[TheClimate.Vote] December 12, 2018 - Daily Global Warming News Digest

[Richard Pauli]

/December 12, 2018/

[Death spike over 75 yrs old]
*Swiss Court Rejects Grannies' Climate Plea 
<https://www.climateliabilitynews.org/2018/12/11/swiss-grannies-climate-change/>*
By Lisa Sturdee
A Swiss court has ruled that senior women are not more likely than other 
citizens to suffer the harmful effects of climate change--despite their 
increased death rate during heatwaves.

The ruling, handed down last week by the Swiss Federal Administrative 
Court, ruled against the group of more than 450 older women, Senior 
Women for Climate Protection, which was formed in August 2016 with the 
help of Greenpeace Switzerland. The group collected evidence showing how 
climate change uniquely affects women over the age of 75.

More frequent and extreme heatwaves impact older women more than any 
other demographic as they are more likely to become seriously ill and to 
die. The Swiss Ministry of Health advises them to stay indoors when the 
temperature tops 30 degrees Celsius (86 degrees F). However, confining 
themselves at home makes them more likely to become isolated and to lose 
precious mobility, which is hard to regain once a heatwave is over...
- - -
The next step is to take the case to the Swiss Federal Supreme Court.

Pia Hollenstein, press officer for the group, said that she expects the 
group to vote for appeal. She said the group had always been determined 
to take the case to the European Court of Human Rights, if necessary.

Hollenstein said the group decided to start legal proceedings because 
the government's actions were inadequate and the political process was 
taking too long. They also hoped to spark more public debate, influence 
future legislation and take part in the global movement to bring climate 
change cases.

Hollenstein said the group's members are disappointed, angry and 
frustrated by the decision, but they remain optimistic.
"It's in no-one's interest to have [a] catastrophe," she said.
https://www.climateliabilitynews.org/2018/12/11/swiss-grannies-climate-change/


[Video lecture a scientist does his work 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iuYH7YN6T00]
*Feeling the Heat: The Biology of Ocean Warming*
University of California Television (UCTV)
Published on Dec 7, 2018
(Visit: http://www.uctv.tv/)
0:13 - Introduction: Harry Helling
2:00 - Main Presentation: Ron Burton
49:26 - Audience Questions
Earth's changing climate provides a natural laboratory for examining how 
organisms evolve adaptations to environmental extremes. As climate 
change accelerates, an obvious question arises: can evolution keep up 
with rapid change or are most species likely to go extinct as 
temperatures rise? Join Scripps Oceanography biologist Ron Burton as he 
describes the cutting-edge genetic tools he uses to understand how 
populations of tidepool animals cope with rapid temperature changes and 
how evolution has shaped those responses across the geographic range of 
each species. Recorded on 10/08/2018. Series: "Jeffrey B. Graham 
Perspectives on Ocean Science Lecture Series" [12/2018] [Show ID: 33840]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iuYH7YN6T00


[Climate & Migration Coalition]
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvy1MtGYMagn7MEwcSxTxHg
How many climate refugees will there be? 
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2-YgYyni7E>
Climate & Migration Coalition
Published on Oct 1, 2018
*Climate refugee statistics: the definition problem*
This is a very difficult question to answer, mainly because it's 
difficult to define exactly what a climate refugee is. To have reliable 
statistics on anything, you need to be able to define what it is you are 
counting. Unfortunately defining who counts as a climate refugee is 
almost impossible. (But stick with us to the end and we promise there 
will be some useful alternatives).
This is because when people move as a result of climate change impacts 
there are usually other forces that cause them to move too. Climate 
change impacts cannot usually be singled out as the sole reason why 
someone moves. Even in cases where climate change is very clearly part 
of the picture it is still difficult.

*Consider this comparison:*
Many of the low lying areas of the Mekong Delta in Vietnam are only a 
few meters above sea level. With a few meters of sea level rise (caused 
by climate change) some areas will become uninhabitable and the people 
will have to move. Will these people count as climate refugees?
Now consider the low lying areas of The Netherlands. They are just as 
low as many areas of the Mekong, but they are much better protected by 
defences and dams. So when people move away from the Mekong Delta, are 
they moving because of climate change, or are they moving because a lack 
of infrastructure protecting the land?

*Of course the answer is "both".*
But what this shows is that climate change is always one force along 
with several others that mean that people have to move. Because of this 
it becomes very difficult to come up with a good way of defining who 
counts as a climate refugee. And without that definition it is 
impossible to come up with reliable statistics.

