[TheClimate.Vote] September 25, 2018 - Daily Global Warming News Digest

[Richard Pauli]

/September 25, 2018/

[MediaMatters: while science is stronger, news coverage is weaker]
*National TV news is still failing to properly incorporate climate 
change into hurricane coverage 
<https://www.mediamatters.org/blog/2018/09/24/National-TV-news-is-still-failing-to-properly-incorporate-climate-change-into-hurricane-co/221423>*
ABC did not mention climate at all during Florence, while CBS, PBS, CNN, 
and MSNBC did worse than last year during Harvey
TED MACDONALD
A Media Matters analysis of Hurricane Florence broadcast news coverage 
from September 7-19 found that ABC failed to air a single segment that 
mentioned the links between climate change and hurricanes like Florence, 
while NBC aired one segment and CBS aired two. PBS NewsHour also aired 
two. A review of weekday, prime-time coverage of Florence on the three 
major cable news networks found that MSNBC ran four segments that 
mentioned climate change in the context of hurricanes, and CNN ran two. 
Fox aired six segments, but these either downplayed or outright 
dismissed the link between climate change and hurricanes. Overall, 
coverage was down from a year ago: The majority of the networks 
mentioned the connections between hurricanes and climate change in fewer 
segments than they did while covering Hurricane Harvey last year.

Florence brought historic levels of rainfall and destruction to the 
Carolinas. Scientists say that climate change worsened these effects.
- - - -
video report 
https://www.mediamatters.org/embed/clips/2018/09/21/61706/cbs-thismorning-09152018-berardelli
video report 
https://www.mediamatters.org/embed/clips/2018/09/21/61708/pbs-newshour-09192018-climate
- - - - -
Scientists say that climate change is exacerbating some of the worst 
effects of hurricanes like Florence. Climate scientist Jennifer Francis 
of the Rutgers Climate Institute told Bloomberg:

    *Warming oceans, a more rapidly warming arctic, melting ice sheets
    are all contributing in various way to conditions like what we're
    observing now. ... It's favoring slow moving weather patterns, more
    intense tropical storms and heavier downpours. And they're all more
    likely as we continue to warm the Earth.*

- - - -
Prime-time cable: CNN and MSNBC mentioned climate change less often 
during Florence coverage than they did last year during Harvey
We also analyzed prime-time, weekday shows on CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News 
from September 7-19. CNN and MSNBC both aired fewer segments that 
discussed climate change in the context of hurricanes than they did 
during Hurricane Harvey. Fox aired the same number as last year, but its 
coverage was even more dismissive of climate science now than it was in 
2017.

CNN aired two segments that discussed the links between climate change 
and hurricanes, down from five such segments that ran during Harvey 
coverage. Both of the climate mentions occurred on September 11, when 
CNN commentators only briefly raised the topic during broader 
discussions. CNN Senior Political Analyst Ron Brownstein mentioned on 
The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer that hurricanes are influenced by 
the changing climate, while CNN Political Commentator Van Jones made a 
similar point on Cuomo Prime Time.

MSNBC aired four segments that discussed the links between climate 
change and hurricanes, down from five that ran during Harvey coverage. 
The September 13 episode of All In With Chris Hayes featured a 
substantive and informative segment with meteorologist Eric Holthaus -- 
the best of the prime-time cable segments we analyzed. Holthaus began 
the discussion by stating, "Florence is a huge hurricane. I mean, this 
is one of the largest hurricanes that we've ever seen in the Atlantic. 
And you can't really talk about this without talking about climate 
change." He explained that intense rain and storm surge fueled by 
climate change were major components of the storm. The other MSNBC 
mentions of climate change occurred in the context of broader 
discussions: one more on the September 13 All In episode; one on the 
September 13 episode of Hardball with Chris Matthews; and one on the 
September 11 episode of The Beat with Ari Melber.

