[TheClimate.Vote] February 27, 2019 - Daily Global Warming News Digest.

[Richard Pauli]

/February 27, 2019/


[gorse fires]
February 27, 2019
*Wildfires rage across Britain after hottest winter day on record*
DIGGLE, England (Reuters) - Firefighters battled a series of wildfires 
in Britain on Wednesday, including a large moorland blaze outside the 
northern English city of Manchester, as the country experienced its 
warmest winter weather on record...
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-fire/wildfires-rage-across-britain-after-hottest-winter-day-on-record-idUSKCN1QG0XC
- - -
[70 degrees F]
*UK experiences hottest winter day ever as 21.2C is recorded in London*
Parts of Britain exceed temperatures in Malibu, Athens and Crete
"The average temperature for this time of year is 9C in London and 9C in 
north Wales, so what we’re seeing is 10 degrees above average," said 
Martin Bowles, a Met Office meteorologist.

Bowles said: "We can't blame climate change directly because we're 
talking about weather, not the climate. But it is a sign of climate 
change. There's been a gradual increase of temperatures over the last 30 
years so the extreme weather has also been increasing."
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/26/uk-hottest-winter-day-ever
- -
[Gorse is burning]
*Gorse Fires - What are they and what to know.*
Gorse is a shrub very commonly found around Ireland. This spiny and 
prickly evergreen thrives in dry, acidic soil. Gorse is highly flammable 
and when it catches alight can spread very quickly. The heat from fires 
causes the flower pods to pop, releasing seeds. This means Gorse is very 
resilient against fire and burnt stubs can sprout new shoots from the roots.
Most gorse fires are started by humans (whether directly or indirectly), 
spreading quickly and causing devastation. Although very few gorse fires 
can start through spontaneous combustion. Hot, dry weather can add to 
the flammability of gorse and provides ideal conditions for gorse growth 
and fires.
Recent high temperatures across the country has provided ideal growing 
conditions for gorse, and therefore ideal fire spreading conditions.
http://smartcontrolsystems.ie/gorse-fires-what-are-they-and-what-to-know/
- -
[see photos]
*Britain is burning: Wildfires break out across the country after 
record-breaking 70F hottest winter's day EVER left fields parched*
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6746085/UK-weather-Britain-set-two-days-glorious-sun.html


[Imagine a day 14 degrees hotter]
*The worst-case scenario for global warming just got 14 degrees F worse*
"The Uninhabitable Earth" isn't just a book title, it's a warning.
JOE ROMM
FEB 26, 2019
A new study and a new book both argue that the worst-case scenario for 
global warming would literally render the planet uninhabitable.

The book is entitled "The Uninhabitable Earth: Life After Warming" and 
is written by New York Magazine editor David Wallace-Wells; it is an 
expansion of his controversial viral article published in July 2017 with 
the same title. As of Feb. 26, it is number 11 on the Amazon best-seller 
list -- a rarity for any climate book, but perhaps another sign of the 
growing interest in strong climate action.

The book, published just last week, makes the case that without dramatic 
climate action, we are headed for catastrophic warming of 7F (4C) above 
pre-industrial temperatures by 2100 -- a world of ever-worsening 
megadroughts and endless food shortages.

But, as Wallace-Wells warns, even the unlikely worst-case warming 
scenario of 14.4F (8C) is possible if we keep on a path of high carbon 
dioxide (CO2) emissions -- and if the climate response is at the high 
end of the estimated range. Warming of this magnitude would essentially 
render the world uninhabitable, where little arable land survives and 
the oceans eventually rise more than 200 feet...
- - -
Indeed, the study itself points out this so-called previous "Hothouse 
Earth" millions of years ago may have been driven in part by a loss of 
stratocumulus clouds -- and that it could happen again "in the future if 
CO2 levels continue to rise."...
- - -
Commenting on the study, leading climate expert Michael Mann told 
ThinkProgress in an email that, "The findings are plausible. Tapio 
Schneider is not a scientist to be dismissed lightly." But he noted 
that, "Even if the findings are correct (and that would require 
replication by several independent research teams), this threshold is 
only hit at 1200 ppm CO2 in the atmosphere."

