[TheClimate.Vote] November 27, 2018 - Daily Global Warming News Digest

[Richard Pauli]

/November 27, 2018/

[a break-down break-through, proof of concept, not operational]
*Light-activated, single-ion catalyst breaks down carbon dioxide 
<https://phys.org/news/2018-11-light-activated-single-ion-catalyst-carbon-dioxide.html>*
November 26, 2018, Brookhaven National Laboratory
A team of scientists has discovered a single-site, 
visible-light-activated catalyst that converts carbon dioxide (CO2) into 
"building block" molecules that could be used for creating useful 
chemicals. The discovery opens the possibility of using sunlight to turn 
a greenhouse gas into hydrocarbon fuels.

The scientists used the National Synchrotron Light Source II, a U.S. 
Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science user facility at Brookhaven 
National Laboratory, to uncover details of the efficient reaction, which 
used a single ion of cobalt to help lower the energy barrier for 
breaking down CO2. The team describes this single-site catalyst in a 
paper just published in the Journal of the American Chemical Society.

Converting CO2 into simpler parts--carbon monoxide (CO) and oxygen--has 
valuable real-world applications. "By breaking CO2, we can kill two 
birds with one stone--remove CO2 from the atmosphere and make building 
blocks for making fuel," said Anatoly Frenkel, a chemist with a joint 
appointment at Brookhaven Lab and Stony Brook University. Frenkel led 
the effort to understand the activity of the catalyst, which was made by 
Gonghu Li, a physical chemist at the University of New Hampshire...
- - -
Though the science outlined in the paper is not yet in practical use, 
there are abundant possibilities for applications, Frenkel said. In the 
future, such single-site catalysts could be used in large-scale areas 
with abundant sunlight to break down excess CO2 in the atmosphere, 
similar to the way plants break down CO2 and reuse its building blocks 
to build sugars in the process of photosynthesis. But instead of making 
sugars, scientists might use the CO building blocks to generate 
synthetic fuels or other useful chemicals.
https://phys.org/news/2018-11-light-activated-single-ion-catalyst-carbon-dioxide.html


[Three chills]
*The Three Most Chilling Conclusions From the Climate Report 
<https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/11/most-chilling-parts-2018-climate-assessment/576598/>*
Thirteen federal agencies agree: Climate change has already wreaked 
havoc on the United States, and the worst is likely yet to come.
RACHEL GUTMAN
On Friday afternoon, the U.S. government published a major and ominous 
climate report. Despite being released on a holiday, when it seemed the 
smallest number of people would be paying attention, the latest 
installment of the National Climate Assessment is, as told to my 
colleague Robinson Meyer, full of "information that every human needs."
The report traces the effects climate change has already wrought upon 
every region of the United States, from nationwide heat waves to 
dwindling snowpacks in the West. In blunt and disturbing terms, it also 
envisions the devastation yet to come.

The document's dire claims, backed by 13 federal agencies, come 
frequently into conflict with the aims of the administration that 
released it. Where the Trump administration has sought to loosen 
restrictions on car emissions, the report warns that vehicles are 
contributing to unhealthy ozone levels that affect nearly a third of 
Americans. Whereas the president has ensured that the United States will 
no longer meet the goals outlined in the Paris Agreement on climate 
change, the report says that ignoring Paris could accelerate coral 
bleaching in Hawaii by more than a decade.
Here are the report's three most chilling conclusions:
*1. Extreme hot weather is getting more common, and cold weather more rare.*
In its first chapter, the National Climate Assessment reports that 
heat-wave season has expanded by more than 40 days since the 1960s. In 
the bleakest scenario of unchecked climate change, Phoenix could have as 
many as 150 days per year above 100 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of the 
century...

*2. Climate change has doubled the devastation from wildfires in the 
Southwest.*
According to the report, human-caused climate change has heated and 
dried out the American Southwest, leading to deaths, enormous costs, and 
lingering health consequences...

*3. Rising sea levels will necessitate mass migrations, and coastal 
cities aren't doing enough.*
The report's chapter on the coastal effects of climate change warns that 
sea-level rise alone could force tens of millions of people to move from 
their homes within the next century...

