[TheClimate.Vote] May 17, 2018 - Daily Global Warming News Digest
Richard Pauli
richard at theclimate.vote
Thu May 17 10:36:20 EDT 2018
/May 17, 2018/
[Storms]
*USA - Deadly Storms Hit North East, Flash Floods in Maryland
<http://floodlist.com/america/usa/usa-storms-north-east-flash-floods-maryland-may-2018>*
16 MAY, 2018 BY RICHARD DAVIES
Severe storms caused major damage in Northeastern USA on Tuesday, 15
May, 2018.
Strong winds caused most of the damage. Two deaths were reported - one
in Newburgh, New York, the other in Danbury, Connecticut - as a result
of falling trees. Almost 400,000 people were without power in New York,
New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Connecticut and Massachusetts.
New York Governor Andrew M. Cuomo declared a state of emergency in four
counties and has deployed members of the New York National Guard to
assist recovery efforts.
Maryland Flooding
Severe flooding was reported in parts of Maryland, in particular
Montgomery and Fredrick counties, where up to 6 inches of rain fell
during the storm. Hail up to 2.5 inches (63.5 mm) was also reported...
More at:
http://floodlist.com/america/usa/usa-storms-north-east-flash-floods-maryland-may-2018
[Going way past gas]
*Tesla's Giant Battery Saving Consumers Huge Dollars - Gas Turbines in
Trouble
<https://climatecrocks.com/2018/05/16/teslas-giant-battery-saving-consumers-huge-dollars-gas-turbines-in-trouble/>*
by greenman3610
General Electric, Siemens, and Mitsubishi, all scaling back production
of gas turbines. This is one reason why. Future muddier for gas, bright
for batteries.
I've asked the question before: Will Gas break wind? or Will Wind Pass
Gas? REnewEconomy- Australia: The Tesla big battery in South Australia
has already taken a 55 per cent share
REnewEconomy- Australia:
The Tesla big battery in South Australia has already taken a 55 per
cent share in the state's frequency and ancillary services market,
and lowered prices in that market by 90 per cent, new data has shown.
The stunning numbers on the economics of the country's first
utility-scale battery were presented at the Australian Energy Week
conference in Melbourne on Thursday by McKinsey and Co partner
Godart van Gendt.
https://climatecrocks.com/2018/05/16/teslas-giant-battery-saving-consumers-huge-dollars-gas-turbines-in-trouble/
- - - -
[storing wind power solution]
*Elon Musk Harpooned Baseload Power
<https://cleantechnica.com/2018/05/15/elon-musk-harpooned-baseload-power/>*
Cleantechnica:
At the other end of the spectrum are peaking plants, usually powered by
natural gas, which are set up only to deliver power when the demand is
exceeding the supply. These plants need to be maintained even when they
are not needed, on a ready basis. Some operate as "spinning reserve,"
running without actually putting power on the grid just so they can
respond to demand changes as quickly as possible. Clearly, it is only
fair that they charge high prices for power, possibly $250/MWh.
In emergency situations, the price of electric power can go to amazing
heights. When a major baseload power plant goes off-line suddenly and
without warning, power prices can go to over $10,000/MWh in minutes.
Another of Giles Parkinson's articles on RenewEconomy provides an
example, in which Australian spot prices hit $14,000/MWh (Australian)
when two large gas-burning power plants failed.
On the other hand, when the power supply exceeds the demand, spot prices
can go into negative territory. Anyone who is set up to buy wholesale
power can absorb the excess and be paid to take it. Batteries and pumped
storage facilities do that.
Power generators often do not wish to lock themselves into contracts for
production at a low, fixed rate. For example, when a contract between
the state of Vermont and the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant had to be
renewed in 2012, the owners of the nuclear plant offered to supply half
of the amount of power Vermont had been buying from them at $65/MWh,
with the remainder at spot prices. Vermont went with hydropower at
$60/MWh for the entire amount instead. Vermont Yankee closed not long
after that because it was no longer economical to keep it running.
