[TheClimate.Vote] August 26, 2018 - Daily Global Warming News Digest
Richard Pauli
richard at theclimate.vote
Sun Aug 26 11:17:58 EDT 2018
/August 26, 2018/
[burning money]
*California's wildfires are deterring tourists and hitting taxpayers
hard, officials say
<http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-wildfire-costs-california-20180824-story.html>*
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-wildfire-costs-california-20180824-story.html
[NPR To the Point Warren Olney interviews ]
*Can President Trump's Climate Change Denial Survive Massive Wildfires?
<https://www.kcrw.com/latest/can-president-trumps-climate-change-denial-survive-massive-wildfires>*
August 23, 2018 - 1:00 PM PT
Wildfires are raging all over the world, and the scientific consensus is
that Global Warming is a major factor. In the US, forest management is
an issue, too--and standard timber-industry practice may be making
things worse. For years, environmentalists and private companies have
battled over their differences. Now, President Trump's denial of
climate change is making resolution harder than ever.
Guests:
Nathaniel Rich, New York Times Magazine, @NathanielRich
Noah Diffenbaugh, Professor with Stanford University's Department of
Earth System Science and Senior Fellow at the Woods Institute for
the Environment., @StanfordEarth
Ryan Richards, A senior policy analyst for Public Lands at the
Center for American Progress, focusing on natural resource economics
and markets., @ryanri84
Kate Yoder, News editor at Grist, a non-profit online news source
based in Seattle--which covers the environment and issues of social
and economic justice., @katemyoder
https://www.kcrw.com/latest/can-president-trumps-climate-change-denial-survive-massive-wildfires
[Politician discovers global warming]
*Sweating out a close race, GOP Rep. Mimi Walters ties wildfires to
climate change
<http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-walters-climate-20180824-story.html>*
By MICHAEL HILTZIK - AUG 24, 2018
The adage "All politics is local" often attributed to the late House
Speaker Tip O'Neill appears to be working its magic in the once-solidly
Republican Orange County district of Rep. Mimi Walters.
Walters is facing a stiff challenge in November from Democrat Katie
Porter, a UC Irvine law professor. So it may be no surprise that she's
trimming her political sails to catch the prevailing winds. Most
recently, Walters signed on to an Aug. 22 letter from the congressional
climate solutions caucus observing that the western wildfires are being
"fueled by climate change" and inviting Gov. Jerry Brown to a meeting to
discuss policy options.
The assertion places Walters at odds with President Trump, who has
called climate change a "hoax" and blamed the fires on "bad
environmental laws," and with Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, who has
pointed the finger at "environmental terrorist groups" who interfere
with government forest management programs.
*Climate change is a significant contributing factor to the increased
severity and frequency of California wildfires.*
It also places Walters at odds with her own record on environmental
issues, which is one of the worst in Congress. As my colleague Evan
Halper observed this week, the League of Conservation Voters gives her a
lifetime score of 4% on legislative votes, and a 3% score for 2017.
That record probably won't help Walters in November. Election
forecasters have moved her district from Republican-leaning to a
toss-up. Although GOP voters outnumber Democrats by nearly 8 percentage
points, the district went for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential
election. We've asked Walters' Washington office to comment but haven't
heard back.
District voters tend to be well-educated, which suggests that they don't
hold much truck with climate change denialism. They also have close to
firsthand experience with wildfires. The Holy fire has been burning for
more than two weeks in remote parts of Orange and Riverside counties;
although authorities say the fire was triggered by arson, climate change
may play a role in its severity, as it has with other blazes during this
ferocious fire season in California...
http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-walters-climate-20180824-story.html
[innovation sticks]
*Scotland's floating turbine smashes tidal renewable energy records
<https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/scotland-floating-turbine-tidal-power-record-sr2000-scotrenewables-ofgem-a8503221.html>*
Leads to calls for 'wholly renewable electricity system' from
environment group
A floating tidal stream turbine off the coast of Orkney has produced
more green energy in a year than Scotland's entire wave and tidal sector
produced in the 12 years before it came online.
In 12 months of full-time operation, the SR2000 turbine supplied the
equivalent annual power demand of about 830 households.
Its developer claimed the machine - the most powerful of its kind in the
world - had set a benchmark for its industry due to its performance...
- - - -
Gina Hanrahan, acting head of policy at WWF Scotland, added: "As we
transition to a wholly renewable electricity system, it's really
important that we have a diversity of renewable electricity sources.
