[TheClimate.Vote] August 31, 2019 - Daily Global Warming News Digest

[Richard Pauli]

/August 31, 2019/

[maybe say the Amazon is primed]
*'It's Really Close': How the Amazon Rainforest Could Self-Destruct*
Climate change and man-made fires could set off a cycle of 
self-perpetuating deforestation, scientists warn.
By Max Fisher
Aug. 30, 2019
As fires rage across the Amazon, a growing number of scientists are 
raising the alarm about a nightmare scenario that could see much of the 
world's largest rainforest erased from the earth...
- - -
No one knows for sure whether and when this might happen, though some 
scientists who study the Amazon ecosystem call it imminent. If it does 
happen, a body of research suggests, the Amazon as a whole would cross a 
tipping point and begin to self-destruct -- a process of 
self-perpetuating deforestation known as dieback.

If that is left unchecked, half or more of the rainforest could erode 
into savanna, according to some estimates, and then the rainforest, 
which has long absorbed the world's greenhouse gases, could instead 
begin to emit them...
- - -
The world may one day look back and find the warnings of ecological 
catastrophe embedded in research papers like one led by Jennifer Balch, 
an expert on fire.

Before Jair Bolsonaro became president of Brazil and oversaw this 
summer's drastic increase in man-made fires in the Amazon rainforest, 
Dr. Balch and her colleagues set out to study what was then a rarer 
phenomenon.

They subjected plots of rainforest to a decade of small but repeated 
fires like those set by farmers, and they found something alarming. 
After enough cycles, even if the fires caused only moderate damage, if 
rainfall dropped, the trees began dying off in huge numbers.

The proportion of plant life that died after a fire suddenly spiked from 
5 or 10 percent to 60 percent -- sudden ecological death.

"We were able to document that, yes, the Amazon does have a tipping 
point," Dr. Balch said of her team's experiment, which is still going 
on. "And it can happen in a very short period of time."

But what most disturbed the scientists was how this phenomenon seemed to 
fit into a larger cycle -- one that implicated the rainforest as a whole.

That cycle is triggered by four forces, all but one of them man-made: 
roads, fires, invasive grasses and climate change.

Roads, along with other forms of construction, fragment the rainforest, 
leaving each acre of plant life less able to endure a fire or resist its 
spread.

"As fragmentation is happening, you're exposing a lot more forest 
edges," Dr. Balch said. Those edges are more susceptible to drying out 
and other dangers.

Invasive grasses are one of those dangers, lingering at forest edges. 
Even a small fire can wipe out a rainforest's undergrowth. Then grasses 
rush in, setting a blanket of dry, flammable plant life -- and making 
the next fire far more damaging.

Climate change, by heating the Amazon, has made its dry seasons dryer 
and more hospitable to those grasses. As fires clear undergrowth, they 
carve out new, vulnerable forest edges and dry out forests, exacerbating 
the effects of climate change.

But what makes those forces so dangerous is not that they kill trees -- 
it's that they reduce rainfall.

In a healthy rainforest, plant life absorbs rainwater and groundwater, 
then sweats it back out into the atmosphere as moisture, seeding more 
rain. But once a section of rainforest has been thinned and fragmented, 
it gives off less moisture. Rainfall decreases, and the ground, of 
course, grows drier.

As a result, the next fire burns hotter and reaches deeper, causing more 
damage. Past a certain point, the forest no longer produces enough rain 
to survive...
- - -
*Could the Amazon Die?*
There are two prevailing theories for what might happen past the 
Amazon's tipping point.

One is that cycles of destruction will play out only where damage is 
most severe. Over time, each acre of rainforest that is dried out or 
destroyed would put neighboring areas at greater risk, potentially 
accelerating as it spreads. But dieback in one stretch need not 
necessarily put the entire rainforest at risk.

In the more dire scenario, enough disruptions could upend the Amazon's 
weather system as a whole, eventually transforming the region from 
rainforest into savanna.