Fox News aired six segments that mentioned climate change in its 
Florence coverage, but all of them were dismissive of the issue. That's 
slightly worse than last year during Harvey, when Fox also aired six 
such segments, only five of which were dismissive of the links between 
climate change and hurricanes.
Of Fox's six segments that mentioned climate change this year, two 
featured well-known climate deniers who disputed any connections between 
climate change and hurricanes: The September 13 episode of Hannity 
included commentary from meteorologist Joe Bastardi, and the September 
14 episode of Tucker Carlson Tonight featured meteorologist Roy Spencer. 
In the other four Fox segments, hosts took aim at a Washington Post 
editorial that called President Trump complicit in extreme weather 
because his administration has been rolling back climate protections. 
Three of these attacks came from Sean Hannity -- on September 12, 13, 
and 14 -- and the fourth from Greg Gutfeld on September 12...
https://www.mediamatters.org/blog/2018/09/24/National-TV-news-is-still-failing-to-properly-incorporate-climate-change-into-hurricane-co/221423


[No corners on a globe]
*Where should you move to save yourself from climate change? 
<https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/sep/24/climate-change-where-to-move-us-avoid-floods-hurricanes>*
- -- -
Much of the east coast will look dicey if the seas rise at such a pace 
that they'll be 6ft higher by the end of the century, but plenty will 
rest on local decisions made to shield residents from flooding. New York 
City, for example, is flanked by rising water and is already stiflingly 
hot in summer, but a multibillion-dollar strategy to build flood 
defenses and buy out vulnerable areas should help stave off the worst 
impacts.

Climate resiliency is a growing focus for many towns and cities that 
fret about expensive clean-up costs from disasters, shading people from 
the heat or dealing with an eroding tax base should residents decide to 
uproot and head somewhere safer.

The scope of these climate considerations is vast, touching on 
everything from transport links to the availability of flood insurance. 
Jesse Keenan, a climate adaptation expert at Harvard University, said 
that he likes Buffalo, New York, and Duluth, Minnesota, as climate 
refuges as they tick many of the appropriate boxes.

"Their sources of energy production are stable, they have cooler 
climates and they have access to plenty of fresh water," Keenan said.

"They also have less vulnerability to forest fires, as compared to 
somewhere like the Pacific north-west. They also have a legacy of excess 
infrastructural capacity that allows them to diversify their economy in 
the future. Land prices are cheap and they have a relatively 
well-educated and skilled labor force."

These safe havens are more of a fantasy wishlist for many moderate-to 
low-income people as property and rental values rise in desirable areas. 
Others won't want to leave more vulnerable parts of the US due to more 
umbilical links, to family and jobs and a sense of home.

"As we saw after Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Maria, communities that 
are able to move can do so, especially if family and friends do the 
same," said Shandas. "Those with less resources are left behind."
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/sep/24/climate-change-where-to-move-us-avoid-floods-hurricanes
- - - -
[What about that campsite on the lake?]
*We asked 11 climate scientists where they'd live in the US to avoid 
future natural disasters - here's what they said 
<https://www.businessinsider.com/where-to-live-to-avoid-natural-disaster-climatologists-2018-8>*
Aria Bendix Sep. 1, 2018
2017 was a record year for natural disasters in the US, with 16 severe 
weather events causing at least $306 billion in damages. While 2018 
portends to be less destructive, it has already seen its fair share of 
catastrophe: As of July 9, six storms have each generated at least $1 
billion in losses...
The following cities were recommended by climatologists as some of the 
least vulnerable to disaster.

    Tulsa, Oklahoma...
    Boulder, Colorado...
    San Diego, California...
    Minneapolis-St Paul, Minnesota
    Sacramento, California
    Charlotte, North Carolina
    Portland, Oregon...
    Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania...
    and- - Anywhere but Hawaii...

https://www.businessinsider.com/where-to-live-to-avoid-natural-disaster-climatologists-2018-8#pittsburgh-pennsylvania-8