"We've seen huge growth in onshore wind and offshore wind over recent
years, and it's great to see new tidal technologies now hitting new
milestones."
https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/scotland-floating-turbine-tidal-power-record-sr2000-scotrenewables-ofgem-a8503221.html
[audio online - at 25:20 about global warming]
*Daniel Kahneman On Misery, Memory, And Our Understanding Of The Mind *
<https://www.npr.org/2018/03/12/592986190/daniel-kahneman-on-misery-memory-and-our-understanding-of-the-mind>
We've dealt with it. But let's say you have another threat over here
where I tell you that in 80 years or 100 years, the temperature
might rise five degrees. And as a result of this, the oceans might
warm a little bit and sea levels might rise by two or three inches.
And as a result of this, models predict that climate events will
become more serious - at least, according to the models. But you
have to understand probability. And in order to try and head that
off, you actually have to take very painful steps right now - maybe
driving your car less, maybe living in a smaller house, all kinds of
things that are painful in the here and now - for something that
seems difficult off in the distance and requires you to really
understand statistics and probability. You've actually called
climate change, in some ways, sort of a perfect storm of the ways in
which our minds are not equipped to deal with certain kinds of threats.
KAHNEMAN: I mean, it's really - if you were to design a problem that
the mind is not equipped to deal with, you know, climate change
would fit the bill. It's distance. It's abstract. It's contested.
And it doesn't make - it doesn't take much. If it's contested, it's
50/50, you know, for many people immediately. You know, you don't
ask, what do most scientists do? Which side of the National Academy
of Sciences - that's not the way it works. You know, some people say
this, other people say that. And if I don't want to believe in it, I
don't have to believe in it.
So it's - I'm really - well, I'm pessimistic in general. But I'm
pessimistic in particular about the ability of democracies to deal
with a threat like that effectively. If there were a comet hurtling
down toward us - you know, an event that would be predictable -
within a day, we'd mobilize. So it's not even that it's distant in
time. If it was going to affect our children, we'd mobilize. But
this is too abstract, possible, contested. It's very different. We
can't - we're not doing it, in fact.
VEDANTAM: So besides being pessimistic, does your research and
understanding of this phenomenon give you any insight into how we
should maybe talk about climate change and what we can do?
KAHNEMAN: Well, I think scientists, in a way, are deluded in that
they have the idea that there is one way of knowing things. And it's
you know things when you have evidence for them. But that's simply
not the case. I mean, you know, people who have religious beliefs or
strong political beliefs. they know things without having, you know,
compelling evidence for it. And so there is a possibility, you know,
of knowing things, which is clearly determined socially. I mean, we
have our religion and our politics and so on because we love it - we
love or used to love and trust the people who held those beliefs.
There is no other way to explain, you know, why people hold to one
religion and think other religions are funny, you know, which is
really a very common observation. So the only way would be to create
social pressure. So, for me, it would be a milestone if you manage
to take influential evangelists, preachers, to adopt the idea of
global warming and to preach it. That would change things. It's not
going to happen by presenting more evidence. That, I think, is clear.
https://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=592986190
audio
https://www.npr.org/2018/03/12/592986190/daniel-kahneman-on-misery-memory-and-our-understanding-of-the-mind
[smart move]
*Dem lawmakers urge California governor to end fossil fuel extraction
<http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/403124-dem-reps-ask-california-governor-to-end-all-fossil-fuel-extraction#.W37P2uNRa8g.twitter>*
BY MIRANDA GREEN -
Two Democratic members of Congress are urging California Gov. Jerry
Brown (D) to put a cap on any new fossil fuel projects and set a
timeline for a hard stop on oil and gas extraction throughout the state.
In a letter sent to Brown on Wednesday, Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and
Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) asked him to end all fossil fuel production in
the Golden State as part of the governor's commitment to "driving
transformational change."
The lawmakers mentioned threats of climate change, increased air
pollution and impacts to low income communities in their reasoning for
the sweeping request.
"We regularly hear from constituents about the tremendous burdens that
fossil fuel production places on our communities, especially low-income
communities and communities of color. California is home to some of the
country's most polluted air basins," Khanna and Lee wrote in the letter.
"The pollution from oil and gas field operations and refinery facilities
is a major contributor to the array of air quality related health
problems that hurt our most overburdened communities."