    It remains difficult...to tally the extent of adaptation
    implementation in the United States because there are no common
    reporting systems, and many actions that reduce climate risk are not
    labeled as climate adaptation. Enough is known, however, to conclude
    that adaptation implementation is not uniform nor yet common across
    the United States...The scale of adaptation implementation for some
    effects and locations seems incommensurate with the projected scale
    of climate threats.

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/11/most-chilling-parts-2018-climate-assessment/576598/


[Visit Grist for links ]
*There's a fight brewing in D.C. over the future of the green movement 
<https://grist.org/article/theres-a-fight-brewing-in-d-c-over-the-future-of-the-green-movement/>*
By Zoya Teirstein on Nov 20, 2018
Something weird is happening around climate change right now -- and it's 
not just that rising average temperatures are throwing our entire planet 
out of whack. Typically an issue politicians on both sides of the aisle 
avoid, climate has been a topic of heated conversation on the Hill ever 
since the Democrats took the House on Nov. 6. What gives?

The reinvigorated dialogue around climate is due, at least in part, to a 
group called the Sunrise Movement. Representative-elect Alexandria 
Ocasio-Cortez joined 150 Sunrise protestors in House Minority Leader 
Nancy Pelosi's office last week for a sit-in to demand an economy-wide 
plan to address climate change. The activists and a small number of 
progressive Congressional Democrats (most of them newly elected), are 
pushing for something called a Green New Deal -- kind of like the 1930s 
version but for green jobs. (Sunrise Movement cofounder Varshini Prakash 
was a member of the 2018 Grist 50.)
But if you think the plan went over well with everyone who understands 
climate change, you'd be mistaken. Many politicians on both sides of the 
aisle prefer a market-driven approach that could hypothetically garner 
bipartisan support. The activists argue that neither political party, 
especially not the Republicans, has come to the table with the kind of 
solution necessary to avert climate catastrophe. To that end, on 
Tuesday, Sunrise Movement members staked out Congressional 
representatives, like Democrats Barbara Lee of California and Jan 
Schakowsky of Illinois, to ask them for their support on a Green New Deal.

The protests shine a spotlight on the rebirth of two very different 
approaches to climate change solutions: sticking with compromise 
tactics, such as a carbon tax that can appeal to people on either side 
of the political spectrum, versus a balls-out, last-ditch effort to 
create a green America. Proponents of each think they have the more 
realistic approach. As we hurtle closer to a 2 degrees Celsius of 
warming, the split between these two groups is widening into a chasm.

One of the people rankled by the activists' efforts to strong-arm Pelosi 
is Representative Carlos Curbelo of Florida, the Republican who 
co-founded a bipartisan climate change caucus in the House of 
Representatives two years ago (which earned him a spot on our 2017 Grist 
50 list). This past Election Day, Curbelo lost his seat to a Democrat, 
Representative-elect Debbie Mucarsel-Powell. The Sunrise demonstrations 
still didn't sit well with Curbelo, who called the protestors' actions 
"truly deplorable." In response, the young activists called him a phony.
There's reason to think that Curbelo really believes his vision for 
reining in emissions is the right one. This summer, he introduced the 
Market Choice Act -- a carbon tax that went approximately nowhere, but, 
as Curbelo said, laid the groundwork for similar taxes in the future. He 
was one of only a handful of candidates, blue or red, who ran midterm 
ads that mentioned his position on climate change. And he wasn't shy 
about bringing up climate change on the Hill over and over again, even 
while the rest of his Republican colleagues ignored the issue and 
condemned solutions.

But Curbelo's political legacy isn't all green. He voted in favor of 
President Trump's tax plan that opened up parts of the Arctic Refuge for 
oil exploration, took money from energy companies in his bid for 
reelection, and recently caught flak for calling people who made the 
link between hurricanes and climate change "alarmists."