Finally, Mann warned (original emphasis), "We can't afford to get 
ANYWHERE NEAR 1200 ppm CO2."...
- -
So Wallace-Wells tries to make what seems trivial and abstract as 
concrete and visceral as possible with chapter titles such as: "Heat 
Death," "Hunger," "Drowning," "Wildfire," "Unbreathable Air," "Plagues 
of Warming," "Economic Collapse," and "Climate Conflict."

And halfway through the book he says, in all caps, "If you have made it 
this far, you are a brave reader." He admits that any of those chapters 
contains, "enough horror to induce a panic attack in even the most 
optimistic of those considering it."

But, he adds, the science makes clear that "You are not merely 
considering it; you are about to embark on living it. In many places, we 
already are."

In recent years, the science has underscored two key facts that further 
support this point. First, the climate impacts that come from just one 
more degree Celsius of warming -- for a total of 3.6F (2C) warming -- 
will be catastrophic.

Second, the climate system has many feedback loops that threaten to 
accelerate warming if we trigger them.

One major 2018 study by 16 top climate scientists, for instance, 
concluded that if we warm the planet 2C that may be enough to trigger 
feedbacks that push the planet toward the irreversible "Hothouse Earth." 
That would mean catastrophic warming of 9F (5C) or more, with widespread 
dust bowls and rapid sea level rise.

However you describe it, the science makes it increasingly clear that no 
rational species would allow us to get anywhere near that level of 
warming. And that's precisely what makes strong action in the next 
decade, as envisioned in proposals such as the Green New Deal, a moral 
imperative.
https://thinkprogress.org/worst-case-global-warming-uninhabitable-earth-c25cd97007fe/
- - -
[3 years]
*Extreme Weather Can Feel 'Normal' After Just a Few Years, Study Finds*
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/26/climate/what-is-extreme-weather.htm


[where lies liability?]
*Battling for Big Oil: Manufacturing Trade Group Leads Assault on 
Climate Suits*
By Karen Savage
In its fight to stave off a wave of climate change-related lawsuits, the 
fossil fuel industry has found a vocal and unapologetic ally in the 
National Association of Manufacturers (NAM). The a 123-year old trade 
group represents a wide range of the nation's manufacturing companies, 
but it has frequently gone to bat for select segments of its membership 
during major liability battles. Currently, it is Big Oil's staunchest 
defender.

The group has filed briefs defending oil companies in liability 
lawsuits, launched campaigns to discredit the communities filing them, 
and has worked to stop shareholders from pressing the oil companies to 
disclose climate risks. In these roles, NAM has put itself front and 
center in the effort to keep fossil fuel companies from being held 
liable for their role in climate change, and from paying for the related 
damages that will run in the hundreds of billions of dollars to 
communities across the country.

"Taxpayer resources should not be used for baseless lawsuits that are 
designed to enrich trial lawyers and grab headlines for politicians," 
Lindsey de la Torre, executive director of NAM's spinoff group, the 
Manufacturers' Accountability Project (MAP), said in a statement after 
Rhode Island filed one of the climate liability lawsuits last year. NAM 
launched MAP in 2017 as a response to the increasing number of climate 
liability suits.

Those suits, according to NAM, are a result of a coordinated campaign by 
activists "to disparage U.S. manufacturers with a focus on America's 
largest energy manufacturers."

MAP is now attempting to convince the American public--as well as judges 
who might hear those liability cases--that attempts to hold companies 
accountable for their role in climate change will harm business, said 
Richard Daynard, president of Northeastern University Law School's 
Public Health Advocacy Institute and chair of its Tobacco Products 
Liability Project.

"This is essentially the PR front for the defendants in climate 
litigation," Daynard said, adding that MAP is also working to discourage 
municipalities from filing future suits.

"This is all part of a long history of tort reform propaganda," he said, 
adding that NAM has worked for decades to reign in all types of 
liability litigation, including against the tobacco industry.

So perhaps it's not surprising that NAM's defense of fossil fuel 
companies has begun to look increasingly like its support for the 
tobacco industry in the 1980s. Similar tactics were used when tobacco 
companies were facing hundreds of lawsuits and were charged with 
racketeering by the federal government for deceiving the public about 
the catastrophic health hazards of smoking. NAM has even hired the same 
law firm that defended the tobacco industry to launch an assault on the 
climate liability lawsuits.
- - -
More recently, NAM's focus has shifted from promoting climate deception 
to defending member companies from efforts to hold them accountable for 
years of deceiving the public and damaging the climate.