No one knows for sure whether this is possible, much less likely. But 
Dr. Lovejoy, the environmental scientist, underscored that rain and 
weather patterns are continental -- and rely on a full, healthy Amazon.

"The models, and they're pretty consistent," he said, "suggest that the 
combination of fire and climate change and deforestation will weaken the 
hydrological cycle of the Amazon to the point where you just get 
insufficient rainfall in the south and the east, and then part of the 
central Amazon, to actually support a rainforest."

In either scenario, the Amazon is thought to be approaching a point past 
which it will begin driving its own destruction...
- - -
The simulation spit out a year: 2050. That was when the rainforest would 
become a net emitter of greenhouse gasses. The findings were heavily 
debated.
As the warning signs of large-scale dieback have mounted, more 
scientists have come to see that scenario as a threat not just to the 
Amazon's inhabitants and Brazil's economy, but to a world already 
struggling to confront climate change.

"It's a lot of carbon," Dr. Lovejoy said. "It's a really big number."

And it's not just the Amazon.

"This is a global phenomenon," said Dr. Balch, who has studied 
grasslands in the United States that could pose a similar threat. Dr. 
Nepstad said that he had found warning signs in the rainforests of 
Indonesia and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Dr. Lovejoy compared this moment to the years before the onset of the 
Dust Bowl, in which mismanagement and drought turned American plains 
states into wastelands during the 1930s.

"Nobody really saw that coming," he said. "The difference between then 
and now is we do see it coming and we know enough not to do it."
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/30/world/americas/amazon-rainforest-fires-climate.html




[colder interior makes hotter exterior]
*The air conditioning trap: how cold air is heating the world*
The warmer it gets, the more we use air conditioning. The more we use 
air conditioning, the warmer it gets. Is there any way out of this trap?
By Stephen Buranyi
This year, by the evening of Sunday 21 July, with temperatures above 36C 
(97F) and demand at more than 12,000MW every second, Con Edison cut 
power to 50,000 customers in Brooklyn and Queens for 24 hours, afraid 
that parts of the nearby grid were close to collapse, which could have 
left hundreds of thousands of people without power for days. The state 
had to send in police to help residents, and Con Edison crews dispensed 
dry ice for people to cool their homes.

As the world gets hotter, scenes like these will become increasingly 
common. Buying an air conditioner is perhaps the most popular individual 
response to climate change, and air conditioners are almost uniquely 
power-hungry appliances: a small unit cooling a single room, on average, 
consumes more power than running four fridges, while a central unit 
cooling an average house uses more power than 15. "Last year in Beijing, 
during a heatwave, 50% of the power capacity was going to air 
conditioning," says John Dulac, an analyst at the International Energy 
Agency (IEA). "These are 'oh shit' moments."

There are just over 1bn single-room air conditioning units in the world 
right now - about one for every seven people on earth. Numerous reports 
have projected that by 2050 there are likely to be more than 4.5bn, 
making them as ubiquitous as the mobile phone is today. The US already 
uses as much electricity for air conditioning each year as the UK uses 
in total. The IEA projects that as the rest of the world reaches similar 
levels, air conditioning will use about 13% of all electricity 
worldwide, and produce 2bn tonnes of CO2 a year - about the same amount 
as India, the world's third-largest emitter, produces today.

All of these reports note the awful irony of this feedback loop: warmer 
temperatures lead to more air conditioning; more air conditioning leads 
to warmer temperatures. The problem posed by air conditioning resembles, 
in miniature, the problem we face in tackling the climate crisis. The 
solutions that we reach for most easily only bind us closer to the 
original problem.