Curbelo says he plans on continuing his climate-related work after he 
steps down in January -- and he's still got his eye on a carbon tax. But 
Sunrise activists aren't giving up either. Serious climate legislation 
won't get through the Republican-controlled Senate for a long time. In 
the meantime, the Democratic Party has a choice: stick with its old, 
bipartisan approach (albeit now with fewer Republican moderates to reach 
to across the aisle), or break off from the middle like a piece of 
Arctic ice.
We might not have to wait long to see which road Democrats take. 
Capitalizing on the zeitgeist, Senator Bernie Sanders announced on 
Monday that he'll host a town hall dedicated to climate solutions next 
month. The 90-minute event is meant to galvanize support for fundamental 
changes in America's energy policy -- exactly the kind of solution for 
which Sunrise and Ocasio-Cortez are gunning. If this keeps up, veteran 
politicians may soon be forced to confront an approach that has been, 
until now, safely sequestered on the sidelines.
more at: - 
https://grist.org/article/theres-a-fight-brewing-in-d-c-over-the-future-of-the-green-movement/ 



[Audio podcast and transcript]
AMERICA'S RING OF FIRE
*Burning Hotter and Faster 
<https://www.revealnews.org/episodes/burning-hotter-and-faster/>*
We look at the recent Camp Fire, which is the deadliest and most 
destructive in state history and revisit an investigation from earlier 
this year.
Nov 24, 2018

Half of California's 10 worst wildfires have struck in the last two 
years. We look at the recent Camp Fire, which is the deadliest and most 
destructive in state history. And we revisit an investigation from 
earlier this year looking at how extreme wildfires are breaking our 
emergency response systems. Produced in partnership with KQED."

(from the) Full Transcript available:

    This is another one of those places where you can hear the system
    breaking down. The operator doesn't even know what Cal Fire is
    talking about. But that's actually because each county in
    California, there are 58, uses different technologies with different
    names to alert people. To Cal Fire it's reverse 911, to Napa it's
    called Nixel."

https://www.revealnews.org/episodes/burning-hotter-and-faster/


[NYTimes Opinion]
*Knowledge, Ignorance and Climate Change 
<https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/26/opinion/skepticism-philosophy-climate-change.html>*
Philosophers have been talking about skepticism for a long time. Some of 
those insights can shed light on our public discourse regarding climate 
change.
By N. Angel Pinillos
Dr. Pinillos is a professor of philosophy at Arizona State University.
No matter how smart or educated you are, what you don't know far 
surpasses anything you may know. Socrates taught us the virtue of 
recognizing our limitations. Wisdom, he said, requires possessing a type 
of humility manifested in an awareness of one's own ignorance. Since 
then, the value of being aware of our ignorance has been a recurring 
theme in Western thought: Rene' Descartes said it's necessary to doubt 
all things to build a solid foundation for science; and Ludwig 
Wittgenstein, reflecting on the limits of language, said that "the 
difficulty in philosophy is to say no more than we know."

Awareness of ignorance appears to be common in politics as well. In a 
recent "60 Minutes" interview, President Trump said of global warming, 
"I don't know that it's man-made." The same sentiment was echoed by 
Larry Kudlow, the director of the National Economic Council. Perhaps 
Trump and Kudlow, confident in their ignorance on these important 
issues, are simply expressing philosophical humility and wisdom. Or 
perhaps not.

Sometimes, when it appears that someone is expressing doubt, what he is 
really doing is recommending a course of action. For example, if I tell 
you that I don't know whether there is milk in the fridge, I'm not 
exhibiting philosophical wisdom -- I'm simply recommending that you 
check the fridge before you go shopping. From this perspective, what 
Trump is doing is telling us that governmental decisions should not 
assume that global warming is caused by humans.

According to NASA, at least 97 percent of actively publishing climate 
scientists think that "climate-warming trends over the past century are 
extremely likely caused by human activities." Americans overwhelmingly 
agree that the federal government needs to take significant action. In a 
recent poll conducted by Stanford University, ABC News and Resources for 
the Future, 61 percent of those surveyed said that the federal 
government should take a great deal or a lot of action to curb global 
warming. And an additional 19 percent believe that the government should 
take moderate action.

