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

[Richard Pauli]

/January 8, 2018/

[slideshow]
*Victorian heat melts tar on the busy Hume Highway Friday 
<https://youtu.be/f4cRItULPAo>*
Victorian heatwave MELTS a busy highway bringing traffic to a standstill 
- as Melbourne and Sydney brace for a scorching weekend.
Surging temperatures on Australia's east coast melted tar on a busy 
Victorian highway on Friday, causing a huge traffic jam as drivers 
dodged the sticky mess.
Video taken from the car's passengers shows a section of the 10 
kilometre stretch of affected bitumen, and countless cars travelling at 
a crawl bumper to bumper.
https://youtu.be/f4cRItULPAo


[GOP]
*Former SC GOP Congressman Bob Inglis finds new focus in climate change, 
criticizing Trump 
<https://www.postandcourier.com/news/former-s-c-gop-congressman-bob-inglis-finds-new-focus/article_a25f3aba-dea5-11e7-bf96-37fdc3b1c863.html>*
Inglis has been arguing for many years the roll-out of a carbon tax. 
Without growing the government, he explained the tax would impose a fee 
on users of fossil fuels as they release carbon dioxide into the 
environment. He works from home in rural Greenville, but also travels 
widely, spreading this message to conservative voters in politically red 
zip codes.
"I'm confident that we're going to win, that America is going to price 
carbon dioxide and lead the world to solutions on climate change through 
free enterprise innovation," he said. "I'm absolutely confident about 
that. The question is, 'Will we do it soon enough to make a difference?'"...
https://www.postandcourier.com/news/former-s-c-gop-congressman-bob-inglis-finds-new-focus/article_a25f3aba-dea5-11e7-bf96-37fdc3b1c863.html


[rational basis for hope]
*Humans Earth's Only Hope: Societal Changes Key To Controlling Rising 
Temperatures 
<http://www.ibtimes.com/humans-earths-only-hope-societal-changes-key-controlling-rising-temperatures-2635715>*
Using past climate projections and social processes, the global 
temperature is predicted to increase by 3.4 to 6.2 degrees C in 2100, 
but the latest model shows that it could only be around 4.9 degrees C...
Due to the complexity of physical processes, climate models have 
uncertainties in global temperature prediction. The new model found that 
temperature uncertainty associated with the social component was of a 
similar magnitude to that of the physical processes, which implies that 
a better understanding of the human social component is important but 
often overlooked.
The model found that long-term solution devised by us to counter climate 
change like electric cars had by far the most impact in reducing 
greenhouse emissions. This showed the team that only humans can counter 
the climate change we could've so easily triggered.
"A better understanding of the human perception of risk from climate 
change and the behavioral responses are key to curbing future climate 
change," said lead author Brian Beckage, a professor of plant biology 
and computer science at the University of Vermont in a press release. 
<http://www.nimbios.org/press/FS_humanclimate>
"It is easy to lose confidence in the capacity for societies to make 
sufficient changes to reduce future temperatures. When we started this 
project, we simply wanted to address the question as to whether there 
was any rational basis for 'hope' - that is a rational basis to expect 
that human behavioral changes can sufficiently impact climate to 
significantly reduce future global temperatures," said NIMBioS Director 
Louis J. Gross, who co-authored the paper and co-organized the Working 
Group.
"Climate models can easily make assumptions about reductions in future 
greenhouse gas emissions and project the implications, but they do this 
with no rational basis for human responses," Gross said. "The key result 
from this paper <http://www.nimbios.org/press/FS_humanclimate> is that 
there is indeed some rational basis for hope."...
http://www.ibtimes.com/humans-earths-only-hope-societal-changes-key-controlling-rising-temperatures-2635715
-
[National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis]
*Curbing Climate Change - Study Finds Strong Rationale for the Human 
Factor <http://www.nimbios.org/press/FS_humanclimate>*
Jan 1, 2018
Humans may be the dominant cause of global temperature rise, but they 
may also be a crucial factor in helping to reduce it, according to a new 
study that for the first time builds a novel model to measure the 
effects of behavior on climate.
Drawing from both social psychology and climate science, the new model 
investigates how human behavioral changes evolve in response to extreme 
climate events and affect global temperature change...
The results, published today in the journal Nature Climate Change, 
demonstrate the importance of factoring human behavior into models of 
climate change.
"*A better understanding of the human perception of risk from climate 
change and the behavioral responses are key to curbing future climate 
change,*" ...
The paper was a result of combined efforts of the joint Working Group on 
Human Risk Perception and Climate Change at the National Institute for 
Mathematical and Biological Synthesis (NIMBioS) at the University of 
Tennessee, Knoxville...
The Working Group of about a dozen scientists from a variety of 
disciplines, including biology, psychology, geography, and mathematics, 
has been researching the questions surrounding human risk perception and 
climate change since 2013.
"It is easy to lose confidence in the capacity for societies to make 
sufficient changes to reduce future temperatures. When we started this 
project, we simply wanted to address the question as to whether there 
was any rational basis for 'hope' - that is a rational basis to expect 
that human behavioral changes can sufficiently impact climate to 
significantly reduce future global temperatures," said NIMBioS Director 
Louis J. Gross, who co-authored the paper and co-organized the Working 
Group.
"Climate models can easily make assumptions about reductions in future 
greenhouse gas emissions and project the implications, but they do this 
with no rational basis for human responses," Gross said. *"The key 
result from this paper is that there is indeed some rational basis for 
hope."*
That basis for hope can be the foundation which communities can build on 
in adopting policies to reduce emissions, said co-author Katherine 
Lacasse, an assistant professor of psychology at Rhode Island College.
http://www.nimbios.org/press/FS_humanclimate
-
[Nature Climate Change]
*Linking models of human behaviour and climate alters projected climate 
change <https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-017-0031-7>*