The global dominance of air conditioning was not inevitable. As recently 
as 1990, there were only about 400m air conditioning units in the world, 
mostly in the US. Originally built for industrial use, air conditioning 
eventually came to be seen as essential, a symbol of modernity and 
comfort. Then air conditioning went global. Today, as with other drivers 
of the climate crisis, we race to find solutions - and puzzle over how 
we ended up so closely tied to a technology that turns out to be 
drowning us.
- - -
Lall says that even with affordable housing it is possible to reduce the 
need for air conditioning by designing carefully. "You balance the sizes 
of opening, the area of the wall, the thermal properties, and shading, 
the orientation," he says. But he argues that, in general, developers 
are not interested. "Even little things like adequate shading and 
insulation in the rooftop are resisted. The builders don't appear to see 
any value in this. They want 10- to 20-storey blocks close to one 
another. That's just how business works now, that's what the cities are 
forcing us to do. It's all driven by speculation and land value."

This reliance on air conditioning is a symptom of what the Chinese art 
critic Hou Hanru has called the epoch of post-planning. Today, planning 
as we traditionally think of it - centralised, methodical, preceding 
development - is vanishingly rare. Markets dictate and allocate 
development at incredible speed, and for the actual inhabitants, the 
conditions they require to live are sourced later, in a piecemeal 
fashion. "You see these immense towers go up, and they're already 
locking the need for air conditioning into the building," says Marlyne 
Sahakian, a sociologist who studies the use of air conditioning in the 
Philippines...
- - -
One scheme to encourage engineers to build a more efficient air 
conditioner was launched last year by the Rocky Mountain Institute 
(RMI), a US-based energy policy thinktank, and endorsed by the UN 
environment programme and government of India. They are offering $3m to 
the winner of the inaugural Global Cooling prize. The aim is to design 
an air conditioner that is five times more efficient than the current 
standard model, but which costs no more than twice as much money to 
produce. They have received more than a hundred entries, from lone 
inventors to prominent universities, and even research teams from 
multibillion-dollar appliance giants.

But, as with other technological responses to climate change, it is far 
from certain that the arrival of a more efficient air conditioner will 
significantly reduce global emissions. According to the RMI, in order to 
keep total global emissions from new air conditioners from rising, their 
prize-winning efficient air conditioner would need to go on sale no 
later than 2022, and capture 80% of the market by 2030. In other words, 
the new product would have to almost totally replace its rivals in less 
than a decade. Benjamin Sovacool, professor of energy policy at Sussex 
University and a lead author on the next Intergovernmental Panel on 
Climate Change (IPCC) report, describes this ambition as not impossible, 
but pretty unlikely...
- - -
In countries where air conditioning is still relatively new, an immense 
opportunity exists to find alternatives before it becomes a way of life. 
The aim, in the words of Thomas, should be to avoid "the worst of the 
west". Recently, the Indian government adopted recommendations by 
Thomas, Rawal and others into its countrywide national residential 
building code ("an immensely powerful document" says Rawal). It allows 
higher indoor temperatures based on Indian field studies - Indian levels 
of comfort - and notes the "growing prevalence" of buildings that use 
air conditioning as a technology of last resort.

Cutting down on air conditioning doesn't mean leaving modernity behind, 
but it does require facing up to some of its consequences. "It's not a 
matter of going back to the past. But before, people knew how to work 
with the climate," says Ken Yeang. "Air conditioning became a way to 
control it, and it was no longer a concern. No one saw the consequences. 
People see them now."
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/aug/29/the-air-conditioning-trap-how-cold-air-is-heating-the-world




[Written - spoken essay - a disruptive philosophy ]
*The Perpetual Illusion of Change*
August 19, 2019
by Deb Ozarko
- - -
"Change is an illusion because we're always at the place where any 
future can take us."
--Alan Watts.
- - -
An abbreviated timeline of the past 60 years tells an interesting story 
about the efficacy of activism to create meaningful change in our world...
In the...timeline just mentioned, we have essentially taken two steps 
forward and several steps back. At a time of rising isolationism, 
tribalism, racism, and authoritarianism, we currently stand in a place 
where the right-to-bear-arms mindset is as deeply entrenched in the 
American psyche as ever; ceaseless wars rage on throughout the world; 
corporate control has become more globally oppressive with each passing 
year; homophobia still runs rampant, racism is as prevalent and ugly as 
ever, and animals, women and the natural world are more brutalized than 
ever before. Let's face it, the world of carrion-loving, 
women-degrading, war-supporting, homophobic, Earth-raping, male 
supremacy is as aggressive and oppressive as it has ever been. We can 
rail against it all we want, but collective allegiance to the 
intergenerational conditioning that feeds widespread separation from 
Earth and Soul is far too great for any movement--no matter how powerful 
it may be--to have a sustained impact. Separation breeds indifference, 
and indifference breeds inertia. As Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel once 
said, "The opposite of love is not hate, it's indifference. The opposite 
of art is not ugliness, it's indifference. The opposite of faith is not 
heresy, it's indifference. And the opposite of life is not death, it's 
indifference."...
- - -
Catherine Ingram once again says it well in, Facing Extinction:

"It is a mystery as to who can handle the truth of our situation and who 
runs from it as though their sanity depended on not seeing it." She 
follows this with powerful words about the greatest deniers of all: 
parents. "There is one category of people that I have found especially 
resistant to seeing this darkest of truths: parents. A particular and by 
now familiar glazed look comes over their faces when the conversation 
gets anywhere near the topic of human extinction. And how could it be 
otherwise? It is built into the DNA that parents (not all, of course) 
love their children above themselves. They would sacrifice anything for 
them. So to think that there will be no protection for their children in 
the future, that no amount of money or homesteading or living on a boat 
or in a gated community or on a mountaintop or growing a secret garden 
will save them is too unbearable a thought to hold for even a second. I 
have also noticed a flash of anger arise in the midst of the distracted 
look on their faces, an almost subliminal message that says, 'Don't say 
another word on this subject'."

And so it is. The dominant civilization that we've adhered to for far 
too long is both our lifeline and our executioner. In a mindless global 
collective grasping at the lifeline, denying the executioner will always 
prevail. Even while we walk the plank toward extinction with no option 
for turning back, our self-designed sense of omnipotence shields us from 
our infallibility. Blindness of the psyche has created a dissonance from 
our bleak reality that cannot be remedied. Without the deeply personal 
desire to look within, there is no climate scientist, spiritual guru or 
activist movement powerful enough to break the spell of denial.

Unstoppable Acceleration
With so many powerful movements throughout history, how did we reach a 
place where rebelling against extinction has even become a 
consideration? There's obviously something about activism that isn't 
working for us to have reached this critical juncture in time. (Personal 
sidenote: at this late hour in our collective predicament, rebelling 
against extinction is about as useful as rebelling against exhalation. 
And it's important to note, we are in a predicament of which there is no 
solution. We are no sooner going to become an awakened collective of 
compassionate vegans than we are going to stop biosphere collapse.)
[more at:]
http://www.debozarko.com/illusion-of-change/



[activism for March 2020]
*Reference: The worldwide Online Conference CLIMATE 2020*
The 7th worldwide online conference, CLIMATE 2020, whose theme is
"Integrating Mitigation & Adaptation Initiatives for a Better Management 
of Climate Change and Its Impacts" will be held on 23rd-30th March 2020. 
This is an on-line conference, with no travel and no unnecessary CO2 
emissions, but reaching thousands of people
round the world. It offers an ideal opportunity to promote research, 
projects and case studies on climate change adaptation to a wide audience.
Details on how to take part can be seen at: 
https://www.haw-hamburg.de/en/ftz-nk/events/climate2020.html
Rgds, The ICCIRP Team
https://www.haw-hamburg.de/en/ftz-nk/events/climate2020.html


[NYTimes compiled list]
*84 Environmental Rules Being Rolled Back Under Trump*
By NADJA POPOVICH, LIVIA ALBECK-RIPKA and KENDRA PIERRE-LOUIS
UPDATED Aug. 29, 2019

President Trump has made eliminating federal regulations a priority. His 
administration, with help from Republicans in Congress, has often 
targeted environmental rules it sees as burdensome to the fossil fuel 
industry and other big businesses.