Like Vermont Yankee, many power generators wish to maintain only some
portion of their power under contracts at a low fixed price. With a
contract for power at a low price, they can get a steady income, but
they do not make a lot of money on it. They sell the rest of their power
on the short-term or spot markets, because they believe they can get
higher income there.
And this is where Elon Musk's harpoon comes in. Tesla's Hornsdale Power
Reserve, by cutting the income available from spot power prices, has not
merely cut into the incomes of peaking plants and other short-term
suppliers. It has also eliminated some options available for baseload
generators make profits.
When the high prices of spot power are pushed down, baseload power
plants will no longer find the spot market profitable. In order to keep
baseload plants profitable, the baseload power plants will have to sell
their power under contracts at higher prices.
Meanwhile, with batteries like the Hornsdale Power Reserve, power from
solar and wind power will be more valuable, because with battery backup
their power can be used to supply an increasing share of baseload power.
And that increase in value, which might not necessarily be reflected by
an increase in price, makes their power all the more attractive.
One of the interesting things about this development is that it did not
happen so suddenly because of market forces. It happened the way it did
because Elon Musk felt frisky enough to place a $50 million bet that he
could build his hundred-megawatt battery in a hundred days. He offered a
bet too good for South Australia to miss out on, and the state committed
$50 million in the big battery. As it happens, the state benefited from
Musk's win; it saved $35 million in the first four months of operations.
And that is a pretty short return on the investment.
Fossil fuels have been harpooned.
https://cleantechnica.com/2018/05/15/elon-musk-harpooned-baseload-power/
- - -
[Offshore Wind Looks Increasingly Like a Good Bet, Analysis Finds]
*High values are blowing in offshore winds; policymakers may need more
<https://www.utilitydive.com/news/high-values-are-blowing-in-offshore-winds-policymakers-may-need-more/523407/>*
A new report says offshore wind can be more cost effective than onshore
turbines near major population centers along the East Coast, when
considering the technology's full economic value. The first-of-its-kind
analysis, from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, is another piece
of evidence that offshore wind is coming into its own. Read more from
ICN about America's first offshore wind farm in Rhode Island.
https://www.utilitydive.com/news/high-values-are-blowing-in-offshore-winds-policymakers-may-need-more/523407/
[Hurricane season]
*America Is Not Ready for This (Again)
<https://newrepublic.com/article/148384/america-not-ready-hurricane-season-again>*
Hurricane season begins in two weeks, but little has been done since
last year's devastating storms to make vulnerable communities more
resilient.
By EMILY ATKIN - May 15, 2018 - The New Republic
With hurricane season only two weeks away, I asked Dr. Irwin Redlener,
the director of Columbia University's National Center for Disaster
Preparedness <http://ncdp.columbia.edu/>, if communities struck by last
year's devastating storms were prepared for another pummeling. His
reply: "It's unfortunate that we can't stop time."
For thousands of Americans in Texas, Florida, and Puerto Rico,
hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria have barely faded from memory. Yet on
June 1, conditions will be ripe for Helene, Isaac, and Michael - just a
few of the names in line for tropical cyclones that form in the Atlantic
Ocean, the Caribbean Sea, and the Gulf of Mexico in 2018. This year is
expected to be a "normal to above normal" season, according to a study
released last week by the Hurricane Genesis and Outlook Project, better
known as the HUGO outlook. And it may even start early; there's a small
chance that Florida will get hit with a minor tropical cyclone this
week, according to a report in Earther.
...
The Florida legislature takes a myopic approach to hurricanes,
preferring to allocate money for immediate recovery - to repair beaches
and farms, or for displaced students who evacuated to Florida from
Puerto Rico. But spending money only on immediate recovery ensures that
money will have to be spent again and again, every time there's a severe
hurricane season. As Republican State Representative Jeanette Nunez told
the Times: "Sometimes it's just easier to throw money at a problem than
it is to take a thoughtful and diligent approach to policy making."