As a philosopher, I have nothing to add to the scientific evidence of 
global warming, but I can tell you how it's possible to get ourselves to 
sincerely doubt things, despite abundant evidence to the contrary. I 
also have suggestions about how to fix this.

To understand how it's possible to doubt something despite evidence to 
the contrary, try some thought experiments. Suppose you observe a 
shopper at the convenience store buying a lottery ticket. You are aware 
that the probability that he will lose the lottery is astronomically 
high, typically above 99.99 percent, but it's hard to get yourself to 
sincerely say you know this person will lose the lottery. Now imagine 
your doctor screens you for a disease, and the test comes out negative. 
But consider the possibility that this result is one of those rare 
"false negative" cases. Do you really know the result of this particular 
test is not a false negative?
These scenarios suggest that it's possible to feel as though you don't 
know something even when possessing enormous evidence in its favor. 
Philosophers call scenarios like these "skeptical pressure" cases, and 
they arise in mundane, boring cases that have nothing to do with 
politics or what one wants to be true. In general, a skeptical pressure 
case is a thought experiment in which the protagonist has good evidence 
for something that he or she believes, but the reader is reminded that 
the protagonist could have made a mistake. If the story is set up in the 
right way, the reader will be tempted to think that the protagonist's 
belief isn't genuine knowledge.

When presented with these thought experiments, some philosophy students 
conclude that what these examples show is that knowledge requires 
full-blown certainty. In these skeptical pressure cases, the evidence is 
overwhelming, but not 100 percent. It's an attractive idea, but it 
doesn't sit well with the fact that we ordinarily say we know lots of 
things with much lower probability. For example, I know I will be 
grading student papers this weekend. Although the chance of this 
happening is high, it is not anything close to 100 percent, since there 
is always the chance I'll get sick, or that something more important 
will come up. In fact, the chance of getting sick and not grading is 
much higher than the chance of winning the lottery. So how could it be 
that I know I will be grading and not know that the shopper at the 
convenience store will lose the lottery?

Philosophers have been studying skeptical pressure intensely for the 
past 50 years. Although there is no consensus about how it arises, a 
promising idea defended by the philosopher David Lewis is that skeptical 
pressure cases often involve focusing on the possibility of error. Once 
we start worrying and ruminating about this possibility, no matter how 
far-fetched, something in our brains causes us to doubt. The philosopher 
Jennifer Nagel aptly calls this type of effect "epistemic anxiety."

In my own work, I have speculated that an extreme version of this 
phenomenon is operative in obsessive compulsive disorder, a condition 
that affects millions of Americans. In many cases of O.C.D., patients 
are paralyzed with doubt about some fact -- against all evidence. For 
example, a patient might doubt whether she turned off her stove despite 
having just checked multiple times. As with skeptical pressure cases, 
the focus on the possibility that one might be wrong plays a central 
role in the phenomenon.

Let's return to climate change skepticism. According to social 
psychology, climate change deniers tend to espouse conservative views, 
which suggests that party ideology is partly responsible for these 
attitudes. I think that we should also think about the philosophical 
nature of skeptical reactions, an apolitical phenomenon.

The standard response by climate skeptics is a lot like our reaction to 
skeptical pressure cases. Climate skeptics understand that 97 percent of 
scientists disagree with them, but they focus on the very tiny fraction 
of holdouts. As in the lottery case, this focus might be enough to 
sustain their skepticism. We have seen this pattern before. Anti-vaccine 
proponents, for example, aware that medical professionals disagree with 
their position, focus on any bit of fringe research that might say 
otherwise.

Skeptical allure can be gripping. Piling on more evidence does not 
typically shake you out of it, just as making it even more probable that 
you will lose the lottery does not all of a sudden make you feel like 
you know your ticket is a loser.

One way to counter the effects of skepticism is to stop talking about 
"knowledge" and switch to talking about probabilities. Instead of saying 
that you don't know some claim, try to estimate the probability that it 
is true. As hedge fund managers, economists, policy researchers, doctors 
and bookmakers have long been aware, the way to make decisions while 
managing risk is through probabilities. Once we switch to this 
perspective, claims to "not know," like those made by Trump, lose their 
force and we are pushed to think more carefully about the existing data 
and engage in cost-benefit analyses.

