[TheClimate.Vote] February 16, 2018 - Daily Global Warming News Digest

[Richard Pauli]

/February 16, 2018/

[The Independent]
*First ship crosses Arctic in winter without an icebreaker as global 
warming causes ice sheets to melt 
<http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/arctic-sea-route-first-ship-no-icebreaker-winter-icebergs-ice-shelf-teekay-russia-a8208596.html>*
A ship has made a winter crossing of the Arctic without an icebreaker 
for the first time as global warming causes the region's ice sheets to 
melt. The tanker, containing liquefied natural gas, is the first 
commercial vessel to make such a crossing alone during the winter 
months. The voyage is a significant ...
"Inevitably, this has caused massive changes, with most of the Arctic 
ice having already disappeared. And so now, ironically, we can deliver 
fossil fuels more quickly. It's like a heavy smoker using his 
tracheotomy to smoke two cigarettes at once."
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/arctic-sea-route-first-ship-no-icebreaker-winter-icebergs-ice-shelf-teekay-russia-a8208596.html


[theGuardian]
*News network climate reporting soared in 2017 thanks to Trump**
* 
<https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2018/feb/15/news-network-climate-reporting-soared-in-2017-thanks-to-trump>*But 
the networks need to improve reporting on climate events unrelated to Trump*
In 2016,US TV network news coverage of climate change plummeted 
<https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2017/mar/27/pbs-is-the-only-network-reporting-on-climate-change-trump-wants-to-cut-it>. 
News coverage was focused on the presidential election, but the 
corporate broadcast networks didn't air a single segment informing 
viewers how a win by Trump or Hillary Clinton could affect climate 
change or climate policy. That followeda slight drop in news coverage of 
climate change in 2015 
<https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2016/mar/07/during-the-most-important-year-for-climate-news-tv-coverage-fell>, 
despite that year being full of critical events likethe Paris climate 
accords 
<https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2015/dec/14/the-paris-agreement-signals-that-deniers-have-lost-the-climate-wars>,Clean 
Power Plan 
<https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2013/jun/25/climate-change-carbon-emissions-president-obama-epa>, 
andrecord-breaking heat 
<https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2016/jan/25/record-hot-2015-gave-us-a-glimpse-at-the-future-of-global-warming>.
The good news is thatthe annual analysis done by Media Matters for 
America 
<https://www.mediamatters.org/research/2018/02/12/how-broadcast-tv-networks-covered-climate-change-2017/219277> 
found that in 2017, network news coverage of climate change soared. 
/(report not from a US-based news outlet)/
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2018/feb/15/news-network-climate-reporting-soared-in-2017-thanks-to-trump


[Time magazine video]*
**Scientists Just Issued a Grim New Warning on Climate Change: 'We Are 
Not Prepared' 
<http://time.com/5156775/climate-change-paris-agreement-research/>*
New research shows that countries around the world are falling short of 
greenhouse gas goals in the Paris climate deal, and the consequences 
will likely be unprecedented extreme weather.
Published in the journal Science Advances this week, the study found 
that the likelihood of extreme heat, dryness and precipitation will 
increase across as much of 90% of North America, Europe and East Asia if 
countries do not accelerate their efforts to reduce greenhouse gas 
emissions...
http://time.com/5156775/climate-change-paris-agreement-research/


[VOX]
*Trump's top spy just contradicted the White House's line on climate 
change 
<https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/2/15/17016952/climate-change-security-threat-cia>*
The director of national intelligence warned Congress that climate 
change could cause "upheaval" this year.
Umair Irfan Feb 15, 2018
The top US intelligence official warned Congress this week about the 
threat of "abrupt" climate change, contradicting the Trump 
administration's efforts to drive climate out of national security 
discussions.
Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, whose office oversees 17 
intelligence agencies including the CIA and the NSA, submitted written 
testimony this week to the Senate Intelligence Committee. In addition to 
warnings about Russian interference in the upcoming midterm election and 
the militarization of space, he identified climate change as a 
significant concern.
"The impacts of the long-term trends toward a warming climate, more air 
pollution, biodiversity loss, and water scarcity are likely to fuel 
economic and social discontent  -  and possibly upheaval  - through 
2018," Coats wrote.
He noted that the past 115 years were the warmest in modern civilization 
and that the past few years were the warmest on record. And there's a 
possibility of a sudden shift in the global climate once it reaches a 
tipping point, he said.
Coats also observed that worsening air pollution is causing unrest in 
countries like India, water scarcity is driving tensions between 
nations, and ecosystems threatened by rising temperatures could 
jeopardize "critical human systems."
This assessment follows testimony from Defense Secretary James Mattis, 
who earlier this month told lawmakers that climate change is an integral 
part of military planning.
"This is a normal part of what the military does, and under any 
strategy, it is part and parcel," he told the House Armed Services 
Committee...
Coats's remarks show that the practical realities of climate change are 
impossible to ignore for those who have to contend with its real-world 
consequences. And as temperatures rise, Trump, his Cabinet, and the 
entire national security apparatus will increasingly have to contend 
with rising seas, more intense weather, and the devastation that ensues.
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/2/15/17016952/climate-change-security-threat-cia