That criticism also applies to President Donald Trump's administration
and the Republican Congress, which has allocated more than $140 billion
for hurricane relief since September, most of it for humanitarian
assistance and rebuilding infrastructure. Last week, FEMA Administrator
Brock Long visited Louisiana and Texas to urge residents to start
preparing for the 2018 hurricane season. It's good advice, but it comes
as the administration has rolled back hurricane resilience policies that
would take the burden off individuals. Last year, Trump shelved two
rules requiring new construction projects be built with flood
protections in mind. After the damage wrought by Hurricane Harvey, Trump
said he would reinstate those rules. With another hurricane season
coming on June 1, they remain shelved.
"We keep calling these storms a wake-up call, but they keep turning into
snooze alarms," Redlener said. "When the cameras go away, we slip into
complacency."
https://newrepublic.com/article/148384/america-not-ready-hurricane-season-again
- - -
[getting ready]
*U.S. Climate Resilience Toolkit <https://toolkit.climate.gov>*
Meet the Challenges of a Changing Climate
Find information and tools to help you understand and address your
climate risks.
LEARN ABOUT OUR RESILIENCE FRAMEWORK
<https://toolkit.climate.gov/#steps> https://toolkit.climate.gov/#steps
SEE WHAT OTHERS ARE DOING <https://toolkit.climate.gov/#case-studies>
https://toolkit.climate.gov/#case-studies
USE THE CLIMATE EXPLORER <https://toolkit.climate.gov/#climate-explorer>
https://toolkit.climate.gov/#climate-explorer›
https://toolkit.climate.gov/#steps
- - -
[Preparation]
*The National Center for Disaster Preparedness at the Earth Institute
<http://ncdp.columbia.edu/research/research-portal/>* works to
understand and improve the nation's capacity to prepare for, respond to
and recover from disasters. NCDP focuses on the readiness of
governmental and non-governmental systems; the complexities of
population recovery; the power of community engagement; and the risks of
human vulnerability, with a particular focus on children.
Research Portal <http://ncdp.columbia.edu/research/research-portal/>
DISASTERS THROW US OFF BALANCE
The CHAOS of devastating STORMS, TERROR events, or major ACCIDENTS
upsets the equilibria of
COMMUNITIES, ORGANIZATIONS, and PEOPLE.
http://ncdp.columbia.edu/research/research-portal/
Practice Portal <http://ncdp.columbia.edu/practice/practice-portal/>
Readiness requires PREPARED communities, TRAINED responders, ROBUST
supply lines, and EFFECTIVE coordination.
In short, READINESS REQUIRES A SYSTEM. Training people is NOT ENOUGH.
http://ncdp.columbia.edu/practice/practice-portal/
Publications <http://ncdp.columbia.edu/library/publications/>
http://ncdp.columbia.edu/library/publications/
[Securing security]
*The Developing Focus of the UN Security Council on Climate Security
<https://climateandsecurity.org/2018/05/16/the-developing-focus-of-the-un-security-council-on-climate-security/>*
[T]he United Nations Security Council held another in a series of
Arria-formula meetings on climate security. The meeting was chaired by
Italy and co-hosted with Sweden, Morocco, the UK, the Netherlands, Peru,
Japan, France, the Maldives and Germany. The meeting was titled,
"Preparing for the Security Implications of Rising Temperatures." A key
focus was on how the UN system might develop the capabilities to foresee
the threats posed by climate events and to prepare appropriate responses
such as risk assessment and risk management. The discussion included
consideration of creating an institutional home for climate and security
within the UN system.
