/09. Local industry 
officials anticipated economic losses exceeding $500 million, which 
would rank as that nation's most expensive disaster in history. The 
previous record was the $380 million cost of a drought in 1999..
https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/most-expensive-weather-disaster-2018-39-billion-drought-argentina-and-uruguay


[Humor?: True news video lunacy sarcasm]
*Trump Saves America From Fake News Climate Change Paris Agreement Hoax 
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NEnlXhdpmY>*
Super Deluxe
Published on Jun 7, 2017
Vic Berger Presents: Thank God President Trump saved America from the 
failing and fake news Paris Agreement!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NEnlXhdpmY


*This Day in Climate History - April 8, 2003 
<http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/08/opinion/08iht-edoppen_ed3_.html>   -  
from D.R. Tucker*
April 8, 2003: In the New York Times, climate scientist Michael 
Oppenheimer declares:

    "The threat of global warming, first raised in 1896, has outlived
    many foreign policy crises. Our failure to deal with it is starting
    to bear a bitter harvest not only in rising seas and intensified
    rainstorms, but also in disruption of long-standing alliances, and
    interference with other foreign policy objectives. It is well past
    time for U.S. leaders to put the climate problem at the center of
    America's domestic and international agendas."

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/08/opinion/08iht-edoppen_ed3_.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//
///
///To receive daily mailings - click to Subscribe 
<mailto:subscribe at theClimate.Vote?subject=Click%20SEND%20to%20process%20your%20request> 
/to news digest. /

        *** 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/20180408/4426f358/attachment.html>


More information about the TheClimate.Vote mailing list