Along with the American Petroleum Institute and American Fuel & 
Petrochemical Manufacturers, NAM in 2015 joined the landmark youth 
climate lawsuit Juliana v. United States as an intervenor on side of the 
federal government.

Calling the suit a "direct threat to businesses," the trade associations 
said the "significant reduction in [greenhouse gas] emissions would 
cause a significant negative effect on [their] members by constraining 
the sale of the product they have specialized in developing and 
selling." When the court asked intervenors to explain their views on 
climate change, NAM quickly backed out.

When the liability lawsuits began--and now total more than a dozen from 
communities across the country and one state (Rhode Island)--NAM 
responded by launching MAP to "set the record straight and highlight 
foundations and other activists who have sought to undermine and weaken 
manufacturing in the United States" by engaging in climate 
change-related litigation.

MAP came out swinging, claiming that then-New York attorney general Eric 
Schneiderman's use of the Martin Act to investigate Exxon for possible 
climate change-related fraud was "politically motivated." It demanded 
New York Mayor Bill de Blasio apologize to New Yorkers for using an 
outside firm to file its suit against five major oil companies and 
launched a campaign to highlight what it called de Blasio's 
"politically-motivated attacks on manufacturers."

Eubanks said that rhetoric doesn't add up.

"Lawsuits are to enforce the law, to ensure that people are following 
the law and it takes you out of a political process and puts you before 
a neutral person, a judge," she said, adding that Shook, Hardy & Bacon 
also does a good bit of political lobbying.

"They say, 'We think these matters should be handled by legislation, not 
litigation, and by regulations that will come out of any statutes that 
are enacted," she said. "Then they fight real hard to make sure there 
are no statutes that come down the pike because regulations come out of 
regulatory authority, so it sounds real good, but that's wholly 
inconsistent with their approach."

NAM and MAP have made a big deal out of the potential for future RICO 
charges against the fossil fuel industry--the same racketeering laws 
that ultimately ensnared the tobacco industry--and contend that a 
conspiracy is being waged on the other side by a "group of politically 
motivated activists" who are "trying to take down America's energy 
manufacturers."

"Right now, there are groups of trial lawyers slinking around the 
country tantalizing elected officials in cities and states with 
unrealistic promises of jackpot justice if they will only agree to sue 
energy manufacturers over climate change," said NAM president and chief 
executive Jay Timmons in NAM's State of Manufacturing Address last week 
in Houston. "These lawyers--they want to get rich at the expense of 
manufacturing workers."

Daynard said this type of messaging is used in an effort to control the 
narrative around-- and media coverage of--climate litigation.

"They have this notion that if they can get continue to get news 
coverage and establish themselves, they can make sure when cases are 
filed journalists will look go to them and they can then get in some 
comment on how this is all worthless crazy stuff stirred up by 'greedy 
lawyers' or 'ideologically driven NGO's,'" Daynard said.

To try and substantiate its view that litigation is part of a vast 
conspiracy--and in what some say is an attempt to have a chilling effect 
on municipalities that file lawsuits--MAP has also submitted extensive 
public record requests to plaintiffs in the suits, seeking documents and 
communication between the municipalities and their attorneys, prior 
records requests that include those attorneys, certain communication 
regarding the defendant companies and communication between the 
municipalities and billionaire Tom Steyer, founder of NextGen, a 
progressive organization working to stem the risks of climate change for 
future generations...
- - -
Not long after the suits were filed, Exxon went on the offensive, 
accusing plaintiffs of failing to disclose climate risks to their bond 
investors.

To try to bolster that allegation, NAM--along with the industry ally 
Competitive Enterprise Institute--asked the Securities and Exchange 
Commission to investigate whether several cities and counties that filed 
climate suits misled investors when they stated in bond offerings that 
they couldn't predict the impacts of climate change.

A report by the former chief of the Securities and Exchange Commission's 
municipal bonds division later found the municipalities did not mislead 
potential investors.

In another instance, NAM partnered with the Chamber of Commerce to back 
Exxon, filing a friend-of-the-court brief in the oil giant's quest to 
stop investigations by the attorneys general of Massachusetts and New York.