[GOP changes?]
*A Climate Caucus Has Turned Into a Magnet for House Republicans. Wait, 
What? 
<https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2018/02/a-climate-caucus-has-turned-into-a-magnet-for-house-republicans-wait-what/>*
"They are finding an easy action to get a green badge or a line on their 
resumes."
REBECCA LEBER AND MEGAN JULA
It turns out, despite its name, the Climate Solutions Caucus is a 
hospitable place for many members who do not seem especially concerned 
about global warming. The two-year-old caucus has expanded to 70 
members, half of whom are Republican - and many of them have brought 
controversial records and a questionable commitment to advancing 
legislation in Congress that would protect the environment.
Its critics charge the caucus has expanded its size at the expense of 
its credibility, providing Republicans who have been actively hostile to 
government programs a low-stakes opportunity to "greenwash" their 
climate credentials without backing meaningful action - just in time for 
midterm elections. In fact, many members may be vulnerable in the 2018 
cycle; 24 of the 35 Republican members' districts will be competitive 
races, according to an analysis of The Cook Political Report. 
Republicans in these races could benefit from distancing themselves from 
Trump's climate change denial.
"They are finding an easy action to get a green badge or a line on their 
resumes," says Melinda Pierce, legislative director of the Sierra Club.
Sierra Club's Pierce says the formation of the caucus is a "baby step" 
toward climate solutions. But she says caucus members haven't taken 
enough actions to back up their words. "We just want to encourage them 
to take off the training wheels and actually ride the bike," she says.
There's one more argument for Republicans to advance climate legislation 
now - if Democrats retake Congress, especially by large margins, they 
would have the opportunity to debate more liberal climate policies. 
Lehrer thinks a price on carbon is inevitable, and conservatives won't 
always be in the driver's seat. "I think in the long term it's actually 
close to inevitable that it will pass one way or another," he says. "It 
will be imposed in a way conservatives like me will not like - by 
Democrats - or it will be done in a way that forwards conservative 
goals. I like the latter
https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2018/02/a-climate-caucus-has-turned-into-a-magnet-for-house-republicans-wait-what/https://twitter.com/A_Siegel/status/964156946529046528


[Wx]
*Even with pledges to fight global warming, you'd better brace yourself 
for more extreme weather 
<http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-climate-change-extreme-weather-20180214-story.html>*
Scientists have some sobering news about the future of our planet: Even 
if humans manage to meet the temperature target set forth in the Paris 
climate change agreement, record-breaking weather events will become 
increasingly common around the world.
And that's the good part.
The Paris plan seeks to keep Earth's global average temperature within 2 
degrees Celsius of pre-industrial levels by getting people to reduce 
their carbon emissions. According to the United Nations, 174 countries 
have signed on to the agreement.
However, the actual commitments made by these countries would probably 
allow the global average temperature to rise by as much as 3 degrees 
Celsius. In that case, extreme weather events would become much more 
commonplace almost everywhere on the planet.
http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-climate-change-extreme-weather-20180214-story.html

*
*[Philanthropy]*
What is Bill Gates doing about climate change? 
<https://thebulletin.org/what-bill-gates-doing-about-climate-change11509>*/(answer: 
adaptation, no mitigation)/
By Elisabeth Eaves
Together with his wife, Bill Gates has given away some $27 billion, much 
of it to global health causes through their Bill and Melinda Gates 
Foundation...
The couple writes an annual letter to sum up their philanthropic 
thinking, and this year's, published on Tuesday, is framed as "The 10 
Toughest Questions We Get."...
One of the tough questions they say they get is, "why don't you give 
money to fight climate change?"

    "We do!" Bill says. As he and Melinda explain, they tackle it in two
    ways. To address climate-change adaptation, they pursue a
    traditional philanthropic approach. Melinda writes, "the world needs
    to adapt to what's happening now and what we know is coming. That's
    why our foundation's work, especially in global agriculture, is
    increasingly focused on climate issues."