*Can there be reliable climate refugee statistics?*
Here is the dilemma: just because we can't define or count climate 
refugees, doesn't mean that climate change has no influence on migration 
and displacement. It absolutely does.

Just because we can't count "climate refugees" doesn't mean that in the 
future there might be more people who have climate change amongst the 
causes of their migration or displacement.

*One useful way to think about it is with analogy to health:*
It is certainly true that eating a lot high fat food can lead to a heart 
attack later in life. But eating lots of bacon probably isn't enough to 
give you a heart attack. It needs to be combined with other lifestyle 
factors – lack of exercise for example – before it starts to increase 
the risk.
So while an increase in bacon intake amongst a population might increase 
the rate of heart attacks, it would be wrong to label all of those 
people as "bacon victims".
Sometimes these analogies can seem daft, but we've found them very 
useful in explaining complex relationships.

*So are there climate refugee statistics I can use?*
Yes and no.
We tend not to use the common "headline" statistics like "250 million 
climate refugees by 2050" for all the reasons explained here. But there 
are reliable statistics on the number of people who are displaced by 
disasters.
The Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre produces annual estimates of 
the number of people displaced by disasters. These estimates are broken 
down by disaster-type and country.
For example we know that last year 24 million people were displayed by 
weather related disasters like floods and hurricanes. These people 
aren't "climate refugees" but these statistics do help paint a picture 
of the scale of current displacement – and help us think about what the 
future might be like if climate change makes disasters worse.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2-YgYyni7E
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvy1MtGYMagn7MEwcSxTxHg


[NPR radio]
*Jerry Brown's Exit Interview: Don't Say He Didn't Warn You 
<https://www.npr.org/2018/12/11/675608702/jerry-browns-exit-interview-don-t-say-he-didn-t-warn-you>*
December 11, 2018
Heard on All Things Considered
BEN ADLER
If all the world goes to hell, don't say Jerry Brown didn't try to warn you.
"The climate [change] threat is real. It's a clear and present danger," 
the unconventional and legendary Democrat who will soon term out as 
California governor told NPR's Ari Shapiro Tuesday in an interview 
airing on All Things Considered. "And it's going to get here much 
sooner" than many people realize.

"It's damn dangerous," Brown said of a possible nuclear war destroying 
much of the world in mere moments. "And I would say most politicians are 
100 percent asleep with respect to this particular issue."

He also discussed a booming economy that has nevertheless left many 
working Americans (and Californians) behind: "The engine of capitalism, 
which is so powerful — it has its negative, dark side as well as its 
bright and shiny side."..
- - -
He spoke in the waning days of a political career that has spanned more 
than 50 years, a record four terms as California governor — from 
1975-1983 and since 2011 — and three unsuccessful runs for president, in 
1976, 1980 and 1990. Democratic Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom will take over 
the world's fifth-largest economy early next year.

In his final years as governor, and particularly after Donald Trump's 
election as president, Brown sought to position himself as a worldwide 
leader on climate change. He has traveled to the Vatican, met with 
Chinese President Xi Jinping, and taken on a formal role with the United 
Nations. The man once mocked as "Governor Moonbeam" during his first 
stint leading California even hosted his own Global Climate Action 
Summit in San Francisco this fall that culminated in an announcement 
that the state will launch its own satellite to help track and reduce 
climate pollutants.
Brown worries, however, that the momentum from the Paris climate accord 
has waned and describes this month's United Nations follow-up climate 
conference in Poland as "abysmal."...
https://www.npr.org/2018/12/11/675608702/jerry-browns-exit-interview-don-t-say-he-didn-t-warn-you