*Briefing to the UN Security Council: "A Responsibility to
Prepare,"* December 15, 2017, Caitlin Werrell, The Center for
Climate and Security
Summary: The world in the 21st century is characterized by both
unprecedented risks and unprecedented foresight. Climate change,
population shifts and cyber-threats are rapidly increasing the scale
and complexity of risks to international security, while
technological developments are increasing our capacity to foresee
those risks. This world of high consequence risks, which can be
better modeled and anticipated than in the past, underscores a clear
responsibility for the international community: A "Responsibility to
Prepare." This responsibility, which builds on hard-won lessons of
the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) framework for preventing and
responding to mass atrocities, requires a reform of existing
governance institutions to ensure that critical, nontraditional
risks to international security, such as climate change, are
anticipated, analyzed and addressed systematically, robustly and
rapidly by intergovernmental security institutions and the security
establishments of nations that participate in that system.
A Responsibility to Prepare agenda should be developed and adopted by
all nations, while adhering to the overarching principle of
"climate-proofing" security institutions at the international, regional
and national levels. That climate-proofing would include routinizing,
integrating, institutionalizing and elevating attention to climate and
security issues at these bodies, as well as establishing rapid response
mechanisms, and developing contingencies for potential unintended
consequences.
Such an agenda - focused as it is on reforming security institutions -
would ensure that critical nontraditional challenges, such as climate
change, are appropriately managed as global security risks, rather than
as niche concerns. A practical fulfillment of the goals and principles
articulated in this Responsibility to Prepare framework would increase
the likelihood of more stable governance in the face of rapid but
foreseeable change.
https://climateandsecurity.org/responsibilitytoprepare/
- - - -
The wide-ranging contributions included in this book touching on
sanctions, the creation of a climate change tribunal, climate migration,
developing a responsibility to respond, climate change adaptation
practices in peace missions, and the Security Council's power to
legislate each tackle what the UNSC can do in respect of climate policy
and security. The purpose of assembling this expertise into a single
volume was to offer a clear basis on which debates can take place on the
specific initiatives that the Council can take both as ends in
themselves and to lay the groundwork for a much larger climate
governance role that may well be called for in the future.
[1] See http://blogs.worldbank.org/climatechange/
https://climateandsecurity.org/2018/05/16/the-developing-focus-of-the-un-security-council-on-climate-security/
[another question]
*Trump White House quietly cancels NASA research verifying greenhouse
gas cuts
<http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/05/trump-white-house-quietly-cancels-nasa-research-verifying-greenhouse-gas-cuts>*
By Paul VoosenMay. 9, 2018 , 2:00 PM
You can't manage what you don't measure. The adage is especially
relevant for climate-warming greenhouse gases, which are crucial to
manage - and challenging to measure. In recent years, though, satellite
and aircraft instruments have begun monitoring carbon dioxide and
methane remotely, and NASA's Carbon Monitoring System (CMS), a
$10-million-a-year research line, has helped stitch together
observations of sources and sinks into high-resolution models of the
planet's flows of carbon. Now, President Donald Trump's administration
has quietly killed the CMS, Science has learned.
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/05/trump-white-house-quietly-cancels-nasa-research-verifying-greenhouse-gas-cuts
For /Science/, Paul Voosen writes about the Trump administration's cuts
to climate research
<https://journalistsresource.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=30699762a3826bbf132818652&id=0631aecc21&e=59fd1f3a43>.
NASA's Carbon Monitoring System, which helps measure greenhouse gas
emissions, is one such casualty. While existing grants for the CMS will
continue to completion, new projects won't start. What this means for
policy: it will be much more difficult to verify whether countries are
adhering to emissions standards laid out in the Paris climate accords.
What this means for research: European scientists likely will pick up
the slack...
- - - -
It's an ironic time to kill the program, Jacob says. NASA is planning
several space-based carbon observatories, including the OCO-3, which is
set to be mounted on the International Space Station later this year,
and the Geostationary Carbon Cycle Observatory, due for launch early
next decade. The CMS would help knit all these observations together.
"It would be a total shame to wind [it] down," Jacob says.
