[TheClimate.Vote] December 28, 2019 - Daily Global Warming News Digest

[Richard Pauli]

/*December 28, 2019*/

[Cost this year]
*Climate crisis linked to at least 15 $1bn-plus disasters in 2019*
Christian Aid report highlights costs of floods, fires and storms around 
the world
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/dec/27/climate-crisis-linked-to-at-least-15-1bn-plus-disasters-in-2019
- - -
[Insurance Journal gives actuarial outlook]
*Why the Worst Case for Climate Change Doesn't Look Realistic: Viewpoint*
By Noah Smith, Bloomberg View | December 27, 2019
In recent years, much of the commentary about climate change has gone 
from sternly serious to wildly despairing. A new report from the United 
Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warns that the 
effects of climate change are accelerating and that the world has barely 
more than a decade to make deep cuts to greenhouse gas emissions and 
limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius by century's end. Such reductions 
are extremely unlikely, given that global emissions rose this year and 
last. China, the world's biggest emitter by far, is still building 
coal-fired power plants, while the U.S. under President Donald Trump has 
abdicated leadership on the climate issue. Warming of more than 1.5 
degrees seems certain at this point and the world will have to deal with 
the consequences.

But how much, exactly, will Earth warm before the fossil-fuel era runs 
its course? That's harder to forecast because it depends not just on 
climate science but also on assumptions about emissions. And that, in 
turn, depends on technology and economics, both of which are notoriously 
hard things to predict. The IPCC lays out several business-as-usual 
scenarios for how much greenhouse gas would be emitted without major 
policy action, but it doesn't say which scenario it thinks is more 
likely. The direst of these, called RCP8.5, implies that the planet 
would warm by an average of 5 degrees Celsius (about 9 degrees 
Fahrenheit) by 2100 -- an absolutely catastrophic, civilization-ending 
level of warming. It's typically this doomsday scenario that motivates 
some observers to despair and others to call for reckless, flailing 
policies like the dismantling of capitalism.

But a growing chorus of climate scientists and energy policy analysts 
has begun to question whether the dreaded RCP8.5 scenario should be 
taken seriously. The scenario assumes that after a brief flirtation with 
natural gas and renewable energy, the world returns to fueling 
industrialization primarily with coal. But it seems vanishingly unlikely 
that the global coal industry will increase sevenfold, as RCP8.5 
envisions, even if natural gas proves to be a temporary phenomenon.

First of all, there probably just isn't that much accessible coal in the 
ground. Second, burning coal creates air pollution in addition to 
greenhouse gases, which gives countries an additional incentive to 
reduce its use. Third, the price of renewables has dropped to the point 
where building new coal plants is simply not economical in most places. 
Despite China's new plants, overall global coal use fell 3% in 2019. 
India is turning away from coal, and so is Southeast Asia:

Even Trump, despite his promise to restore the coal industry to its 
former glory, has managed to do nothing of the kind.

And as renewables get cheaper, it will become economical to retire 
existing coal and gas plants. McKinsey predicts that this will be the 
case in most of the world by 2030. Banks are already beginning to pull 
out of the coal-power industry, not because of environmental pressure 
(since they're still funding coal for other industrial uses), but 
because they know there's just no future in coal plants. Gas won't be 
far behind, though a few gas plants will probably remain in service to 
back up solar plants when the sun isn't shining.

So the IPCC's commonly cited doomsday scenario looks like a rash flight 
of imagination. A group of climate scientists recently got together on 
Twitter and tried to figure out what a more realistic scenario looked 
like. They fed energy predictions from the International Energy Agency 
into climate models and found out that 3 degrees of warming is a much 
more likely business-as-usual scenario than 5 degrees. But as the 
climate scientists noted, the IEA has consistently underestimated the 
growth of solar power; each year the international agency predicts that 
growth in solar-power generation will slow, and each year it grows 
rapidly. If renewable technologies continue to surprise on the upside, 
warming could be limited to 2.5 degrees.

Now for the bad news: 2.5 degrees of warming will still be catastrophic 
for many people and countries, and 3 degrees even more so. Heat waves 
will become unbearable without air conditioning, even in high latitudes. 
All coral reefs will probably die. Many major cities will be drowned. 
Even just 2 degrees of warming, which will be exceeded in any 
business-as-usual scenario, will have very serious global repercussions.