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/403124-dem-reps-ask-california-governor-to-end-all-fossil-fuel-extraction#.W37P2uNRa8g.twitter
*
Big oil asks government to protect it from climate change
<https://apnews.com/4adc5a2a2e6b45df953ebcba6b63d171/Big-oil-asks-government-to-protect-it-from-climate-change>*
By WILL WEISSERT - Aug. 22, 2018
PORT ARTHUR, Texas (AP) - As the nation plans new defenses against the
more powerful storms and higher tides expected from climate change, one
project stands out: an ambitious proposal to build a nearly 60-mile
"spine" of concrete seawalls, earthen barriers, floating gates and steel
levees on the Texas Gulf Coast.
Like other oceanfront projects, this one would protect homes, delicate
ecosystems and vital infrastructure, but it also has another priority -
to shield some of the crown jewels of the petroleum industry, which is
blamed for contributing to global warming and now wants the federal
government to build safeguards against the consequences of it...
https://apnews.com/4adc5a2a2e6b45df953ebcba6b63d171/Big-oil-asks-government-to-protect-it-from-climate-change
[short term thinking]
*Norway's $1tn wealth fund urged to keep oil and gas investments
<https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/aug/24/norway-1tn-wealth-fund-urged-to-keep-oil-and-gas-investments>*
Government advisers reject central bank's proposal to sell billions held
in oil stocks
Government advisers have urged Norway not to ditch oil and gas
investments from its $1tn sovereign wealth fund, in a setback for those
backing the world's biggest fossil fuel divestment.
*Norway's central bank last year recommended the fund sell the billions
it holds in oil stocks to avoid the risk of a permanent drop in crude
prices.*
However, a government-appointed commission has rejected the proposal,
warning that a less diverse investment strategy would have major
consequences for the fund's returns.
"A sale of energy stocks would challenge the current investment strategy
of the fund, with broad diversification of the investments and a high
threshold for exclusion," the commission said on Friday.
The Government Pension Fund Global was built off the oil and gas
revenues that have made Norway rich
It also has major holdings in international oil firms, including $6.14bn
in Shell, followed by billions of dollars invested in other oil majors
such as BP, Chevron, ExxonMobil and Total.
It has smaller stakes in the Italian oil firm Eni, the US oil firm
ConocoPhillips and the US oil services group Schlumberger. Most oil
company share prices have climbed in the past year along with crude prices.
Divesting those stocks was "not an effective insurance" against the
"substantial" hit Norway faced to its tax take if its oil and gas sector
was hurt by an oil price crash, the commission argued.
The commission, headed by the economist O/ystein Tho/gersen, said the
fund's existing investment strategy was "simple, well founded and has
served the fund well"...
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/aug/24/norway-1tn-wealth-fund-urged-to-keep-oil-and-gas-investments
[fire safety reminder]
*Smoke Gets in Your Eyes…and Mouth and Lungs Too
<https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/smoke-gets-your-eyes-and-mouth-and-lungs-too>*
Wildfire smoke presents a real threat to public health
BY CASEY O'BRIEN - AUG 3 2018
Wildfires are burning in California. There are now at least 18 major
fires tearing across the Golden State, leaving a trail of death and
destruction. The Carr fire around the city of Redding has destroyed an
estimated 1,000 homes and killed at least six people. The Ferguson fire
prompted the closure of Yosemite National Park on July 23, and visitors
aren't expected to be allowed to enter the park until at least this
Sunday. Fires in Lake and Mendocino Counties have prompted evacuations
of residents there.
- - - -
A longer and more intense wildfire season means that wildfire smoke will
become even more of a health risk. "We have to assume every summer is
going to be the worst summer we have ever had," says Sarah Henderson,
senior environmental scientist for the British Columbia Center for
Disease Control. In British Columbia, the fire season is also getting
longer, Henderson says. Normally fires burn about 980 km (600 miles) a
year; last summer, more than 1.2 million hectares (nearly 3 million
acres) burned. British Columbia was in a state of emergency for 70 days
due to wildfire, the longest provincial state of emergency in BC's
history. More than 60,000 BC residents had to evacuate their homes.
In a longitudinal study of various cities in British Columbia, Henderson
found that distributions of asthma medications increased considerably on
high smoke days, by up to 7 percent. In general, people with respiratory
or cardiac problems are more at risk during days with poor air quality,
but even healthy people are vulnerable to headaches and respiratory
problems.