This type of research is likely to continue, Duffy adds, but leadership
will pass to Europe, which already operates one carbon-monitoring
satellite, with more on the way. "We really shoot ourselves in the foot
if we let other people develop the technology," he says, given how
important the techniques will be in managing low-carbon economies in the
future. Hurtt, meanwhile, holds out hope that NASA will restore the
program. After all, he says, the problem isn't going away. "The topic of
climate mitigation and carbon monitoring is maybe not the highest
priority now in the United States," he says. "But it is almost
everywhere else."
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/05/trump-white-house-quietly-cancels-nasa-research-verifying-greenhouse-gas-cuts
[Minnesota radio show going for 5 years]
*Climate Cast live special with Paul Huttner
<https://www.mprnews.org/story/2018/05/15/climate_cast_live>*
Environment May 15, 2018
1hour 32min Climate Cast
A Climate Cast live special, hosted by MPR News chief meteorologist Paul
Huttner in MPR's UBS Forum in downtown St. Paul.
Guests included:
Radhika Fox, executive director of the US Water Alliance.
Jessica Hellman of the University of Minnesota's Institute on the
Environment.
Mark Seeley, retired University of Minnesota meteorologist and
climatologist.
https://www.mprnews.org/story/2018/05/15/climate_cast_live
[Book Review]
*Making the case against geoengineering
<http://climateandcapitalism.com/2018/05/14/making-the-case-against-geoengineering/>*
Posted on May 14, 2018
The Big Bad Fix powerfully exposes the dangers of deliberate climate
modification, and presents alternatives. A deeper focus on fighting the
fossil industry would strengthen the argument.
THE BIG BAD FIX The Case Against Climate Geoengineering
<http://www.etcgroup.org/content/big-bad-fix>
ETC Group, BiofuelWatch and Heinrich Boell Foundation, 2017
reviewed by Valerie Lannon
There are full-blown climate change deniers, including Scott Pruitt, the
head of the US Environmental "Protection" Agency. Then there are those
who acknowledge the seriousness of global warming but are confident that
capitalist ingenuity will save the day somehow "just like we always
have." Last but not least are those who are concerned about global
warming, are not overly confident in capitalism-as-saviour but who are
so desperate to avoid climate catastrophe that they pray that the
far-out solutions they hear about from Bill Gates (for "storm
modification") will keep the global warming wolves at bay.
The Big Bad Fix: The Case Against Climate Geoengineering addresses the
last two categories...
There are three main approaches to geoengineering.
*Solar Radiation Management (SRM) (aka albedo modification),* aims
at reducing the amount of heat in the atmosphere by turning sunlight
back into space (e.g. by increasing the reflectivity of clouds). The
report notes "SRM deployment is likely to alter the hydrological
cycle (reduce or increase rainfall by changing weather patterns) and
produce unequal effects across the planet, potentially threatening
the sources of food and water for millions of people." There is no
attempt here to try and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, only the
release "of inorganic particles such as sulphur dioxide into the
upper layer of the atmosphere - via cannons or hoses or aircraft -
to act as a reflective barrier to reduce the amount sunlight
reaching Earth… the unknowns are many, including the possibility of
ozone layer depletion and significant weather pattern changes."
*Greenhouse Gas Removal (GGR), does not focus on the sun but, as its
name describes, aims to remove the excess greenhouse gas that is
already in the atmosphere*. Again there is no no focus on reducing
the production of greenhouse gas emissions. Some GGR methods look to
change the chemical balance in the oceans to increase the uptake of
carbon dioxide. Others look to sequester carbon dioxide underground
or in specialized facilities. As the report states "Despite
stepped-up research on these technologies over the last decade, no
one has yet been able to demonstrate that artificial, large-scale,
long-term carbon sequestration is affordable, safe or even possible,
or that CDR would produce the desired effect of lowering the Earth's
temperature."
Lastly, *Weather Modification is the stuff of both science fiction
movies and of actual use in China, usually to either make rain or
suppress rain, for example by "cloud seeding*."