[US as source of refugees]
*Meet the 'climate refugees' who already had to leave their homes 
<https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/sep/24/climate-refugees-new-orleans-houston-hurricane-katrina-hurricane-harvey>*
- - -
We are called climate refugees, but I hate that term. "Refugee" suggests 
something with no clear plan or action but we have a clear plan and are 
doing this as a unified tribe. Most people believe we have to move 
because of climate change and also because the oil companies dug canals 
that allowed salt water to intrude further. It's like we've hit the fast 
forward button on the environment.
We will be the first ones to face this in the modern US but we won't be 
the last. It's important for us to get it right so other communities 
know that they can do it, too...
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/sep/24/climate-refugees-new-orleans-houston-hurricane-katrina-hurricane-harvey


*Intellectual Property and Climate Change 
<https://www.the-trouble.com/content/2018/9/20/intellectual-property-and-climate-change>**
<https://www.the-trouble.com/content/2018/9/20/intellectual-property-and-climate-change>*Zachary 
Eldredge - September 20, 2018
In climate politics, we are faced with the immense task of rapidly 
restructuring the global economy to function on an entirely different 
basis. Such a task is impossible without a near-complete technological 
revolution. We will need to efficiently produce and store cheap, clean 
energy; to engineer new, efficient machines for both personal use and 
industrial production; and to discover new modes of agriculture capable 
of feeding humans without destroying the earth...
- - - -
Patents have provided a robust system for encouraging technological 
growth. The 20th century saw both a robust patent system, with over five 
million US design patents granted, and rapid technological development 
in the United States. Indeed, under capitalism, this is how research 
must happen -- the promise of future gains incentivize private 
investment by owners of capital. Theoretically, a strong patent system 
is necessary in this situation, and we should be wary of undermining it 
and potentially discouraging investment in R&D. But a key feature of the 
patent system, even when it works on its own terms, is the temporary 
monopoly it grants in exchange for public disclosure. A patent in the US 
applies for twenty years, and the inventor must disclose all the 
invention details in the application. The climate does not have twenty 
years. We cannot wait until 2038 for new green technologies to become 
available and affordable worldwide. Therefore, we must be actively 
working on finding a new balance between the return on investments into 
research and the exclusionary rights that are granted to encourage that 
investment.

None of this is news to the people at risk -- technology transfer and 
intellectual properties have been key elements of international talks. 
The UN's 1993 non-binding Agenda 21, a blueprint for sustainable 
development in the 21st century, included the recommendation of: "the 
undertaking of measures to prevent the abuse of intellectual property 
rights, including rules with respect to their acquisition through 
compulsory licensing." Similar discourse has since surrounded climate 
talks, but neither the Kyoto nor Paris agreements contain any mention of 
patents or intellectual property rights. As such, despite widespread 
calls from poorer countries to incorporate intellectual property relief 
measures, no international framework for addressing this technical 
imbalance exists at the moment. However, the key role that technological 
advancement will play in averting climate catastrophe is reflected in 
the Paris Agreement's five-year review structure, which recognizes that 
rapid technological progress implies a periodic re-calibrating of 
climate goals.

The remedy is clear: we must begin taking aggressive action to break 
patents that hinder a just transition away from fossil fuels, whether 
nationally or internationally. It is not enough to hope that the market 
incentives a patent provides will stimulate the correct technological 
development, because the timescale of patent protection is too long for 
the climate emergency. Action is required sooner rather than later. Nor 
can we rely on the rich to be generous. Elon Musk, in an era of sunnier 
media relations, announced that he would open Tesla's patents and was 
roundly praised for it. We should view this as akin to all other 
billionaire philanthropy: a worthy gesture utterly too small to make the 
necessary difference. Unsurprisingly, Musk continued seeking patents on 
other aspects of his business, such as battery production, suggesting 
that his prior commitment to "open source hardware" was simply marketing.

Instead of relying on the benevolence of the odd tech baron, we can open 
patents directly. This both directly addresses the problems that arise 
when a patent is abused and discourages future abuse. There are two 
legal mechanisms which make this possible in the United States. The 
first is a term in the Bayh-Dole Act known as "march-in" rights. This 
gives the federal government the right, for publicly-funded inventions, 
to "march-in" and license the patent to other producers of its choosing. 
Thus, the patent exclusivity is broken. One condition which must be met 
to justify this action is that "action is necessary to alleviate health 
or safety needs." Climate change is among the largest public "health or 
safety needs" which could possibly exist, so there is ample reason to 
believe that the legal basis for this type of patent seizure has been met.