A New York Times analysis, based on research from Harvard Law School, 
Columbia Law School and other sources, counts more than 80 environmental 
rules and regulations on the way out under Mr. Trump.

Our list represents two types of policy changes: rules that were 
officially reversed and rollbacks still in progress. The Trump 
administration has released an aggressive schedule to try to finalize 
many of these rollbacks this year.

The Trump administration has often used a "one-two punch" when rolling 
back environmental rules, said Caitlin McCoy, a fellow in the 
Environmental and Energy Law Program at Harvard Law School who tracks 
regulatory rollbacks. "First a delay rule to buy some time, and then a 
final substantive rule."

But the process of rolling back regulations has not always been smooth. 
In some cases, the administration has failed to provide a strong legal 
argument in favor of proposed changes or agencies have skipped key steps 
in the rulemaking process, like notifying the public and asking for 
comment. In several cases, courts have ordered agencies to enforce their 
own rules...
- -
All told, the Trump administration's environmental rollbacks could 
significantly increase greenhouse gas emissions and lead to thousands of 
extra deaths from poor air quality every year, according to a recent 
report prepared by New York University Law School's State Energy and 
Environmental Impact Center.

Here are the details for each of the policies targeted by the 
administration so far. Are there rollbacks we missed? Email 
climateteam at nytimes.com or tweet @nytclimate.
- - -
*Air pollution and emissions*
COMPLETED
1. Canceled a requirement for oil and gas companies to report methane 
emissions.
E.P.A.
2. Revised and partially repealed an Obama-era rule limiting methane 
emissions on public lands, including intentional venting and flaring 
from drilling operations.
E.P.A.
3. Loosened a Clinton-era rule designed to limit toxic emissions from 
major industrial polluters.
E.P.A.
4. Stopped enforcing a 2015 rule that prohibited the use of 
hydrofluorocarbons, powerful greenhouse gases, in air-conditioners and 
refrigerators.
E.P.A.
5. Repealed a requirement that state and regional authorities track 
tailpipe emissions from vehicles traveling on federal highways.
Transportation Department
6. Reverted to a weaker 2009 pollution permitting program for new power 
plants and expansions.
E.P.A.
7. Amended rules that govern how refineries monitor pollution in 
surrounding communities.
E.P.A.
8. Directed agencies to stop using an Obama-era calculation of the 
"social cost of carbon" that rulemakers used to estimate the long-term 
economic benefits of reducing carbon dioxide emissions.
Executive Order
9. Withdrew guidance that federal agencies include greenhouse gas 
emissions in environmental reviews. But several district courts have 
ruled that emissions must be included in such reviews.
Executive Order; Council on Environmental Quality
10. Lifted a summertime ban on the use of E15, a gasoline blend made of 
15 percent ethanol. (Burning gasoline with a higher concentration of 
ethanol in hot conditions increases smog.)
E.P.A.