The report explains all three approaches in greater detail and provides
eight case studies, all of which point to extreme dangers and, in many
cases, irreversibility.
So wrong, on so many levels...
The report states, "Geoengineering aims to intervene in dynamic and
poorly-understood systems. Given the complexities of global climate,
there are countless ways interventions could go awry…Trying to fix a
failing geoengineering deployment could make the problem of climate
change worse."
Economics. The experiments are typically funded by industry (often with
government support), especially the high tech sector. But this is a
classic example of "just because you can do something, doesn't mean you
should do it." The costs are prohibitive, especially when you consider
the savings to be had by immediately gearing up sustainable energy
sources and agricultural practices to eliminate the use of fossil fuels.
- - - -
The authors of the report make four excellent recommendations to address
the problems raised with current geoengineering "solutions." These include:
- End the production of carbon dioxide from fossil fuels by phasing
out fossil fuel infrastructure, using renewable sources with
communities' consent, efficient public transport, reducing energy
consumption, transforming agribusiness to smaller holdings and
"agroecology"
- Restore natural ecosystems, including forests, rainforests, moors
and oceans, with full involvement of local communities
- Ban outdoor testing of geoengineering, enforced through a global
governance body, since geoengineering has global impacts
- Debate proposed geoengineering solutions using the "do no harm"
principle.
http://climateandcapitalism.com/2018/05/14/making-the-case-against-geoengineering/
[activisim call]
*NAFTA Talks Have Ignored Environmental Concerns
<http://sc.org/NAFTAEnviro>*
NAFTA 2.0 Could Increase Pollution that Threatens Our Communities
"Today, 17 environmental organizations are releasing a joint statement
pledging to oppose a NAFTA 2.0 deal if it prioritizes the interests of
polluters over the needs of communities across borders.
The statement can be found here:sc.org/NAFTAEnviro
<http://sc.org/NAFTAEnviro>. You canretweet here
<https://twitter.com/SierraClub/status/996781617187381248>. See below
for the list of signers.
*Please help amplify this statement on social media!* See below for
ideas for tweets, posts, and graphics that may be of use for your social
media team.
To date, the NAFTA talks have ignored most of the environmental concerns
that our groupsdelineated before talks began
<https://www.sierraclub.org/sites/www.sierraclub.org/files/uploads-wysiwig/NAFTA%20Enviro%20Redlines%20FINAL.pdf>.
Unless talks dramatically change course, the resulting deal is likely to
further exacerbate pollution and climate change. As detailed intoday's
statement
<https://www.sierraclub.org/sites/www.sierraclub.org/files/uploads-wysiwig/NAFTA%20Environmental%20Letter%20May%202018.pdf>,
the deal couldhelp corporations offshore more jobs and pollution, lock
in fossil fuel dependency, and prolong the Trump administration's
polluting legacy.
The statement makes clear that the U.S. environmental community "will
oppose a NAFTA 2.0 deal if it undermines rather than supports
environmental protection and a just transition to a clean energy economy."
http://sc.org/NAFTAEnviro
[Humor - scroll down screen comic]
*Life During Interesting Times -*
*"The greatest generation" was defined by their suffering. Will we be?
<https://thenib.com/greatest-generation-interesting-times?utm_campaign=newsletter-links&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter>*
by Mike Dawson
"A catastrophe to which we gradually gave meaning"
https://thenib.com/greatest-generation-interesting-times?utm_campaign=newsletter-links&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter
Rise and Shine.The World is Doomed.
*This Day in Climate History - May 17, 2013
<http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/05/17/settled-among-scientists/> -
from D.R. Tucker*
May 17, 2013: Andrew Sullivan points to the root cause of US
climate-change denial:
"But the main reason many Americans still refuse to believe it is
religious fundamentalism. That is immune to science and reason. But it
is the bedrock belief of one of our political parties."
http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/05/17/settled-among-scientists/
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
//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/20180517/98ee585c/attachment.html>
More information about the TheClimate.Vote
mailing list