The second legal mechanism is less direct, and lies in the law that 
defines the US government's liability for patent infringement. Under US 
law, the remedy for a patent holder in response to government patent 
infringement is suit in federal court for "reasonable" compensation. 
Rather than prevent the use of a technology, all a patent holder can ask 
for is that compensation, which can be well below the amount they would 
have extracted from the market. This approach could be described as 
"asking forgiveness, not permission." Rather than invoke any direct 
claim on the patent (as the government has for Bayh-Dole march-in 
rights), the government can use the technology immediately and pay 
damages later. Although this may imply that the government needs to 
directly be involved in the production, the law is clear that 
contractors or others acting with government authorization are protected...
- - - -
Patent-breaking alone won't fix climate. It's an ecomodernist fallacy to 
believe that if only we invent the right device, we can solve the 
climate crisis. Patent-breaking done today, however, accomplishes two 
goals. First, regardless of our ideals, there is a physical world we 
must act in now. We must act soon to avoid "technological lock-in," a 
pattern where our investments today set us on courses for the future, 
such as the construction of pipelines that imply future natural gas 
production.  Every green technology or sustainable infrastructure we 
build now buys us more time for growth and progress as as we work 
towards full decarbonization. Second, social transformation begins by 
bridging the system we have now, where research is done to maximize the 
market returns to a company, with a system where research can be done to 
benefit humanity with an emphasis on what good a technology can do 
rather than what it sells for. It's a bridge whose foundations lie in 
current law, and whose mechanisms we can implement with a combination of 
popular pressure to act on climate, international demands, and the 
support of technological workers themselves.

In climate politics, we must act on every time scale at once: we must 
think about emissions in the next year while simultaneously 
restructuring our economy over the course of the next thirty or forty 
years for complete decarbonization. The climate crisis necessitates 
immediate, actionable policy that leads naturally into a long-term 
decarbonization plan. Systems of scientific solidarity like 
patent-breaking can form the basis for moving beyond the original 
frameworks of intellectual property. If we take climate mobilization 
seriously, these are the readily-deployed initiatives and plans which we 
must include in our first volley of actions.
https://www.the-trouble.com/content/2018/9/20/intellectual-property-and-climate-change


[Parody music by old geezers with great talent]
*ENVIRONMENTALLY RESIGNED – Parody of Gentle On My Mind 
<https://parodyproject.com/environmentally-resigned-parody-of-gentle-on-my-mind/>*
Every day Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke is in office, he works to 
destroy our public lands and waters at the expense of our communities. 
He needs to be "environmentally resigned." He proposed gutting Bears 
Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monuments. He wants to 
massively ramp up oil and gas drilling off our coasts. And he's trying 
to slash protections for the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. There are 
already 14 federal investigations into Zinke's decision-making, misuse 
of funds, and potential corruption.
And while we're at it we need to get rid of Acting EPA Administrator 
Andrew Wheeler, who has proposed a dramatic weakening of protections 
against pollution that currently prevent 100,000 tons of methane 
pollution and 30,000 tons of smog-forming chemicals annually, and we 
need these protections now more than ever.
- - - video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJjclRiwXpo Parody of Gentle 
on My Mind by John Hartford
*LYRICS to ENVIRONMENTALLY RESIGNED*

    It's knowing that the truth will have a cost
    that causes some people to balk,
    and makes them tend to leave their sleeping brains
    rolled up and stashed behind their couch,
    where they sit and watch the corporate news
    controlled by those who profit
    from a system that pollutes both earth and mind.
    It keeps us on the backroads
    cut off from the solutions
    and we're left environmentally resigned.

    It's knowing that the atmospheric C02
    affects the planet's climate,
    with levels at the highest that they'e been
    over the last 3 million years.
    While it's true that we could fix it,
    the inherent threat to profit
    seems to make it so we're always disinclined.
    What use will all that money be
    when the planet can't sustain us
    and the earth's environmentally resigned.