She goes on to point out: "Hundreds of millions of people in developing 
countries depend on farming for their livelihoods. They had almost 
nothing to do with causing climate change, but they will suffer the most 
from it. When extreme weather ruins their harvest, they won't have food 
to eat that year."
One solution the Gates Foundation is pursuing is developing varieties of 
"climate-smart crops" that are less susceptible to extreme weather and 
resistant to drought, flood, and disease.
For strategies to limit carbon emissions, though, the Gateses don't go 
through the foundation but instead invest their own money in 
technologies being developed by the private sector. Why this approach?
"In philanthropy," Bill writes, "you look for problems that can't be 
fixed by the market or governments. The clean-energy problem can be 
fixed by both - as long as governments fund basic research and create 
incentives to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and investors are patient 
while companies turn that research into marketable products."
Those are some pretty important conditions, and with a US administration 
intent on cutting research budgets and rolling back environmental 
regulations, the government piece currently looks insufficient. 
Proponents of renewable and nuclear energy have pointed out for years 
that for non-fossil-fuel energy sources to really find market success, 
*a carbon tax will be required.* No US state has yet passed one.
Which is why adaptation is required too. "Even breakthrough technology 
can't stop the weather from changing," Melinda says.
https://thebulletin.org/what-bill-gates-doing-about-climate-change11509
-
[2009 opinion and criticism]
*First Person: Prodding the sacred cow 
<https://www.seattlepi.com/local/opinion/article/First-Person-Prodding-the-sacred-cow-1301367.php>*
By RICHARD PAULI, GUEST COLUMNIST Published  March 1, 2009
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the world’s largest philanthropy, 
has overlooked the biggest threat to human health and human future - the 
increasing rate of climate destabilization from global warming.
Last year the Foundation co-chairman said about Global Warming: "The 
fact of the matter is we don’t think about it".   I urge you to change 
that immediately to state:  "Every individual, organization and state 
should be thinking about climate change now".
For too long the Gates Foundation ignored extensive research that 
concludes global warming and climate destabilization has extended and 
amplified disease and other human health problems .  Your science 
advisers can tell you that global warming is caused, enhanced and 
accelerated by carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere by industrial 
civilization.  The biggest danger to our future is that we may fail to 
regulate CO2 output  Continued global warming causes sea levels to rise 
which will increase disease vector populations .
If eradicating malaria is the goal then you must regard the compelling 
data and devastating forces of a changing climate.  All of the awesomely 
great works by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation can be undone by the 
horrible realities of Global Warming to come.  If you truly want to 
support human health and nurture prosperity, then you need to refocus 
and modify priorities in a way that respects climate change.
The investment policy for the Foundation Trust forbids trading in 
tobacco stock since that industry so obviously harms health. Similarly, 
I ask you to halt investments in carbon fuel companies and other 
polluting industries.  You may derive revenue from over $1 billion 
invested in oil company stocks, but the resulting greenhouse gas 
emissions will further increase the rate of warming.  Until you decide 
how best to be part of the solution, please don’t be part of the 
problem.  You should completely divest from any hydro-carbon energy 
company stock holdings.
We all praise the Gates Foundation for generosity and laudatory good 
works saving lives and giving hope for the future.  But gradually, 
inexorably, everyone is beginning to feel the aggravation, pain and real 
suffering from our destabilizing climate.  To further 
ignore/[mitigating]/ the problem is misguided, shortsighted and 
squanders the opportunity for change.
At the very least, you should accept climate change as a real cause of 
suffering, and include it when evaluating the global health metrics that 
underlie your good works.  With such an honest view, others can share in 
your objective: for all people to have healthy and productive lives.
Failure to act is the biggest sin. Knowledgeable people of wealth and 
power should take a stand - because it is right, because it is needed 
and because inaction brings harm to us all
Richard Pauli    February 2009
Cross posted in the Seattle PI First Person opinion March 2, 2009
https://www.seattlepi.com/local/opinion/article/First-Person-Prodding-the-sacred-cow-1301367.php


[Video report of current papers]
*Climate Restoration with Carbon Dioxide Removal 
<https://youtu.be/NLpWUdx0rJ4>*
Paul Beckwith
Published on Feb 14, 2018
Slashing global fossil fuel emissions is necessary, but no longer 
sufficient to restore our climate to stability. The good news is that we 
are not defenceless. To restore climate stability it is essential that 
we also deploy CDR (carbon dioxide removal) to remove CO2 from the 
atmosphere. Following up on my last video, I discuss key technologies to 
achieve this, like enhanced weathering, DAC (direct air capture), 
biochar, and ocean fertilization. Trying all these makes sense, although 
my money is on the latter being the most promising.
https://youtu.be/NLpWUdx0rJ4
*