Government health agencies are already preparing for a future with more
wildfires. The British Columbia Lung Association public health
department released a series of recommendations for residents on how to
prepare for wildfire season, including making sure that buildings have
up-to-date air filters, and encouraging them to purchase portable air
purifiers. In Los Angeles-where officials have worked hard to regulate
pollution from sources like ports, highways, and oil and gas
operations-wildfires have significant impact on air quality. The
California Department of Public Health website directs residents to
follow CDC guidelines and utilize face masks with an N95 or higher
rating if they need to go outside; they are available at many hardware
stores. Officials recommend people check the fit, because a mask that
doesn't fit well can actually worsen the problem by making it hard for
the people who wear them to breathe comfortably. Dr. Henderson suggests
getting a N95 respirator face mask professionally fitted, if possible.
Staying indoors on smoky days is also recommended.
- - - - -
Albinson's experience is a warning, and a reminder, that one doesn't
have to be directly in a fire's path to suddenly be in harm's way.
https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/smoke-gets-your-eyes-and-mouth-and-lungs-too
[when is high tide?]
*Are Coastal Nuclear Power Plants Ready for Sea-Level Rise?
<https://www.hakaimagazine.com/features/are-coastal-nuclear-power-plants-ready-for-sea-level-rise/>*
As shorelines creep inland and storms worsen, nuclear reactors around
the world face new challenges.
by John Vidal - August 21, 2018
This article was originally published in Ensia, a magazine that presents
new perspectives on environmental challenges and solutions to a global
audience. Read more stories like this at ensia.com.
The outer defensive wall of what is expected to be the world's most
expensive nuclear power station is taking shape on the shoreline of the
choppy gray waters of the Bristol Channel in western England.
By the time the US $25-billion Hinkley Point C nuclear station is
finished, possibly in 2028, the concrete seawall will be 12.5 meters
high, 900 meters long, and durable enough, the UK regulator and French
engineers say, to withstand the strongest storm surge, the greatest
tsunami, and the highest sea-level rise.
But will it? Independent nuclear consultant Pete Roche, a former adviser
to the UK government and Greenpeace, points out that the tidal range
along this stretch of coast is one of the highest in the world, and that
erosion is heavy. Indeed, observers reported serious flooding on the
site in 1981 when an earlier nuclear power station had to be shut down
for a week, following a spring tide and a storm surge. However well
built, says Roche, the new seawall does not adequately take into account
sea-level rise due to climate change.
"The wall is strong, but the plans were drawn up in 2012, before the
increasing volume of melting of the Greenland ice cap was properly
understood and when most experts thought there was no net melting in the
Antarctic," he says. "Now estimates of sea level rise in the next 50
years have gone up from less than 30 centimeters to more than a meter,
well within the operating lifespan of Hinkley Point C-let alone in 100
years time when the reactors are finally decommissioned or the even
longer period when spent nuclear fuel is likely to be stored on site."
In fact, research by Ensia suggests that at least 100 US, European, and
Asian nuclear power stations built just a few meters above sea level
could be threatened by serious flooding caused by accelerating sea-level
rise and more frequent storm surges.
Some efforts are underway to prepare for increased flooding risk in the
future. But a number of scientific papers published in 2018 suggest that
climate change will impact coastal nuclear plants earlier and harder
than the industry, governments, or regulatory bodies have expected, and
that the safety standards set by national nuclear regulators and the
United Nations' nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA), are out of date and take insufficient account of the effects of
climate change on nuclear power.
https://www.hakaimagazine.com/features/are-coastal-nuclear-power-plants-ready-for-sea-level-rise/
- - - - -
[See for yourself]
*Mapped: The world's nuclear power plants
<https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-the-worlds-nuclear-power-plants>*
To help provide a global overview of the nuclear power sector both today
and throughout its history, Carbon Brief has produced this interactive map.
It shows the location, operating status and generating capacity of all
667 reactors that have been built, or are under construction, around the
world, ever since Russia's tiny Obninsk plant became the first to supply
power to the grid in 1954.
https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-the-worlds-nuclear-power-plants
- - -- -
[locates, but does not show elevation]
*The Database on Nuclear Power Reactors <https://pris.iaea.org/pris/>*
https://pris.iaea.org/pris/
[Some fundamental science]
*The villain in the atmosphere is carbon dioxide
<http://climatestate.com/2018/08/25/the-villain-in-the-atmosphere-by-isaac-asimov/>*
*by Isaac Asimov* - First published July 1986
It does not seem to be a villain. It is not very poisonous and it is
present in the atmosphere in so small a quantity that it does us no
harm. For every 1,000,000 cubic feet of air there are only 340 cubic
feet of carbon dioxide - only 0.034 percent.