New York has since filed a lawsuit against Exxon based on that 
investigation, alleging the oil giant for years deceived investors by 
deliberately downplaying the climate risks to its business and long-term 
financial health. The Supreme Court recently ruled against Exxon's 
attempt to stop Massachusetts' investigation, which now continues.
https://www.climateliabilitynews.org/2019/02/26/national-association-manufacturers-oil-climate-liability/


[From the Department of Anomalies]
Whales
*Why we can't help but see the whale in the forest as an omen*
The dead humpback whale lying in an Amazon rainforest clearing distills 
our knowledge that human actions have changed the climate and polluted 
the oceans..
- - -
In reality, this mystery is not quite as profound as the headlines 
imply. The whale was found in a mangrove swamp on the island of Marajó 
in the Amazon delta. Presumably a storm hurled its carcass deep into the 
swamp. Yet even if this falls short of a mystery that needs UFOs or the 
Illuminati to explain it, this surreal and wretched sight has the kind 
of power that we can't always get from reading data on sea temperature 
rises. The scientific evidence that we are pushing nature to its 
greatest crisis since the extinction of the dinosaurs is abundant. We 
should be grateful to this whale for giving us an image of the colossal 
tragedy we are making of our world. A whale in a forest is no more 
unnatural than plastic on a beach.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/shortcuts/2019/feb/26/why-we-cant-help-but-see-the-whale-in-the-forest-as-an-omen


[Classic 2012 warning against ESLD bias]
*Climate change prediction: Erring on the side of least drama?*
Keynyn Brysse, Naomi Oreskes, Jessica O'Reilly, Michael Oppenheimer
ABSTRACT
Over the past two decades, skeptics of the reality and significance of 
anthropogenic climate change have
frequently accused climate scientists of ''alarmism'': of 
over-interpreting or overreacting to evidence of
human impacts on the climate system. However, the available evidence 
suggests that scientists have in
fact been conservative in their projections of the impacts of climate 
change. In particular, we discuss
recent studies showing that at least some of the key attributes of 
global warming from increased
atmospheric greenhouse gases have been under-predicted, particularly in 
IPCC assessments of the
physical science, by Working Group I. We also note the less frequent 
manifestation of over-prediction of
key characteristics of climate in such assessments. We suggest, 
therefore, that scientists are biased not
toward alarmism but rather the reverse: toward cautious estimates, where 
we define caution as erring
on the side of less rather than more alarming predictions. We call this 
tendency ''erring on the side of
least drama (ESLD).'' We explore some cases of ESLD at work, including 
predictions of Arctic ozone
depletion and the possible disintegration of the West Antarctic ice 
sheet, and suggest some possible
causes of this directional bias, including adherence to the scientific 
norms of restraint, objectivity,
skepticism, rationality, dispassion, and moderation. We conclude with 
suggestions for further work to
identify and explore ESLD.
- - - -
In this paper, we suggest that such a factor may exist, and that
scientists are biased not toward alarmism but rather the reverse:
toward cautious estimates, where we define caution as erring on the
side of less rather than more alarming predictions.We argue that the
scientific values of rationality, dispassion, and self-restraint tend to
lead scientists to demand greater levels of evidence in support of
surprising, dramatic, or alarming conclusions than in support of
conclusions that are less surprising, less alarming, or more
consistent with the scientific status quo. Restraint is a community
norm in science, and it tends to lead many scientists (ceteris paribus
and with some individual exceptions) to be cautious rather than
alarmist, dispassionate rather then emotional, understated rather
than overstated, restrained rather than excessive, and above all,
moderate rather than dramatic (on community norms, see Bernard,
1927; Conant, 1953; Merton, 1979; Keller, 1985; Harding, 1986;
Haraway, 1989). We call this tendency ''erring on the side of least
drama (ESLD).'
- -
5. What leads to ESLD?
Given the challenging political environment in which climate
scientists operate, and the fact that climate scientists have been
repeatedly accused of fear-mongering and alarmism, we might
conclude that scientific reticence with respect to global warming
is a consequence of the charged political context in which climate
scientists operate. Freudenberg and Muselli (2010) have suggested that 
the asymmetry of political pressure, particularly in the
United States, has contributed to a conservative bias in IPCC
assessments. These authors emphasize that most analyses of
scientific communication focus on the flow (and impact) of
information from scientists to the larger public, paying far less
attention to the reverse flow--in this case, the strongly stated
criticism of scientists by contrarians and skeptics, widely
repeated in the North American press, and then spread more
widely on the internet. They suggest that this reverse flow has
contributed to a bias in which scientists not only bend over
backward to ensure that their results are absolutely warranted by
the evidence, but actually take positions that are more conservative 
than warranted by the evidence to disprove contrarian
accusations of scientific ''alarmism.''...
- - -
7. Further reasons for ESLD
We have suggested one reason for ESLD that may apply in the
realm of earth science and biology: the historic link between
uniformitarianism, anti-clericalism, and the rise of modern
geology and evolutionary biology. We believe, however, that an
even broader pattern may be at play: that the basic, core values of
scientific rationality contribute to an unintended bias against
dramatic outcomes.
Half a century ago, sociologist Robert Merton attempted to
define the norms of science, reducing them to four key ideas:
universalism, communism (or communality), disinterestedness,
and organized skepticism. While some critics have noted that
commercial and national interests may challenge scientific
universalism and communism, few have doubted that organized
skepticism is a guiding force in science. And this guiding force--
organized skepticism--is consistent with the argument we have
made here: that scientists are skeptical of all new claims, and
ceteris paribus, the more dramatic the claim, the more skeptical
they are likely to be, and the greater the evidential bar (this point
was made explicitly in the 1920s debates over continental drift:
see Oreskes, 1999)...
- - -
9. Conclusion
Evidence from recent analyses suggests that scientists, particularly 
acting in the context of large assessments, may have
underestimated the magnitude and rate of expected impacts of
anthropogenic climate change. We suggest that this underestimation 
reflects a systematic bias, which we label ''erring on the side of
least drama (ESLD)''. ESLD is consistent with a broad pattern in
earth science, in play since the mid-19th century, of eschewing
catastrophic accounts of natural phenomena. While physicists and
chemists do not share this particular history, they do share a
broader pattern in science of skepticism toward dramatic
explanations of natural phenomena. This stance arises, we suggest,
from the core scientific values of objectivity, rationality, and
dispassion, which lead scientists to be skeptical of any claim that
might evoke an emotional response.
Our hypothesis of ESLD is not meant as a criticism of scientists.
The culture of science has in most respects served humanity very
well. Rather, ESLD provides a context for interpreting scientists'
assessments of risk-laden situations, a challenge faced by the
public and policy-makers. In attempting to avoid drama, the
scientific community may be biasing its own work--a bias that
needs to be appreciated because it could prevent the full
recognition, articulation, and acknowledgment of dramatic natural
phenomena that may, in fact, be occurring. After all, some
phenomena in nature are dramatic. If the drama arises primarily
from social, political, or economic impacts, then it is crucial that
the associated risk be understood fully, and not discounted.
http://www.phys.uri.edu/nigh/FFRI/LeastDrama.pdf