That's why a business-as-usual scenario is unacceptable. The human race 
probably isn't doomed, but climate change is still an enormous 
catastrophe in the making. Big policy changes are needed -- in the U.S., 
in China and in many other countries. Instead of embarking on the fool's 
errand of trying to dismantle capitalism, governments should utilize the 
combined resources of the public and private sectors. They should retire 
all coal plants as quickly as possible, steadily reduce natural gas 
usage and convert to all electric vehicles. Buildings need to be 
retrofitted to use electricity instead of gas. And new technologies for 
producing low-carbon steel and cement, and for carbon-free aviation, 
need to be researched, scaled up and disseminated internationally.

More rational climate scenarios don't give any excuse for complacency. 
But they do give human civilization a fighting chance.
https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2019/12/27/552899.htm



[LA California]
*California, climate change and the trauma of the last decade *
- - -
"I think there is a general sense of crisis about everything right now, 
and that has a compounding effect," said Alex Hall, director of the 
Center for Climate Science at UCLA.

If you're worried that things will only get worse, you're not exactly wrong.

By 2100, the state's average temperature could be 5.6 to 8.8 degrees 
Fahrenheit higher than it was in the early 1900s, depending on how good 
a job the world does of limiting greenhouse gas emissions, the Natural 
Resources Agency says. And that will have further consequences for 
drought, fire and storms.

"The modeling shows us that we'll see more extreme events happening more 
frequently," said Nina Oakley, an atmospheric scientist at the Desert 
Research Institute.
Climate change simulations for California show more precipitation in wet 
years and deeper droughts in dry years, Hall said. And according to the 
models, he added, we are just now on the precipice of seeing those 
changes play out.

If that leaves you feeling more terrified than ever, consider this: 
Experts say there is plenty we can do to respond and adapt...
https://www.latimes.com/environment/story/2019-12-26/california-decade-extreme-weather-climate-change-anxiety


[Scientific American reprinted from E&E News]
*Despite Climate Change Health Threats, Few Medical Schools Teach It*
Heat, mosquito-borne diseases and air pollution are medical issues that 
should be viewed through a climate lens, advocates say
By Maya Earls, E&E News on December 27, 2019
Despite the threat climate change poses to human health, very few 
medical schools have made it a part of their coursework.

The International Federation of Medical Students' Associations recently 
conducted a survey of medical schools in 118 countries. Of the medical 
schools reviewed, the IFMSA found 15.9% have made climate change a part 
of their curricula.

Dr. Renee Salas, an emergency room doctor and climate change researcher 
at the Harvard Global Health Institute, said she was not surprised by 
the results. Through her work at Harvard, she has tried to incorporate 
climate change into the teachings of U.S. medical schools.

Salas said the survey shows there is an opportunity to train the next 
generation of physicians so they have the skills necessary to practice 
in a future where global warming affects every aspect of their jobs.

"Climate change is truly that threat multiplier," she said. "It impacts, 
in my opinion, every facet of how we practice medicine."

The health impacts of climate change are numerous. More days with 
extreme heat could account for an increase of 1 million deaths each year 
in India alone (Climatewire, Nov. 1). Wildfires, which are also 
predicted to increase, pose a threat to people with respiratory 
conditions (Climatewire, Dec. 16). And the changing climate is exposing 
more people to vector-borne diseases such as Zika and Lyme (Climatewire, 
Oct. 30).

Sheri Weiser, a professor of medicine at the University of California, 
San Francisco, said her own interest in climate change was spurred by 
research into food insecurity. The more she studied the subject, the 
more she found the issue was significantly exacerbated by climate change.

For example, an August study published in the Proceedings of the 
National Academy of Sciences found increased climate shocks could reduce 
gains that have been made in lowering the rates of stunting caused by 
poor childhood nutrition. The United Nations also issued a report that 
found the number of people suffering from hunger in 2018 reached an 
eight-year high due to economic, political and climate-related factors.

Weiser is now a leader in incorporating climate change into the 
university's curriculum.

"One of the biggest barriers is competing priorities," she said. "And 
how to add content without taking away content."

Medical school curriculum by nature is always changing to include new 
research. An Association of American Medical Colleges survey of 147 
medical schools in 2017-2018 found 34.7% were planning to make a 
curriculum change in the future. The survey found 30.6% of schools 
already had a curriculum change in the process.

There are natural fits in the curriculum to bring climate change into 
the conversation, according to Weiser. For example, the study of 
infectious disease presents an opportunity to discuss how more people 
could be affected.

Salas echoed that idea, saying that schools can add climate change to 
lessons of asthma and other conditions.

"My approach is all they need to do is add a climate lens to what 
they're already teaching," she said.