What's more, that small quantity of carbon dioxide in the air is
essential to life. Plants absorb carbon dioxide and convert it into
their own tissues, which serve as the basic food supply for all of
animal life (including human beings, of course). In the process, they
liberate oxygen, which is also necessary for all animal life.
But here is what this apparently harmless and certainly essential gas is
doing to us
The sea level is rising very slowly from year to year. The high tides
tend to be progressively higher, even in quiet weather, and storms
batter at breakwaters more and more effectively, erode the beaches more
savagely, batter houses farther inland.
In all likelihood, the sea level will continue to rise and do so at a
greater rate in the course of the next hundred years. This means that
the line separating ocean from land will retreat inland everywhere. It
will do so only slightly where high land abouts the ocean. In those
places, however, where there are low-lying coastal areas (where a large
fraction of humanity lives) the water will advance steadily and
inexorably and people will have to retreat inland.
It is not only that people will be forced to retreat by the millions and
that virtually all of Long Island will become part of the shallow
offshore sea bottom, leaving only a line of small islands running east
to west, marking off what had been the island's highest points.
Eventually the sea will reach a maximum of two hundred feet above the
present water level, and will be splashing against the windows along the
twentieth floors of Manhattan's skyscrapers. Naturally the Manhattan
streets will be deep under water, as will the New Jersey shoreline and
all of Delaware. Florida, too, will be gone, as will much of the British
Isles, the northwestern European coast, the crowded Nile valley, and the
low-lying areas of China, India, and the Soviet Union.
Many cities will be drowned, but much of the most productive farming
areas of the world will be lost. Although the change will not be
overnight, and though people will have time to leave and carry with them
such of their belongings as they can, there will not be room in the
continental interiors for all of them. As the food supply plummets with
the ruin of farming areas, starvation will be rampant and the structure
of society may collapse under the unbearable pressures.
And all because of carbon dioxide. But how does that come about? What is
the connection?
It begins with sunlight, to which the various gases of the atmosphere
(including carbon dioxide) are transparent. Sunlight, striking the top
of the atmosphere, travels right through miles of it to reach the
Earth's surface, where it is absorbed. In this way, the Earth is warmed.
The Earth's surface doesn't get too hot, because at night the Earth's
heat radiates into space in the form of infrared radiation. As the Earth
gains heat by day and loses it by night, it maintains an overall
temperature balance to which Earthly life is well-adapted.
However, the atmosphere is not quite as transparent to infrared
radiation as it is to visible light. Carbon dioxide in particular tends
to be opaque to that radiation. Less heat is lost at night, for that
reason, than would be lost if carbon dioxide were not present in the
atmosphere. Without the small quantity of that gas present, the Earth
would be distinctly cooler on the whole, perhaps a bit uncomfortably cool.
This is called the "greenhouse effect" of carbon dioxide. It is so
called because the glass of greenhouses lets sunshine in but prevents
the loss of heat. For that reason it is warm inside a greenhouse on
sunny days even when the temperature is low.
We can be thankful that carbon dioxide is keeping us comfortably warm,
but the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is going up
steadily and that is where the villainy comes in. In 1958, when the
carbon dioxide of the atmosphere first began to be measured carefully,
it made up only 0.0316 percent of the atmosphere. Each year since, the
concentration has crept upward and it now stands at 0.0340 percent. It
is estimated that by 2020 the concentration will be about 0.0660
percent, or nearly twice what it is now.
This means that in the coming decades, Earth's average temperature will
go up slightly. Winters will grow a bit milder on the average and
summers a bit hotter. That may not seem frightening. Milder winters
don't seem bad, and as for hotter summers, we can just run our
air-conditioners a bit more.
But consider this: If winters in general grow milder, less snow will
fall during the cold season. If summers in general grow hotter, more
snow will melt during the warm season. That means that, little by
little, the snow line will move away from the equator and toward the
poles. The glaciers will retreat, the mountain tops will grow more bare,
and the polar ice caps will begin to melt.