IN PROCESS
11. Proposed rules to end federal requirements that oil and gas 
companies install technology to inspect for and fix methane leaks from 
wells, pipelines and storage facilities.
E.P.A.
12. Proposed weakening Obama-era fuel-economy standards for cars and 
light trucks. The proposal also challenges California's right to set its 
own more stringent standards, which other states can choose to follow.
E.P.A. and Transportation Department
13. Announced intent to withdraw the United States from the Paris 
climate agreement. (The process of withdrawing cannot be completed until 
2020.)
Executive Order
14. Proposed repeal of the Clean Power Plan, which would have set strict 
limits on carbon emissions from coal- and gas-fired power plants. In 
April 2019, the E.P.A. sent a replacement plan, which would let states 
set their own rules, to the White House for budget review.
Executive Order; E.P.A.
15. Proposed eliminating Obama-era restrictions that in effect required 
newly built coal power plants to capture carbon dioxide emissions.
E.P.A.
16. Proposed a legal justification for weakening an Obama-era rule that 
limited mercury emissions from coal power plants.
E.P.A.
17. Proposed revisions to standards for carbon dioxide emissions from 
new, modified and reconstructed power plants.
Executive Order; E.P.A.
18. Began review of emissions rules for power plant start-ups, shutdowns 
and malfunctions. In April, the E.P.A. filed an order reversing a 
requirement that 36 states follow the emissions rule.
E.P.A.
19. Proposed relaxing Obama-era requirements that companies monitor and 
repair methane leaks at oil and gas facilities.
E.P.A.
20. Proposed changing rules aimed at cutting methane emissions from 
landfills. In May, 2019, a federal judge ruled against the E.P.A. for 
failing to enforce the existing law and gave the agency a fall deadline 
for finalizing state and federal rules. E.P.A. said it is reviewing the 
decision.
E.P.A.
21. Announced a rewrite of an Obama-era rule meant to reduce air 
pollution in national parks and wilderness areas.
E.P.A.
22. Weakened oversight of some state plans for reducing air pollution in 
national parks. (In Texas, the E.P.A. rejected an Obama-era plan that 
would have required the installation of equipment at some coal-burning 
power plants to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions.)
E.P.A.
23. Proposed repealing leak-repair, maintenance and reporting 
requirements for large refrigeration and air conditioning systems 
containing hydrofluorocarbons.
E.P.A.

*Drilling and extraction *
COMPLETED
24. Made significant cuts to the borders of two national monuments in 
Utah and recommended border and resource management changes to several more.
Presidential Proclamation; Interior Department
25. Rescinded water pollution regulations for fracking on federal and 
Indian lands.
Interior Department
26. Scrapped a proposed rule that required mines to prove they could pay 
to clean up future pollution.
E.P.A.
27. Withdrew a requirement that Gulf oil rig owners prove they could 
cover the costs of removing rigs once they have stopped producing.
Interior Department
28. Approved construction of the Dakota Access pipeline less than a mile 
from the Standing Rock Sioux reservation. Under the Obama 
administration, the Army Corps of Engineers had said it would explore 
alternative routes.
Executive Order; Army
29. Revoked an Obama-era executive order designed to preserve ocean, 
coastal and Great Lakes waters in favor of a policy focused on energy 
production and economic growth.
Executive Order
30. Changed how the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission considers the 
indirect effects of greenhouse gas emissions in environmental reviews of 
pipelines.
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
31. Permitted the use of seismic air guns for gas and oil exploration in 
the Atlantic Ocean. The practice, which can kill marine life and disrupt 
fisheries, was blocked under the Obama administration.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
32. Loosened offshore drilling safety regulations implemented by the 
Obama administration following the 2010 Deepwater Horizon explosion and 
oil spill. The revised rules include reduced testing requirements for 
blowout prevention systems.
Interior Department
IN PROCESS
33. Completed preliminary environmental reviews to clear the way for 
drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
Congress; Interior Department
34. Proposed opening most of America's coastal waters to offshore oil 
and gas drilling, but delayed the plan after a federal judge ruled that 
Mr. Trump's reversal of an Obama-era ban on drilling in the Arctic Ocean 
was unlawlful.
Interior Department
35. Lifted an Obama-era freeze on new coal leases on public lands. But, 
in April 2019, a judge ruled that the Interior Department could not 
begin selling new leases without completing an environmental review. A 
month later, the agency published a draft assessment that concluded 
restarting federal coal leasing would have little environmental impact.
Executive Order; Interior Department

36. Repealed an Obama-era rule governing royalties for oil, gas and coal 
leases on federal lands, which replaced a 1980s rule that critics said 
allowed companies to underpay the federal government. A federal judge 
struck down the Trump administration's repeal. The Interior Department 
is reviewing the decision.