*[Iron stimulates photosynthesis]*
**Key to predicting climate change could be blowing in the wind* 
<https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/02/180215105713.htm>
Dust that blew into the North Pacific Ocean could help explain why the 
Earth's climate cooled 2.7 million years ago, according to a new study.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/02/180215105713.htm


[climate migrations]
*The two borderless challenges of our time: Migration and climate change 
<https://us6.campaign-archive.com/?e=[UNIQID]&u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&id=21d82c41a6>*
*Civil society response to the Zero Draft of the UN**'s Global Compact 
for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration*
There are over a quarter billion migrants and refugees in the world. 
Over 5,000 died last year on their dangerous journeys. The United 
Nations has been moved to act.
Governments are currently negotiating a Global Compact on Safe, Orderly 
and Regular Migration. The agreement is meant to protect the rights of 
those displaced and help address the root economic, environmental and 
social drivers that are compelling people to leave their communities and 
countries.
Last week, the UN released its draft agreement 
<https://refugeesmigrants.un.org/sites/default/files/180205_gcm_zero_draft_final.pdf> 
and will have until December to negotiate the final details. A key area 
where the document falls short is on commitments to tackle the primary 
causes of migration. A stated aim of the Global Compact is to "mitigate 
the adverse drivers and structural factors that hinder people from 
building and maintaining sustainable livelihoods in their countries of 
origin". However, the current text lacks actionable commitments to 
control the numerous man-made forces underlying global mass migration.
The reasons are different for every migrant and diaspora, but we know 
that natural disasters are the number one cause of internal and 
international displacement. With rising sea levels, desertification and 
extreme weather events, climate action must be a part of any meaningful 
agreement.
"Climate induced displacement is upon us. Coastal communities are being 
evacuated and relocated the world over." Said Emele Duituturaga, 
Executive Director of the Pacific Islands Association of Non 
Governmental Organisations. "Here in sea locked countries of the Pacific 
Ocean, disappearance of our island homes is imminent".
To protect the growing number of climate migrants, a necessary starting 
place for the compact is to  reaffirm the importance of the Paris 
Climate Change Agreement and accelerate efforts to limit global average 
temperature rise to 1.5 degrees C, instead of the more conservative and 
ambiguous target to keep the world "well below" 2 degrees C above 
pre-industrial levels. Missing just one of these targets will lead to 
millions of people being displaced.  The United Nations´ climate science 
panel (The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) gauges that the 
half a degree gap in warming "amounts to a greater likelihood of 
drought, flooding, resource depletion, conflict and forced migration". 
Climate models show us that the additional 0.5 degrees C would  further 
raise sea levels by 10 centimeters and cut crop yields by half across 
the tropics.
 From Fiji to Trinidad and Tobago, from Bangladesh to Morocco, civil 
society groups are calling on their governments to make climate 
mitigation a fundamental pillar of the Global Compact on Migration. Over 
400 civil society groups at International Civil Society Week (Fiji, 
December) signed ajoint declaration on climate induced displacement 
<http://www.civicus.org/icsw/index.php/climate-declaration>,  outlining 
key demands for the Global Compact. Among other recommendations, we are 
urging the UN to address the causes and consequences of migration, 
including:
- Recognize that communities must have key human rights like food, 
water, housing and health protected to reduce the necessity of migration.
- Commit to protect those who are most vulnerable to climate displacement.
- Ensure that those most vulnerable to climate displacement are able to 
participate in the design and governance of the Global Compact.
The upcoming multi-stakeholder consultations 
<https://refugeesmigrants.un.org/multi-stakeholder-hearings-0>on 21 
February and 21 May at UN Headquarters will provide civil society with 
the opportunity to raise the ambition of the Global Compact and to help 
ensure meaningful action is taken to reduce the man-made causes of 
migration and incorporate key recommendations put forth in the joint 
civil society declaration.
https://us6.campaign-archive.com/?e=[UNIQID]&u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&id=21d82c41a6
Draft Agreement 
https://refugeesmigrants.un.org/sites/default/files/180205_gcm_zero_draft_final.pdf