[greater concerns]
*Extreme CO2 levels could trigger clouds 'tipping point' and 8C of 
global warming*
If atmospheric CO2 levels exceed 1,200 parts per million (ppm), it could 
push the Earth's climate over a "tipping point", finds a new study. This 
would see clouds that shade large part of the oceans start to break up.

According to the new paper published in the journal Nature Geoscience, 
this could trigger a massive 8C rise in global average temperatures - in 
addition to the warming from increased CO2.

The only similar example of rapid warming at this magnitude in the 
Earth's recent history is the Paleo-Eocene Thermal Maximum 55m years 
ago, when global temperatures increased by 5-8C and drove widespread 
extinction of species on both the oceans and land.

However, scientists not involved in the research caution that the 
results are still speculative and that other complicating factors could 
influence if or when a tipping point is reached. The threshold 
identified by the researchers - a 1,200ppm concentration of atmospheric 
CO2 - is three times current CO2 concentrations.

If fossil fuel use continues to rapidly expand over the remainder of the 
century, it is possible levels could get that high. The Representative 
Concentration Pathways 8.5 scenario (RCP8.5), a very high emissions 
scenario examined by climate scientists, has the Earth's atmosphere 
reaching around 1,100ppm by the year 2100. But this would require the 
world to massively expand coal use and eschew any climate mitigation 
over the rest of this century.