This solution has its own hurdle, as there are few climate experts 
currently in the medical field. That's why Salas says medical schools 
need to focus on collaboration and developing electronic curriculum that 
could be used to more easily spread growing knowledge from existing experts.

"We are in an era where we're stronger together," she said. "We can 
learn from each other, figure out what works and share information."

The IFMSA survey found there is some action on climate change happening 
in medical schools from the ground up. Of the schools surveyed, about 
60% reported they had at least one student-led educational activity on 
climate change.

"Students today are a part of that generation that has grown up seeing 
climate change as a daily part of their existence," Salas said. "For 
them, it just makes sense that climate change is going to impact the way 
they will care for patients and will have growing implications."

Overall, Weiser said doctors need to be a part of the climate discourse 
to help improve the health of people and the planet.

"I believe having a bigger voice in that helps health in the long term 
and health in the short term," she said.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/despite-climate-change-health-threats-few-medical-schools-teach-it/


[wonderful essay in text or audio - about Mario Pelto by the great 
essayist Madeline Ostrander]
*A Visit with the Glacier Squad*
For 35 years, a scientist and his team have been taking the pulse of 10 
coastal glaciers. The diagnosis is in.

Authored by Madeline Ostrander - July 16, 2019
Stream or download audio For this article

This article is also available in audio format. Listen now, download, or 
subscribe to "Hakai Magazine Audio Edition" through your favorite 
podcast app. [clip:]

    A high mountain glacier, in its frigid, deadly enormity, doesn't
    feel much like a landscape meant for humans. In the European Alps,
    medieval myths held that glaciers carried curses and incarcerated
    the frozen souls of the damned. And yet, on a grand scale, where
    glaciers and humans coexist, our lives are entwined in ways we
    rarely realize. During the last ice age, the glaciers of Alaska
    locked up so much water that the seas lowered enough to create a
    land bridge to Siberia and perhaps allowed the earliest passage of
    humans into North America. Glaciers have carved out many of our
    mountain ranges, scoured out plains and prairies, and birthed rivers
    and lakes. Today, in many parts of the world, mountain glaciers
    preside over vast empires of fresh water that reach from the highest
    peaks to the coast: they dictate the flow of water downslope and
    influence the seasonal pulse of rivers and fish and the temperature
    and chemistry of streams and estuaries. They supply water for
    drinking, irrigation, and hydropower dams. But as the world gets
    warmer, glaciers' influence in many regions is waning.

    Pelto, a professor at Nichols College in Massachusetts, has been
    traveling to the northwest United States to document the behavior of
    glaciers every year for the past 35 years, witnessing their decline
    and fall, and this is why he regards the otherworldly scene before
    us with a kind of nonchalance. All morning, he has pointed out where
    the glacier used to be--in the 1990s, an area presently marked by
    the bit of precocious vegetation that has begun to colonize; then
    the early 2000s, a space now mostly comprised of bare rock and mud;
    then 2009, when his daughter, Jill, first came here with him as a
    teenager. She strides cheerfully behind him now, along with two
    graduate students from Maine--Mariama Dryak and Erin McConnell. Both
    are similarly sanguine, even though McConnell is wearing crampons
    that barely fit her boots, tied on precariously with some extra
    straps repurposed from her backpack. Through wind and rain, we have
    ascended a slope covered in glassy ice so hard we have had to stomp
    the crampons in just to get a foothold. Still, the women are
    unflappable and curious, lobbing questions at Pelto and at each
    other, and noticing formations and debris in the ice--from the
    geological bands left by meltstreams to a bit of tire tread and some
    pistachio shells presumably deposited months ago by incautious
    snowmobilers...

- - - -

    Three decades later, the idea that glaciers are vanishing, that they
    are harbingers of climate change, is now well known. Six of the 120
    Cascade glaciers Pelto originally surveyed have perished, including
    four of those he surveys by satellite imagery and two of the 10 he
    chose for his initial field study (which he's since replaced with
    two glaciers that are still alive). When the regime of glaciers
    fully comes to a close--when rain and sun dominate over ice and
    snow--this will spell trouble for the rivers and coasts below. Few
    people have yet reckoned with the consequences...

- - -

    Because glaciers like this are so large, high, and dynamic, Pelto
    thinks some claims about their hasty demise may be exaggerated,
    particularly the estimate that Glacier National Park (the US park
    not the Canadian one) will lose all of its 26 remaining eponymous
    ice bodies in just over a decade.