    They're clinging to some dead beliefs
    while rapid changes happen all around us,;
    Believing something someone said
    that blames it on some faction they despise.
    It's just knowing that the world
    could be impacted with disaster,
    like an earthquake and a hurricane combined,
    and to them it wouldn't indicate
    that something was amiss,
    'cause they're environmentally resigned.

    It makes some people mad to say that
    humans could affect the course of nature.
    Go ahead and check the comments
    that you'll find below this post.
    I rest my case.
    How can we find solutions
    when the truth is being purposefully maligned?
    When things get to their worst
    they'll still deny we caused it.
    We'll be environmentally resigned.

    It's knowing that the truth will have a cost
    that causes some people to balk,
    and makes them tend to leave their sleeping brains
    rolled up and stashed behind their couch,
    where they sit and watch the corporate news
    controlled by those who profit
    from a system that pollutes both earth and mind.
    It keeps us on the backroads
    cut off from the solutions
    and we're left environmentally resigned.

SOURCE MATERIAL
"Gentle on My Mind" was written by John Hartford, and it was the 
recipient of four Grammy Awards in 1968, which included Best Folk 
Performance, Best Country & Western Song (Songwriter), Best Country & 
Western Solo Vocal Performance and Male and Best Country & Western 
Recording, which went to American country music singer Glen Campbell for 
his version of Hartford's song.

The song was released in June 1967 as the only single from the album of 
the same name. It was re-released in July 1968 to more success. Glen 
Campbell's version received over 5 million plays on the radio. Campbell 
used "Gentle on My Mind" as the theme to his television variety show, 
The Glen Campbell Goodtime Hour between 1969 and 1972.

Dean Martin's version, recorded in 1968, was a major hit in the United 
Kingdom; three versions of the song, Campbell's, Martin's and Patti 
Page's, all reached the top ten of the U.S. easy listening chart in 
1968. The song was ranked number 16 on BMI's Top 100 Songs of the Century.
https://parodyproject.com/environmentally-resigned-parody-of-gentle-on-my-mind/


*This Day in Climate History - September 25, 2014 
<http://nypost.com/2014/09/25/harpers-story-stokes-backlash-from-pbs/> - 
from D.R. Tucker*
September 25, 2014:
New York Times columnist Gail Collins observes:

    "There was a time, children, when the parties worked together on
    climate-change issues. No more. Only 3 percent of current Republican
    members of Congress have been willing to go on record as accepting
    the fact that people are causing global warming. That, at least, was
    the calculation by PolitiFact, which found a grand total of eight
    Republican nondeniers in the House and Senate. That includes
    Representative Michael Grimm of New York, who while laudably
    open-minded on this subject, is also under indictment for perjury
    and tax fraud. So we may be pushing 2 percent in January.

    "This is sort of stunning. We're only looking for a simple
    acknowledgment of basic facts. We'll give a pass to folks who accept
    the connection between human behavior and climate change, but say
    they don't want to do anything about it."

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/25/opinion/gail-collins-the-politics-of-climate-change.html?ref=opinion&_r=0
- - - -
PBS announces that it will cease advertising in Harper's magazine, in 
apparent retaliation for a recent article detailing PBS's ties to 
billionaire climate-change denier David Koch.

    One of the themes of the Harper's article is the protests that have
    broken out among PBS supporters worried over the secretive and
    conservative-leaning David Koch, who has a seat on the public
    broadcasting station in Boston, WGBH. The station is one of the
    crown jewels in the PBS system.

    The article, by Eugenia Williamson, details a long history of money
    woes at PBS that began even in the heady days of its founding by
    President Lyndon Johnson.

    And, she claims the corporate sponsors and board members can often
    influence what does and does not get aired.

    "I thought they'd be mad and maybe write a letter to the editor, or
    propose a debate," said MacArthur.

http://nypost.com/2014/09/25/harpers-story-stokes-backlash-from-pbs/


/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
//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/20180925/909d873f/attachment.html>