That might be annoying to skiers and to other devotees of winter sports,
but would it necessarily bother the rest of us? After all, if the snow
line moves north, it might be possible to grow more food in Canada,
Scandinavia, the Soviet Union, and Patagonia.
Still, if the cold weather moves poleward, then so do the storm belts.
The desert regions that now exist in subtropical areas will greatly
expand, and fertile land gained in the north will be lost in the south.
More may be lost than gained.
It is the melting of the ice caps, though, that is the worst change. It
is this which demonstrates the villainy of carbon dioxide.
Something like 90 percent of the ice in the world is to be found in the
huge Antarctica ice cap, and another 8 percent is in the Greenland ice
cap. In both places the ice is piled miles high. If these ice caps begin
to melt, the water that forms won't stay in place. It will drip down
into the ocean and slowly the sea level will rise, with the results that
I have already described.
Even worse might be in store, for a rising temperature would manage to
release a little of the carbon dioxide that is tied up in vast
quantities of limestone that exist in the Earth's crust. It will also
liberate some of the carbon dioxide dissolved in the ocean. With still
more carbon dioxide, the temperature of the Earth will creep upward a
little more and release still more carbon dioxide.
All this is called the "runaway greenhouse effect," and it may
eventually make Earth an uninhabitable planet.
But, as you can see, it is not carbon dioxide in itself that is the
source of the trouble; it is the fact that the carbon dioxide
concentration in the atmosphere is steadily rising and seems to be
doomed to continue rising. Why is that?
To blame are two factors. First of all, in the last few centuries, first
coal, then oil and natural gas, have been burned for energy at a rapidly
increasing rate. The carbon contained in these fuels, which has been
safely buried underground for many millions of years, is now being
burned to carbon dioxide and poured into the atmosphere at a rate of
many tons per day.
Some of that additional carbon dioxide may be absorbed by the soil or by
the ocean, and some might be consumed by plant life, but the fact is
that a considerable fraction of it remains in the atmosphere. It must,
for the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere is going up year by year.
To make matters worse, Earth's forests have been disappearing, slowly at
first, but in the last couple of centuries quite rapidly. Right now it
is disappearing at the rate of sixty-four acres per minute.
Whatever replaces the forest- grasslands or farms or scrub- produces
plants that do not consume carbon dioxide at a rate equal to that of
forest. Thus, not only is more carbon dioxide being added to the
atmosphere through the burning of fuel, but as the forests disappear,
less carbon dioxide is being subtracted from the atmosphere by plants.
But this gives us a new perspective on the matter. The carbon dioxide is
not rising by itself. It is people who are burning the coal, oil, and
gas, because of their need for energy. It is people who are cutting down
the forests, because of their need for farmland. And the two are
connected, for the burning of coal and oil is producing acid rain which
helps destroy the forests. It is people, then, who are the villains.
What is to be done?
First, we must save our forests, and even replant them. From forests,
properly conserved, we get wood, chemicals, soil retention, ecological
health- and a slowdown of carbon dioxide increase.
Second, we must have new sources of fuel. There are, after all, fuels
that do not involve the production of carbon dioxide. Nuclear fission is
one of them, and if that is deemed too dangerous for other reasons,
there is the forthcoming nuclear fusion, which may be safer. There is
also the energy of waves, tides, wind, and the Earth's interior heat.
Most of all, there is the direct use of solar energy.
All of this will take time, work, and money, to be sure, but all that
time, work, and money will be invested in order to save our civilization
and our planet itself.
After all, humanity seems to be willing to spend more time, work, and
money in order to support competing military machines that can only
destroy us all. Should we begrudge less time, work, and money in order
to save us all?
Source
https://archive.org/details/66EssaysOnThePastPresentAndFuture
Releases
1986 6-Jul-86, Newsday "Are We Drowning Our Tomorrows?"
http://www.asimovonline.com/oldsite/Essays/other_essays.html
1987 https://www.amazon.com/Past-Present-Future-Isaac-Asimov/dp/0879753935
http://climatestate.com/2018/08/25/the-villain-in-the-atmosphere-by-isaac-asimov/
*This Day in Climate History - August 26, 2013
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xua78w7e4DA> - from D.R. Tucker*
August 26, 2013: 350.org releases a video recommending that hurricanes
be named after politicians who assert that human-caused climate change
is a hoax.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xua78w7e4DA
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
//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/20180826/66272a6a/attachment.html>
More information about the TheClimate.Vote
mailing list