Interestingly, people in the grips of skepticism are often still willing 
to accept the objective probabilities. Think about the lottery case 
again. Although you find it hard to say you know the shopper will lose 
the lottery, you readily agree that it is still very probable that he 
will lose. What this suggests is that even climate skeptics could budge 
on their esteemed likelihood of climate change without renouncing their 
initial skepticism. It's easy to say you don't know, but it's harder to 
commit to an actual low probability estimate in the face of overwhelming 
contrary evidence.

Socrates was correct that awareness of one's ignorance is virtuous, but 
philosophers have subsequently uncovered many pitfalls associated with 
claims of ignorance. An appreciation of these issues can help elevate 
public discourse on important topics, including the future of our planet.

N. Angel Pinillos is a professor of philosophy in the School of 
Historical, Philosophical and Religious Studies at Arizona State University.

Now in print: "Modern Ethics in 77 Arguments" and "The Stone Reader: 
Modern Philosophy in 133 Arguments," with essays from the series, edited 
by Peter Catapano and Simon Critchley, published by Liveright Books.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/26/opinion/skepticism-philosophy-climate-change.html


November 24, 2018
*Neil deGrasse Tyson: Elon Musk Is The Most Important Person Alive Today 
<https://youtu.be/BXcgBfi4xxo>*
CNBC Make It. Published on Nov 21, 2018
""As important as Steve Jobs was, here's the difference: Elon Musk is 
trying to invent a future, not by providing the next app," says renowned 
astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson.

"What Elon Musk is doing is not simply giving us the next app that will 
be awesome on our smartphone," deGrasse Tyson says. "No, he is thinking 
about society, culture, how we interact, what forces need to be in play 
to take civilization into the next century."

Between Musk's work at Tesla developing electric cars and his SpaceX 
plans to put humans on Mars by 2024 (and, eventually, to colonize the 
planet), the billionaire tech executive is attempting to revolutionize 
both human transportation and space exploration, deGrasse Tyson says.

Of course, as an astrophysicist and director of the Hayden Planetarium 
in New York, deGrasse Tyson might be expected to have a soft spot for 
Musk's grand intergalactic plans. But deGrasse Tyson, who also hosts the 
show "StarTalk" on the National Geographic Channel, argues that space 
colonization could have a tremendous impact on civilization, potentially 
eliminating the need for warring over dwindling natural resources.

"Because there's unlimited resources in space; resources that, on Earth, 
we fight wars over," deGrasse Tyson tells CNBC Make It. "In space, you 
don't need to fight a war, just go to another asteroid and get your 
resources. A whole category of war has the potential of evaporating 
entirely with the exploitation of space resources, which includes the 
unlimited access to energy as well."

That's the sort of universal issue that Musk is trying to tackle, 
deGrasse Tyson argues, which gives him the potential to have the 
greatest long-term effect on our civilization. "[H]e will transform 
civilization as we know it," deGrasse Tyson says.

Granted, Musk has had his share of detractors over the past year. Musk 
was forced to step down from his role as Tesla's chairman as part of a 
settlement with the SEC over a series of tweets in August in which he 
discussed taking Tesla private (the SEC alleged the tweets constituted 
fraud on Musk's part). The billionaire CEO has also received quite a bit 
of criticism for, among other things: seemingly smoking marijuana on 
video, calling a British cave diver a "pedo" on Twitter, and clashing 
with journalists during an earnings call.

However, deGrasse Tyson feels that Musk is somewhat underappreciated, 
though he argues that Musk is beloved by many people, including Tesla 
owners and anyone interested in space exploration. ("Go, Elon Musk! And, 
I don't care if he gets high," deGrasse Tyson jokes about the 
controversy over Musk supposedly using drugs.)

"People who own Teslas love their Tesla …" deGrasse Tyson says. "Anyone 
who knows and cares about space exploration knows and cares about Elon 
Musk."