*Interior Department *
37. Proposed "streamlining" the approval process for drilling for oil 
and gas in national forests.
Agriculture Department; Interior Department
38. Ordered review of regulations on oil and gas drilling in national 
parks where mineral rights are privately owned.
Executive Order; Interior Department
39. Recommended shrinking three marine protected areas, or opening them 
to commercial fishing.
Executive Order; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
40. Ordered review of regulations on offshore oil and gas exploration by 
floating vessels in the Arctic that were developed after a 2013 
accident. The Interior Department said it was "considering full 
rescission or revision of this rule."
Executive Order; Interior Department
41. Approved the Keystone XL pipeline rejected by President Barack 
Obama, but a federal judge blocked the project from going forward 
without an adequate environmental review process. Mr. Trump later 
attempted to side-step the ruling by issuing a presidential permit, but 
the project remains tied up in court.
Executive Order; State Department

*Infrastructure and planning*
COMPLETED
42. Revoked Obama-era flood standards for federal infrastructure 
projects, like roads and bridges. The standards required the government 
to account for sea-level rise and other climate change effects.
Executive Order
43. Relaxed the environmental review process for federal infrastructure 
projects.
Executive Order
44. Revoked a directive for federal agencies to minimize impacts on 
water, wildlife, land and other natural resources when approving 
development projects.
Executive Order
45. Revoked an Obama executive order promoting "climate resilience" in 
the northern Bering Sea region of Alaska, which withdrew local waters 
from oil and gas leasing and established a tribal advisory council to 
consult on local environmental issues.
Executive Order
46. Revoked an Obama executive order that set a goal of cutting the 
federal government's greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent over 10 years.
Executive Order
47. Reversed an update to the Bureau of Land Management's public land 
use planning process.
Congress
48. Withdrew an Obama-era order to consider climate change in managing 
natural resources in national parks.
National Park Service
49. Restricted most Interior Department environmental studies to one 
year in length and a maximum of 150 pages, citing a need to reduce 
paperwork.
Interior Department
50. Withdrew a number of Obama-era Interior Department climate change 
and conservation policies that the agency said could "burden the 
development or utilization of domestically produced energy resources."
Interior Department
51. Eliminated the use of an Obama-era planning system designed to 
minimize harm from oil and gas activity on sensitive landscapes, such as 
national parks.
Interior Department
52. Eased the environmental review processes for small wireless 
infrastructure projects with the goal of expanding 5G wireless networks.
Federal Communications Commission
53. Withdrew Obama-era policies designed to maintain or, ideally 
improve, natural resources affected by federal projects.
Interior Department
IN PROCESS
54. Proposed plans to streamline the environmental review process for 
Forest Service projects.
Agriculture Department

*Animals*
COMPLETED
55. Opened nine million acres of Western land to oil and gas drilling by 
weakening habitat protections for the sage grouse, an imperiled bird 
with an elaborate mating dance.
Interior Department
56. Overturned a ban on the use of lead ammunition and fishing tackle on 
federal lands.
Interior Department
57. Overturned a ban on the hunting of predators in Alaskan wildlife 
refuges.
Congress
58. Ended an Obama-era rule barring hunters on some Alaska public lands 
from using bait to lure and kill grizzly bears.
National Park Service; Interior Department
59. Withdrew proposed limits on the number of endangered marine mammals 
and sea turtles that people who fish could unintentionally kill or 
injure with sword-fishing nets on the West Coast. In 2018, California 
issued a state rule prohibiting the use of the nets the rule was 
intending to regulate.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
60. Amended fishing regulations for a number of species to allow for 
longer seasons and higher catch rates.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
61. Rolled back a roughly 40-year-old interprentation of a policy aimed 
at protecting migratory birds, potentially running afoul of treaties 
with Canada and Mexico.
Interior Department
62. Overturned a ban on using parts of migratory birds in handicrafts 
made by Alaskan Natives.
Interior Department
IN PROCESS
63. Proposed stripping the Endangered Species Act of key provisions.
Interior Department
64. Proposed relaxing environmental protections for salmon and smelt in 
California's Central Valley in order to free up water for farmers.
Executive Order; Interior Department
  Toxic substances and safety
COMPLETED
65. Narrowed the scope of a 2016 law mandating safety assessments for 
potentially toxic chemicals, like dry-cleaning solvents and paint 
strippers. The E.P.A. will focus on direct exposure and exclude air, 
water and ground contamination.
E.P.A.
66. Reversed an Obama-era rule that required braking system upgrades for 
"high hazard" trains hauling flammable liquids, like oil and ethanol.
Transportation Department
67. Removed copper filter cake, an electronics manufacturing byproduct 
comprised of heavy metals, from the "hazardous waste" list.
E.P.A.