[Control engineering technologies]
*Is global warming like level control? 
<https://www.controlglobal.com/articles/2018/is-global-warming-like-level-control/>*
Comparing the processes sheds light on the problem of regulating Earth's 
temperature.
Dec 05, 2018
This column is moderated by Béla Lipták, automation and safety 
consultant and editor of the Instrument and Automation Engineers' 
Handbook (IAEH). If you have an automation-related question for this 
column, write to liptakbela at aol.com.
Q: In a previous column, you wrote that understanding the control of 
global warming is very similar to understanding level control. Could you 
explain this in more detail? In what respect are the two processes similar?
- - -
Since the beginning of the industrial revolution, humans gradually took 
over this control from nature, CO2 concentration in the atmosphere 
increased from 280 to more than 410 ppm, and it's predicted by most 
models that it will reach or even exceed 500 ppm by the end of this century.
If a control engineer was to bring this process under control by 
returning CO2 concentration to the stable, pre-industrial state, the 
task would be to balance the in and outflows of this tank, and on top of 
that, remove roughly half of the CO2 that accumulated during the 
industrial age. If a conventional level controller was installed on this 
tank, it would see an error of 410 – 280 = 130 ppm and a past error 
accumulation of some 400-500 Gt (gigatons) of carbon. It would 
immediately close the inlet valve and open the outlet valve.
Unfortunately, in this process, these valves are stuck. The outflow from 
the tank (the CO2 intake of the plants and dissipation by the oceans) 
can't be increased. In fact, it has probably decreased during the past 
century because of deforestation, acidification of the oceans, and 
building of dams/reservoirs, holding 8,000 km3 of water, which also emit 
carbon to the atmosphere. In short, this outlet valve is almost 
completely stuck, and we have no technology to open it further except 
reforestation, which is unlikely due to overpopulation (during the 
industrial age, population increased from 1.0 to 9.0 billion)...
https://www.controlglobal.com/articles/2018/is-global-warming-like-level-control/


[*first section in series- Being with the Suffering 
<https://www.lionsroar.com/first-do-no-harm/?mc_cid=651927711b&mc_eid=0f3d41a2e1>*]
BY STEPHANIE KAZA - OCTOBER 10, 2018
Environmentalist Stephanie Kaza invites us to consider how Buddhist 
principles can help us nurse the planet back to health.
*First Do No Harm*
Environmentalist Stephanie Kaza invites us to consider how Buddhist 
principles can help us nurse the planet back to health.
Being with suffering means learning about what is going on in a given 
environmental conflict. The four noble truths can be applied as a 
framework for diagnosis by posing four questions, each question 
corresponding to one of the truths: First, what is the environmental 
problem or suffering? Second, what are the causes of the suffering? 
Third, what would put an end to the suffering? And fourth, what is the 
path to realize this goal?

*Being with the Suffering*
If you look at the state of the world today, the suffering—of plants and 
animals, forests and rivers, and local and indigenous peoples—is 
enormous. Global agriculture, urban sprawl, and industrial development 
have caused wide-scale loss of habitat, many local-species extinctions, 
severe land and water degradation, and unstable climate. In the last 
century, the rate of loss has accelerated significantly, to the point of 
threatening ecosystem health and the continuity of life.

The first noble truth begins with the suffering that arises from the 
inevitability of change and loss. Facing this suffering and the 
delusions it generates is where Buddhist practice begins. In the 
precepts of the Order of Interbeing, Thich Nhat Hanh urges, "Do not 
avoid contact with suffering or close your eyes before suffering." He 
directs students to be present with suffering to understand the nature 
of existence. This requires patience and equanimity in the face of 
disturbing realities—a clear-cut forest reduced to stumps, a once-lush 
river deadened by chemical waste, a coral reef blasted by dynamite 
fishing. It is not easy to gaze clear-eyed at these troubling results of 
human activity.

Most of the time we would rather not think about the suffering caused by 
our actions. Yet from a Buddhist perspective, this is the best place to 
start, for it is grounded in reality, not idealized projection. Mindful 
awareness is all about direct experience of the actual state of things. 
The authenticity of such perception is freeing and motivating at the 
same time. Practices that quiet and focus the mind can provide a stable 
mental base from which to observe the whole catastrophe of human impact. 
To be with environmental suffering means being willing to be with the 
suffering produced by your own cultural conditioning toward 
other-than-human beings. Those of us in the West have been raised to see 
forests and rivers as potential resources. Human-centered views are one 
of the greatest deterrents to being fully present with other living 
beings. If you see the environment as primarily for human use—whether 
for food, shelter, recreation, or spiritual development—you may not see 
how others suffer under the thumb of human dominance.

Being with suffering means learning about what is going on in a given 
environmental conflict. The four noble truths can be applied as a 
framework for diagnosis by posing four questions, each question 
corresponding to one of the truths: First, what is the environmental 
problem or suffering? Second, what are the causes of the suffering? 
Third, what would put an end to the suffering? And fourth, what is the 
path to realize this goal?