    Abstract
    Although not considered in climate models, perceived risk stemming
    from extreme climate events may induce behavioural changes that
    alter greenhouse gas emissions. Here, we link the C-ROADS climate
    model to a social model of behavioural change to examine how
    interactions between perceived risk and emissions behaviour
    influence projected climate change. Our coupled climate and social
    model resulted in a global temperature change ranging from 3.4 -
    6.2 degreesC by 2100 compared with 4.9 degreesC for the C-ROADS
    model alone, and led to behavioural uncertainty that was of a
    similar magnitude to physical uncertainty (2.8 degreesC versus
    3.5 degreesC). Model components with the largest influence on
    temperature were the functional form of response to extreme events,
    interaction of perceived behavioural control with perceived social
    norms, and behaviours leading to sustained emissions reductions.
    *Our results suggest that policies emphasizing the appropriate
    attribution of extreme events to climate change and infrastructural
    mitigation may reduce climate change the most.*

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-017-0031-7


[Jerry Large / Columnist]
*Climate-change expert shows how to slay carbon bigfoot 
<https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/climate-change-expert-shows-how-to-slay-carbon-bigfoot/>*
Originally published January 7, 2018
A scientist creates a competition to encourage a grass-roots battle 
against global warming through individual lifestyle choices...
He and some dedicated volunteers decided to create teams so there would 
be both cooperation and competition. Fifteen teams started and 13 
completed the three-month competition. Teams could have as many as seven 
members, but they had to be a mix of ages and lifestyles.
The participants started in January 2016 and spent that month recording 
data using a spreadsheet Bindschadler designed to keep track of their 
carbon footprint in three categories: home (energy, water use, garbage), 
transportation, and food and shopping.
It was a rough measure, but enough to get a baseline. Over the next two 
months, the teams competed to see which would lower its carbon score 
most from its starting point.
Bindschadler said the primary objective is to educate people about their 
own habits and about where the biggest carbon costs are. Taking a plane 
has a huge carbon footprint, for instance...
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/climate-change-expert-shows-how-to-slay-carbon-bigfoot/
-
[Jan 21]
*A Friendly Competition to Reduce Your Carbon ​Footprint in Seattle 
<http://www.tamingbigfootseattle.org/>*
http://www.tamingbigfootseattle.org/