"[W]e're on the frontier of the future of civilization, and no I don't 
think he gets his full due from all sectors of society," says deGrasse 
Tyson, "but ultimately he will when the sectors that he is pioneering 
transform the lives of those who currently have no clue that their life 
is about to change."

About CNBC Make It.: CNBC Make It. is a new section of CNBC dedicated to 
making you smarter about managing your business, career, and money.
https://youtu.be/BXcgBfi4xxo


[Up in the Arctic]
*Vegetation in Barents Region disturbed by mid-autumn thaw 
<https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/ecology/2018/11/autumn-spring-arctics-new-season>*
After frost comes spring, but when it happens in mid-November plants get 
confused. That is not good news.
By Thomas Nilsen - November 16, 2018
November on the coast of the Barents Sea has been unseasonably warm. 
Halfway, the Norwegian Meteorological Institute could report 5,9 degrees 
Celsius above normal for Troms and Finnmark region in northern Norway.

What was snow-covered and frozen in late October is again rainy and warm.

The warm weather are confusing plants and trees. Some, like the 
low-growing goat willow tree, believes it is spring. On Friday, catkins, 
the fuzzy soft silver-colored nubs, started to appear, both near 
Kirkenes and in Murmansk, as reported by Severpost.

Both are cities far above the Arctic Circle.

Catkins are actually the trees' flowers just before they fully bloom, 
like you normally can see in late April, early May in the Barents Region.
"Very interesting, but not at all good news," says Paul Eric Aspholm, 
Research Scientist with the Norwegian Institute of Bioeconomy Research 
(NIBIO).

Aspholm works at Svanhovd, NIBIO's department in the Pasvik valley in 
the Norwegian-Russian borderland, the heart of the area experiencing 
some of the most dramatic climate changes in the Arctic.
"It has been reported before, catkins on goat willow trees in late 
autumn, but that was south in Nordland," Paul Eric Aspholm tells. 
Nordland is the county in Northern-Norway with coastline to the 
North-Atlantic and not the Arctic Ocean like the Barents Sea.

What happens, Aspholm explains, is that the tree "wakes up" with the 
warm temperatures after a period of frost and believes the winter is 
past. In combination with no frost in the ground, the plants blooming 
are triggered.
"Over the last decade, we have seen more and more changes in the flora, 
especially in the latest few years," Aspholm says.

He explains how such confusion like we see this November could harm 
trees and plants in the Arctic.

"The plants use a lot of energy when blooming. It is a kind of failed 
reproduction and no seeds are produced. One thing is the catkins we can 
see, but there are likely a lot of other processes going on inside the 
plant disturbing the balance in what should be the dormant phase."

"We know very little about how this will affect the plants up here in 
the Arctic environment," says Paul Eric Aspholm.

Lack of daylight, he adds, slows down the spring effects. Whatever 
temperatures, November is dark while May is light around the clock up 
north at 69 degrees north and light is important for all plants and 
trees. Secondly, there are no bees and butterflies to pollinate any 
flowers in November.
The warm weather along the coast of the Barents Sea is forecasted to 
last at least until mid-next week.
https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/ecology/2018/11/autumn-spring-arctics-new-season


*This Day in Climate History - November 27, 2014 
<http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/27/us/without-passing-a-single-law-obama-crafts-bold-enviornmental-policy.html> 
- from D.R. Tucker*
November 27, 2014:
The New York Times reports:

    "President Obama could leave office with the most aggressive,
    far-reaching environmental legacy of any occupant of the White
    House. Yet it is very possible that not a single major environmental
    law will have passed during his two terms in Washington.

    "Instead, Mr. Obama has turned to the vast reach of the Clean Air
    Act of 1970, which some legal experts call the most powerful
    environmental law in the world. Faced with a Congress that has shut
    down his attempts to push through an environmental agenda, Mr. Obama
    is using the authority of the act passed at the birth of the
    environmental movement to issue a series of landmark regulations on
    air pollution, from soot to smog, to mercury and planet-warming
    carbon dioxide."

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/27/us/without-passing-a-single-law-obama-crafts-bold-enviornmental-policy.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.