This analysis is deceptively simple, yet it can be quite radical if you 
include all forms of suffering—that of people, animals, trees, species, 
habitats, and ecosystems. This method of diagnosis provides 
straightforward guidelines for how to become informed, and therefore 
more able to bear witness to the suffering involved. It also provides 
analytical balance to the emotions you inevitably feel when you glimpse 
another being's suffering...
much more at - 
https://www.lionsroar.com/first-do-no-harm/?mc_cid=651927711b&mc_eid=0f3d41a2e1


[Predictions posted in 2006 uncovered via archive.org]
*Tipping Points - the Facts*
When the temperature gets high enough to cause forests to give up their 
CO2 rather than sequest it, then every tonne of gas given up to the air 
increases the temperature and causes even more gas to be given up. This 
is a tipping point - an irreversable moment when the dreaded feeback 
loop begins.
This is now the central issue for the scientific community: have humans 
already have gone too far, and may we now be helpless to stop abrupt and 
runnaway global warming.
These ten major tipping points are are right at this moment being triggered.

-Melting glaciers will raise sea levels so that less heat is
reflected out to space
-Decline of the flow of fresh water from the Arctic will collapse
the Gulf Stream
-Forests will no longer absorb carbon, but become a source.
-Methane clathrates held in the mud under the sea begin to burp
-Melting permafrost releases vast quantities of methane
-Drought kills the Amazon forest and its carbon sink is released
-The benefits of being shielded by global dimming ceases
-Bush fires increase the carbon load and reduce the storage capacity
of forests
-As oceans warm the seas absorb less carbon
-All the above plus disastrous weather and coral bleaching and
acidification of the oceans disrupt food production

Triggering any one of these ten carbon sinks would cause runaway 
greenhouse warming.
The triggering of any one of them would start off the others.
The earth has over eons stored greenhouse gasses in forests, the soil 
and in the oceans. Recent scientific research has shown that small rises 
in temperature can trigger these sinks into becoming sources, and thus 
tip the scales against our survival.
Only now, in the past five years, has the scientific community begun to 
pat serious attention to them. We do not know if they will be triggered 
today or in decades, It seems there is a ten percent possibility that 
feedback loops from glacial-meltdown, permafrost methane burping and/or 
rainforest collapse will commence within the next few years.
Only intense and immediate action beyond anything the world has ever 
done can stop this.
https://web.archive.org/web/20070114174408/http://www.planetextinction.com:80/planet_extinction_tipping_points.htm


*This Day in Climate History - December 12, 2014 - from D.R. Tucker*
December 12, 2014 - The New York Times reports:

"When it comes to global warming, the United States has long been
viewed as one of the world's worst actors. American officials have
been booed and hissed during international climate talks, bestowed
with mock 'Fossil of the Day' awards for resisting treaties, and
widely condemned for demanding that other nations cut their fossil
fuel emissions while refusing, year after year, to take action at home.

"Suddenly, all that has changed.

"At the global climate change negotiations now wrapping up in Peru,
American negotiators are being met with something wildly unfamiliar:
cheers, applause, thanks and praise.

"It is an incongruous moment, arriving at a time when so many
aspects of American foreign policy are under fire.

"But the enthusiastic reception on climate issues comes a month
after a historic announcement by the United States and China, the
world's two largest polluters, that they would jointly commit to cut
their emissions. Many international negotiators say the deal is the
catalyst that could lead to a new global climate change accord that
would, for the first time, commit every nation in the world to
cutting its own planet-warming emissions.

"The American policy that helped prod China -- and change the
international perception of the United States — is one of President
Obama's most contentious domestic decisions. His June announcement
that he would use his executive authority to push through an
aggressive set of regulations on coal-fired power plants in the
United States — the nation's largest source of greenhouse gas
pollution — set off a firestorm of legal, political and legislative
opposition at home. Critics have called it a 'war on coal' that
could devastate the American economy.

"But in the arena of international climate change negotiations, it
has fundamentally transformed the feeling toward his administration.

"'The U.S. is now credible on climate change,' said Laurence
Tubiana, the French climate change ambassador to the United Nations,
who is leading efforts to broker a new agreement to be signed by
world leaders in Paris next year.

"Veterans of two decades of climate change negotiations called the
turnaround in America's image profound."

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/12/world/strange-climate-event-warmth-toward-the-us.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 
<mailto:contact at theclimate.vote> with subject subscribe, To Unsubscribe, 
subject: unsubscribe
Also you may subscribe/unsubscribe at 
https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/theclimate.vote
Links and headlines assembled and curated by Richard Pauli for 
http://TheClimate.Vote <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.