[Comment Berkeley Daily Planet]
*The Peril We All Face Due To Human Folly 
<http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2018-01-06/article/46370>
*Jack Bragen
Sunday January 07, 2018
Soylent Green was a 1973 movie starring Charlton Heston, loosely based 
on the 1966 science fiction book "Make Room, Make Room!" by author Harry 
Harrison. The movie explored the effects of unchecked population, it 
predicted global warming (in 1973) and it concluded with the uncovering 
of a secret, that the ocean was dying, and with it, everyone would die.
Thus, human beings have known of global warming for more than fifty 
years. It was too inconvenient for us to find alternatives to fossil fuels.
Worse yet is how human beings treat our oceans. We've used them as a 
sewer, a garbage dump, a nuclear testing ground and nuclear waste sight, 
a platform for military battles. And worse. Recently there was the 
meltdown of the Fukushima nuclear reactors, which released large amounts 
of radioactive material into the ocean. Additionally, we had the BP oil 
spill disaster in Gulf of Mexico.
At the same time, we expect the ocean to provide us with oxygen, and we 
use it as a source of food. The ocean is responsible for about 70 
percent of the oxygen we breathe. Due to warming of the oceans, some 
scientists believe that there has already been a forty percent reduction 
in the plankton that produces oxygen.
When our situation worsens, it is conceivable that our oceans could turn 
anaerobic. This means everything in the ocean will die, and it means 
that human beings and most animals will slowly suffocate to death.
Environmental issues are no longer strictly in the domain of bird 
watchers, hikers and nature lovers. Environmentalism is also no longer 
about mere health concerns, such as carcinogens in our environment, lead 
and mercury contamination, birth defects, towns becoming sick due to 
toxic waste, and so on. Now, the ante has been raised to whether or not 
our planet will continue to support human life, whatsoever.
Is it too late for us? We must not assume that. It appears that the 
Republican Party, the fossil fuel industry, Congress, and the President, 
believe that it is hopeless to reverse global warming; and that we may 
as well build structures that will house the fortunate few.
I am certain that President Trump is well aware of the scientific fact 
of global warming, despite his public denial of that. His circle of 
concern excludes everything and everyone other than his own power, 
importance, and wealth.
To appease some of the less informed members of the public, oil 
companies have periodically aired ads claiming that we can take the 
carbon dioxide out of our atmosphere and store it. Any credible 
scientist can tell you that this would either A; require more energy 
than was obtained by burning the fossil fuels, or else B; it would 
deplete our atmosphere of oxygen.
We currently have sufficient technology to convert to renewable energy. 
What stands in the way?--human folly of various kinds, such as greed, 
denial, the desire for comfort, and resistance to change.
As it stands, we're looking at the likelihood of most life on our planet 
becoming extinct, and it seems to be happening much faster than we 
anticipated.
http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2018-01-06/article/46370


[Antarctic desert]
*In Antarctic dry valleys, early signs of climate change-induced shifts 
in soil <https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/01/180106103436.htm>*
In a study spanning two decades, a team of researchers led by Colorado 
State University found declining numbers of soil fauna, nematodes and 
other animal species in the McMurdo Dry Valleys, one of the world's 
driest and coldest deserts. This discovery is attributed to climate 
change, which has triggered melting and thawing of ice in this desert 
since an uncharacteristically warm weather event in 2001.
There are no plants, birds or mammals in the McMurdo Dry Valleys, 
located in the largest region of the Antarctic continent. But microbes 
and microscopic soil invertebrates live in the harsh ecosystem, where 
the mean average temperature is below -15 degrees Celsius, or 5 degrees 
Fahrenheit.
The findings offer insight and an alarm bell on how ecosystems respond 
to climate change and to unusual climate events, scientists said.
"Until 2001, the region was not experiencing a warming trend," said 
Walter Andriuzzi, lead author of the study and a postdoctoral researcher 
in the Department of Biology and School of Global Environmental 
Sustainability.
"On the contrary, it was getting colder," he continued. "But in 2001, 
the cooling trend stopped abruptly with an extremely warm weather event. 
Since then, the average temperatures are either stable or are increasing 
slightly. But most importantly, there have been more frequent intense 
weather events."
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/01/180106103436.htm


Techno-fix illusions*
**Big Bad Fix: The case against climate geoengineering 
<http://climateandcapitalism.com/2017/12/14/big-bad-fix-the-case-against-climate-geoengineering/>*
Technologies that promise easy solutions to the climate crisis actually 
pose high risks to people, ecosystems and security, and are dangerous 
distractions from the urgent need for deep emission cuts.
A new report warns that geoengineering, the large-scale manipulation of 
the climate, is gaining acceptance as a would-be technological fix for 
climate change in key emitting countries, as these countries refuse to 
break away from their fossil-fuelled economies.
/Click here to download The Big Bad Fix (pdf). 
<https://www.boell.de/sites/default/files/bigbadfix_a4_col4web.pdf?dimension1=division_iup>/ 