IN PROCESS
68. Rejected a proposed ban on chlorpyrifos, a potentially neurotoxic 
pesticide. In August 2018, a federal court ordered the E.P.A. to ban the 
pesticide, but the agency is appealing the ruling.
E.P.A.
69. Announced a review of an Obama-era rule lowering coal dust limits in 
mines. The head of the Mine Safety and Health Administration said there 
were no immediate plans to change the dust limit, but the review is 
continuing.
Labor Department

*Water pollution*
COMPLETED
70. Revoked a rule that prevented coal companies from dumping mining 
debris into local streams.
Congress
71. Withdrew a proposed rule aimed at reducing pollutants, including air 
pollution, at sewage treatment plants.
E.P.A.
72. Withdrew a proposed rule requiring groundwater protections for 
certain uranium mines.
E.P.A.
73. Weakened federal rules regulating the disposal and storage of coal 
ash waste from power plants. (A second phase of this rollback is still 
under way.)
E.P.A.
IN PROCESS
74. Proposed rolling back protections for certain tributaries and 
wetlands that the Obama administration wanted covered by the Clean Water 
Act.
E.P.A.; Army
75. Delayed by two years an E.P.A. rule regulating limits on toxic 
discharge, which can include mercury, from power plants into public 
waterways.
E.P.A.
76. Ordered the E.P.A. to re-evaluate a section of the Clean Water Act 
and related guidance that allows states to reject or delay federal 
projects - including pipelines and other fossil fuel facilities - if 
they don't meet local water quality goals.
Executive Order; E.P.A.

*Other*
COMPLETED
77. Prohibited funding environmental and community development projects 
through corporate settlements of federal lawsuits.
Justice Department
78. Announced intent to stop payments to the Green Climate Fund, a 
United Nations program to help poorer countries reduce carbon emissions.
Executive Order
79. Reversed restrictions on the sale of plastic water bottles in 
national parks desgined to cut down on litter, despite a Park Service 
report that the effort worked.

***Interior Department*
IN PROCESS
80. Proposed limiting the studies used by the E.P.A. for rulemaking to 
only those that make data publicly available. (The move was widely 
criticized by scientists, who said it would effectively block the agency 
from considering landmark research that relies on confidential health data.)
E.P.A.
81. Proposed repealing an Obama-era regulation that nearly doubled the 
number of light bulbs subject to energy-efficiency standards set to go 
into effect next year.
Energy Department
82. Proposed changes to the way cost-benefit analyses are conducted 
under the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act and other environmental statutes.
E.P.A.
83. Proposed withdrawing efficiency standards for residential furnaces 
and commercial water heaters designed to reduce energy use.
Energy Department
84. Initially withdrew then delayed a proposed rule that would inform 
car owners about fuel-efficient replacement tires. (The Transportation 
Department has scheduled a new rulemaking notice for 2020.)
Transportation Department
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/climate/trump-environment-rollbacks.html?module=inline


*This Day in Climate History - August 31, 1988 - from D.R. Tucker*
August 31, 1988: Vice President and GOP presidential candidate George H. 
W. Bush declares that those who think people are powerless to combat the 
"greenhouse effect" are forgetting about "the White House effect." 
(Twenty-one years later, James Hansen would note in his book "Storms of 
My Grandchildren" that Bush's chief of staff, John Sununu, tried to have 
him fired from NASA.)
http://c-spanvideo.org/x1mc/
http://articles.latimes.com/1988-09-01/news/mn-4551_1_george-bush

/-------------------------------------------------/

/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.