[Book Review]
*Review: 'Water Will Come' offers compelling view of climate-influenced 
future 
<https://www.postandcourier.com/features/review-water-will-come-offers-compelling-view-of-climate-influenced/article_c2088558-05f4-11e8-a007-eb8713367246.html>*
By Jeremy Rutledge*
**THE WATER WILL COME: Rising Seas, Sinking Cities, and the Remaking of 
the Civilized World. By Jeff Goodell. Little, Brown and Company. 340 
Pages. $28.*
In her 1951 book "The Sea Around Us" environmentalist Rachel Carson 
wrote of how we all make our way back to the water from which we came. 
We return "to mother sea only on her own terms." In the world we have 
engineered and built, Carson wrote, we "often forget the true nature of 
(our) planet and the vistas of its history, in which the existence of 
(humankind) has occupied a mere moment of time." Even so, all roads lead 
back the ocean, and a reminder of our place in the order of things.
This is the sense one gets while reading Jeff Goodell's new book, "The 
Water Will Come." Not only do we return to the sea, as Carson suggested, 
but the sea returns to us, rising faster as the effects of climate 
change are felt on our shores...
The climate change he warns us about is not projected onto some distant 
future; it is happening here and now, and Goodell means to show it to us...

    In perhaps the book's starkest passage, Goodell recounts a
    conversation with the Miami developer and Democratic donor Jorge
    Perez. His name now graces the stunning $118 million dollar Perez
    Art Museum Miami, which sits elevated a few feet above Biscayne Bay.
    When Goodell introduced himself as a journalist working on a book
    about sea level rise, Perez turned cold toward him, the author reports.
    Even so, Goodell managed to ask him a few questions: "How is
    sea-level rise changing your thinking about the real estate business
    in South Florida?" "Does it change the design of buildings you're
    building?" "Did it influence the design of this museum?" "Aren't you
    worried that increased flooding in the city will impact the value of
    your real estate holdings?"
    Perez became increasingly annoyed by the questions, answering them
    each with a curt dismissal, until finally he offered this
    exasperating confession: "I believe that in 20 or 30 years someone
    is going to find a solution. ... Besides, by that time, I'll be
    dead, so what does it matter?"

Perez's words hang ominously over Goodell's storytelling because they 
articulate the combination of blind faith, deep denial and selfishness 
that prevent many of us from not only having a substantive conversation 
about sea-level rise but taking meaningful action in response.
Perhaps what "The Water Will Come" does best of all is ask what we will 
do to adapt to rising seas. The longer we bury our heads in the sand, 
Goodell warns, the worse our suffering will be. Countries and 
communities that plan now will fare better in a future that is 
approaching faster than we can imagine.
Herman Melville, our great American chronicler of the ocean, wrote, 
"Consider the subtleness of the sea; how its most dreaded creatures 
glide under water, unapparent for the most part … hidden beneath the 
loveliest hints of azure." The beauty of what is and the danger of what 
is close at hand yet hidden from view are the subject of Goodell's work, 
which could hardly be timelier.
To read it is to wonder about all the conversations we are not having 
and all the work we are not doing here in our Lowcountry home by the 
sea. Goodell reminds us that the water will rise whether we have 
prepared for it or not. Much is hidden beneath the surface of this moment.
Reviewer Jeremy Rutledge is the senior minister at Circular 
Congregational Church in Charleston.
https://www.postandcourier.com/features/review-water-will-come-offers-compelling-view-of-climate-influenced/article_c2088558-05f4-11e8-a007-eb8713367246.html


[TED video]
*An economic case for protecting the planet - Naoko Ishii 
<https://youtu.be/tbvUCrS5_5I>*
TED - Published on Feb 14, 2018
We all share one planet - we breathe the same air, drink the same water 
and depend on the same oceans, forests and biodiversity. Economist Naoko 
Ishii is on a mission to protect these shared resources, known as the 
global commons, that are vital for our survival. In an eye-opening talk 
about the wellness of the planet, Ishii outlines four economic systems 
we need to change to safeguard the global commons, making the case for a 
new kind of social contract with the earth.
https://youtu.be/tbvUCrS5_5I


*This Day in Climate History February 16, 2002  - from D.R. Tucker*
February 16, 2002: In response to President George W. Bush's February
14, 2002 speech on climate change, the New York Times editorial page
declares:

    "The obvious conclusion to be drawn from President Bush's latest
    global warming strategy, unveiled this week, is that he does not
    regard warming as a problem. There seems no other way to interpret a
    policy that would actually increase the gases responsible for heating
    the earth's atmosphere. That the policy demands little from the
    American people, while insulting allies who have agreed to take tough
    steps to deal with the problem, only adds to one's sense of dismay."

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/16/opinion/backward-on-global-warming.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//
///
Send email to subscribe <a%20href=%22mailto:contact at theClimate.Vote%22> 
to news clippings. /

        *** 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/20180216/cef1e7d8/attachment.html>