Geoengineering research programs and projects planned by industry and 
state-funded and private research institutions are proliferating, 
primarily in high-emitting countries such as the US, the UK and China. 
The Big Bad Fix analyses the context and risks of geoengineering, and 
reveals the actors, vested interests and political developments underway 
to advance the large-scale technological schemes to manipulate the 
Earth's natural systems.
Although considered reckless and unacceptable by many scientific and 
political experts, geoengineering is now increasingly being pushed into 
the mainstream of climate policy debates, where it creates the illusion 
of a technological shortcut to manage the symptoms of climate change 
without addressing its root causes.
However, as the report details, geoengineering poses many risks for 
people, ecosystems and security. It relies on excessive land, water and 
resource consumption, threatens food security, and undermines democratic 
control over the world's commons because its untested technologies are 
also developed by patent-holders for profit.
Therefore, the report states, irreversible harm to biodiversity and 
ecosystem integrity is highly probable. There are also serious concerns 
about geoengineering governance, including the potential for unilateral 
deployment, the risk of conflict in the event of adverse regional 
impacts and side effects, and the risk of weaponization of 
geoengineering technologies.
Instead of resorting to unproven, risky techno-fixes, the report calls 
for the rapid implementation of a climate-just vision for limiting 
global warming to under 1.5 degreesC.

    Barbara Unmusig, Director of the Heinrich Boll Foundation:
    "Proponents of geoengineering are feeding the illusion that we can
    escape our climate crises without having to adjust our
    emission-heavy lifestyles. But reality is not that simple. Not only
    do geoengineering technologies come with new risks and side effects,
    they also distract from the only proven solution for climate change:
    a radical reduction of climate changing emissions. Before
    geoengineering is put into action, we need clear and binding
    regulations for these technologies. An international framework of
    regulation must be grounded in the precautionary principle, and
    technologies with associated risks that are not predictable,
    justifiable or manageable must be prohibited outright."

The report concludes that the numerous high-impact risks of 
geoengineering, and the political, social, cultural, economic, ethical, 
moral, intergenerational and rights-based problems it implies, render 
geoengineering unacceptable. Further, the authors argue that it is a 
dangerous distraction from the urgent need to support viable 
alternatives: making deep emission cuts in the near-term and rapidly 
transforming our economies to allow for a socially and ecologically 
sustainable and just future, rather than locking the world into a 
long-term dependence on non-existent, high-risk technologies.
http://climateandcapitalism.com/2017/12/14/big-bad-fix-the-case-against-climate-geoengineering/


*This Day in Climate History January 8, 2013 
<http://mediamatters.org/research/2013/01/08/study-warmest-year-on-record-received-cool-clim/192079>  
-  from D.R. Tucker*
January 8, 2013:
Media Matters releases an analysis showing that "...news coverage of 
climate change on ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX remained low in 2012 despite
record temperatures and a series of extreme weather events in the U.S.
When the Sunday shows did discuss climate change, scientists were shut 
out of the debate while Republican politicians were given a platform
to question the science."
Since 2009, climate coverage on the Sunday shows has declined every 
year. *In 2012, the Sunday shows spent less than 8 minutes on climate 
change, down from 9 minutes in 2011, 21 minutes in 2010, and over an 
hour in 2009.* The vast majority of coverage -- 89 percent -- was driven 
by politics, and none was driven by scientific findings.
- ABC's This Week covered it the most, at just over 5 minutes.
- NBC's Meet the Press covered it the least, in just one 6 second mention.
*In Four Years, Sunday Shows Have Not Quoted A Single Scientist On 
Climate Change.* Of those who were asked about climate change on the 
Sunday shows, 54 percent were media figures, 31 percent were politicians 
and not one was a scientist or climate expert. This is consistent with a 
previous Media Matters analysis which found that none of the Sunday 
shows quoted any scientists on climate change between 2009 and 2011. By 
contrast, two-thirds of those interviewed or quoted on the nightly news 
programs in 2012 were scientists. [Media Matters, 4/16/12]
*Sunday Shows Obscured Scientific Consensus On Climate Change. *Not only 
did the Sunday shows shut out those who accept the science of climate 
change, but they also failed to inform their audiences that the vast 
majority of climate scientists agree that climate change is occurring 
and is driven by human activity. Only 11 percent of coverage implied 
that scientists agree on global warming, while 44 percent failed to 
correct a guest who questioned the science. By contrast, 60 percent of 
nightly news coverage alluded to the scientific consensus.
http://mediamatters.org/research/2013/01/08/study-warmest-year-on-record-received-cool-clim/192079

/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
//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/20180108/fa130a6f/attachment.html>