    "People always ask, 'How soon is it going to disappear? They're
    melting so fast,'" he says. He points to a deep crevasse ahead of
    us. "But then you see how thick the ice is at a place like this. And
    then we're nowhere near the thickest place of the ice."...

more at - 
https://www.hakaimagazine.com/features/a-visit-with-the-glacier-squad/
- - -
[referenced blog]
*From a Glacier's Perspective*
Glacier Change in a World of Climate Change
https://blogs.agu.org/fromaglaciersperspective/
- - -
[read more source material in Pelto's blog]
*NORTH CASCADE GLACIER CLIMATE PROJECT*
Mauri S. Pelto, NCGCP Director Founded in 1983, Nichols College, Dudley, 
MA mspelto at nichols.edu
https://glaciers.nichols.edu/



[Insightful, conversational analysis of COP25 meeting by Paul Beckwith]
*91 Beckwith After COP 25*
Dec 23, 2019
Metta Spencer
Canadian climatologist Paul Beckwith attended the COP 25 meeting in 
Madrid that ended in a stalemate. He and Metta agree that there is too 
little progress by elected government officials, and they consider ways 
of speeding up responses to the emergency. Beckwith favors sprinkling 
iron in oceans to encourage plankton and feeding CO2 to limestone.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTRsRv-6dek



[brief statement]
*Ben Abbott on Air Pollution Health Effects*
Dec 27, 2019
greenmanbucket
There are a lot of reasons beside climate change to switch to renewables.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7mmvA8VL5Q
- - -
[Here is source]
The Lancet Planetary Health
VOLUME 3, ISSUE 2, PE49-E50, FEBRUARY 01, 2019
*Air pollution and disease burden*
Air pollution represents a considerable threat to health worldwide. 
According to the 2015 Global Burden of Disease Study, exposure to 
outdoor fine particulate matter (PM)2.5 is the fifth leading risk factor 
for death worldwide, accounting for 4.2 million deaths and 103.1 million 
disability-adjusted life-years in 2015. Although air pollution is a 
universal issue, it is likely to cause the greatest harm in susceptible 
individuals who are exposed to high PM2.5 concentrations. People with 
chronic diseases (particularly cardiorespiratory illnesses), little 
social support, and poor access to medical services are most at risk 
from air pollution.
China is the largest developing country in the world, with exceptional 
economic growth observed in the past four decades. However, similar to 
other rapidly industrialising countries, air pollution, water 
contamination, and land degradation are serious environmental issues in 
China, and thus are the focus of a considerable amount of research and 
public attention. To protect the environment and public health, policies 
have been established to tackle air pollution and other environmental 
problems. Since the implementation of the Ambient Air Quality Standards 
(GB 3095-2012), and the release and implementation of the Air Pollution 
Prevention and Control Action Plan,6 air quality in most regions of 
China has improved substantially.
Previous studies have shown that air pollution is associated with 
increased morbidity and mortality, and some studies reported that 
reductions in air pollution have been associated with improvements in 
the health of the Chinese population. However, little data are available 
on the public health benefits of air pollution control measures and 
policies in developing countries. This issue is important since the 
disease burden associated with air pollution has increased in the past 
decade, especially in low-income and middle-income countries.
The modelling study by Qing Wang and colleagues in The Lancet Planetary 
Health10 provides important information with regard to the health 
benefits of air quality improvements in China. The authors used 
county-level PM2.5 and mortality data to estimate PM2.5-associated 
disease burden in 2020 and 2030. Wang and colleagues reported that the 
projected health benefit of the Air Pollution Prevention and Control 
Action Plan is considerable, and could reduce the number of 
PM2.5-related premature deaths by 129 278 deaths (13.5%) in 2020 and by 
217 988 deaths (22.8%) in 2030 compared with 2010. However, the health 
benefits resulting from air quality improvements would be offset by the 
effect of the population growth and ageing. Thus, to reduce future 
disease burden, the implementation of more stringent measures for air 
quality improvement and public health protection are needed in China. 
Concerted efforts are needed to cope with population growth and ageing.
The authors estimated the future disease burden in China at the county 
level, with full coverage of the entire country for multiple scenarios. 
Future efforts should use the county-level age structure and the 
baseline mortality of diseases to project the health benefits associated 
with air quality improvements. As discussed by the authors, no data on 
future age structure (county or provincial level) or future baseline 
mortality (county or provincial level) of each disease were available, 
which is an important limitation of the study since baseline mortality 
is likely to decline over time and the pace of population ageing might 
vary between counties.
The authors' assumption that for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease 
and lung cancer, the relative risk (RR) for the same exposure 
concentration of PM2.5 was the same for all adults might be incorrect. 
Previous studies have shown that the associated with air pollution for 
chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and lung cancer varies with age, 
and these results are biologically plausible. Additionally, the 
difference in risk across age groups is exacerbated by the fact that the 
population is rapidly ageing in China, and the incidence of chronic 
obstructive pulmonary disease and lung cancer is likely to be higher in 
older populations (aged >55 years) than younger populations (aged <55 
years). Thus, this modelling approach requires improvement for future 
projections.
Quantifying and projecting the health benefits induced by air quality 
improvements is complex, and requires consideration of differences that 
might exist between counties as suggested by Wang and colleagues. An 
urgent need exists to identify the characteristics of future disease 
burden associated with air pollution, including the changing patterns of 
disease, spatial distributions, at-risk populations, most sensitive 
diseases, and the optimum model to use for such projections.
This study highlights the need to formulate and implement more stringent 
environmental policies and public health measures in China to control 
air pollution in the future. These policy implications are applicable to 
other developing countries with similar levels of air pollution and 
similar population demographics.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(18)30288-2/fulltext



[basic scripts for civil conversation]
*How to talk to your family about climate change*
With the climate crisis making more headlines than ever, difficult 
conversations about climate change will be hard to avoid this holiday 
season. So we asked a therapist, a scientist, a policy expert, and a 
psychologist about how to navigate these conversations with relatives 
who might not share your point of view. When that uncle breaches the 
topic this Christmas, how can you respond in a way that could actually 
change his mind?
*"Climate change is natural. It's always been like that. The planet gets 
warmer, then it gets colder. People are exaggerating the dangers. Some 
scientists agree with me!‌‌‌‌"*

Answer by Prof. Dr. Volker Quaschning, expert in renewable energy:

    An estimated 0.5% of scientists disagree with the premise that
    humans are responsible for causing climate change. But there are
    also a few lung doctors who claim that driving diesel cars isn't
    harmful to health. Such claims will always exist. ‌‌

    But the facts are actually clear. It is true that the Earth's
    climate has always varied. The most recent transition was from the
    ice age to the warm interglacial period, when the temperature rose
    by three to four degrees.‌‌

    Back then, Berlin was covered by a layer of ice 200 meters thick.
    The warming of the planet resulted in the ice melting, which caused
    sea levels to rise by 120 meters. Such radical changes can be
    triggered by a difference of three to four degrees. ‌‌

    The increase in greenhouse gas emissions means that we are currently
    facing a further temperature rise of three to four degrees. It's
    easy to imagine just how different the Earth will look then. ‌‌

    We have lived through a relatively stable climate period for around
    10,000 years, and this is now coming to an end. The planet will
    survive. The question is whether humans will be able to cope with
    these changes, because the changes are coming faster than our
    ability to adapt.‌‌

https://blog.ecosia.org/how-to-talk-to-your-family-about-climate-change/



[Activism]
*Who We Are | Why XR? | How You Can Help | Extinction Rebellion*
Dec 26, 2019
Extinction Rebellion
What people are saying, "We don't have any time to waste, the science is 
absolutely clear, we have to listen to the science." | "It wasn't until 
I got involved in XR that I realized we can actually make a difference." 
| "The hope is that we can just have a better society."

This is an emergency. We believe it is our duty to act. Together, let's 
unite and insist our governments take action for us, for our children 
and for all life! Extinction Rebellion is the fastest growing climate & 
ecology non violent direct action movement in history.

It is time for direct action. It is time to act. We are unprepared for 
the danger our future holds. We face floods, wildfires, extreme weather, 
crop failure, mass displacement and the breakdown of society. The time 
for denial is over. Our system is broken but we are Rising Up!

Join the rebellion: https://Rebellion.Earth/
International: https://Rebellion.Global/

Producer: Caroline Pakel
Editor and Producer: Nathaniel Walters

1. #TellTheTruth
2. #ActNow
3. #BeyondPolitics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTR1JqjbD3Q



*This Day in Climate History - December 28, 2007 - from D.R. Tucker*

In a Washington Post op-ed, Bill McKibben, citing a recent speech by 
NASA scientist James Hansen, states that the worldwide CO2 level must 
remain below 350 parts per million to avoid catastrophic global warming. 
Further, McKibben writes:

    "Hansen [has] called for an immediate ban on new coal-fired power
    plants that don't capture carbon, the phaseout of old coal-fired
    generators, and a tax on carbon high enough to make sure that we
    leave tar sands and oil shale in the ground. To use the medical
    analogy, we're not talking statins to drop your cholesterol; we're
    talking huge changes in every aspect of your daily life."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/27/AR2007122701942.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.