Dissipating 'climate-cooling' clouds
Stratocumulus clouds are widespread low-lying clouds, typically present 
within 2,000 metres of the Earth's surface. They form large cloud 
"decks" that typically cover around 20% of the Earth's tropical ocean 
regions. They cool the Earth by shading its surface from incoming 
sunlight, reflecting much of it back to space before it reaches the 
surface...
- - -
Clouds have long been one of the main areas of uncertainty in global 
climate models. Clouds form and dissipate over scales that are smaller 
than can be resolved in current global climate models, which makes it 
difficult to predict how they will respond to future changes driven by 
increasing greenhouse gas concentrations.

The new study overcomes this hurdle by using a state-of-the-art, 
high-resolution "large-eddy simulation" model that is capable of 
resolving the physical processes that govern clouds. The researchers use 
this model to estimate how cloud properties might change as the world warms.

They found a striking result: in their simulations, stratocumulus cloud 
decks become unstable and break up into scattered clouds when CO2 levels 
rise above 1,200ppm. When these clouds break up they no longer shade the 
surface, triggering global warming of 8C - and as much as 10C in 
subtropical regions. This is in addition to the 5C or so of global 
warming above pre-industrial levels associated with 1,200ppm CO2.

Very high levels of CO2 affect stratocumulus clouds by influencing how 
they absorb and re-emit the heat given off from the Earth's surface. An 
atmosphere with lots of CO2 in it is more "opaque" and this causes the 
re-emission of heat to start at lower levels of the atmosphere. In 
short, this warms the tops of the stratocumulus clouds - which are 
typically sustained by cooling at their tops. This also reduces the 
moisture transported up from the Earth's surface through convection. 
Together, these changes make stratocumulus cloud decks more susceptible 
to breaking up...
- -
The authors find that once the stratocumulus decks have broken up, they 
only re-form once CO2 concentrations drop substantially, to below 
300ppm. They suggest that this would make warming associated with this 
climate "tipping point" much more difficult to reverse, as CO2 
concentrations would have to be drawn down to levels last seen a century 
ago...
- - -
The stratocumulus breakup identified in the study also may help to 
explain some enduring mysteries about temperatures in the distant past, 
which current climate models have trouble simulating.

For example, the Arctic was ice free about 50m years ago in the early 
Eocene. Current climate models suggest that it would require atmospheric 
concentrations of around 4,000ppm CO2 to trigger these conditions, but 
records suggest that concentrations were a much lower 2,000ppm during 
the early Eocene...
- - -
The tipping point identified in this new paper should be easy to avoid 
with any sort of concerted efforts to mitigate climate change, even if 
they fall far short of Paris Agreement current goals of limiting 
temperature rise to 1.5C or 2C above pre-industrial levels.

But the potential presence of massive tipping points that could usher in 
potentially catastrophic warming should provide a sobering example of 
the risks of climate inaction in the face of large "unknown unknowns" in 
the climate system.
https://www.carbonbrief.org/extreme-co2-levels-could-trigger-clouds-tipping-point-and-8c-of-global-warming



[video mention from Democracy Now]
*Greenhouse Effect Increase from Cloud Cover Breakup?*
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUtfzi9TH4E
- - -
[Research article]
*Possible climate transitions from breakup of stratocumulus decks under 
greenhouse warming*
Tapio Schneider, Colleen M. Kaul & Kyle G. Pressel
Nature Geosciencevolume 12, pages163-167 (2019)
Abstract
Stratocumulus clouds cover 20% of the low-latitude oceans and are 
especially prevalent in the subtropics. They cool the Earth by shading 
large portions of its surface from sunlight. However, as their dynamical 
scales are too small to be resolvable in global climate models, 
predictions of their response to greenhouse warming have remained 
uncertain. Here we report how stratocumulus decks respond to greenhouse 
warming in large-eddy simulations that explicitly resolve cloud dynamics 
in a representative subtropical region. In the simulations, 
stratocumulus decks become unstable and break up into scattered clouds 
when CO2 levels rise above 1,200 ppm. In addition to the warming from 
rising CO2 levels, this instability triggers a surface warming of about 
8 K globally and 10 K in the subtropics. Once the stratocumulus decks 
have broken up, they only re-form once CO2 concentrations drop 
substantially below the level at which the instability first occurred. 
Climate transitions that arise from this instability may have 
contributed importantly to hothouse climates and abrupt climate changes 
in the geological past. Such transitions to a much warmer climate may 
also occur in the future if CO2 levels continue to rise.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-019-0310-1


[The US is downhill from Canada]
*U.S. plush toilet paper use wiping out Canada's forests, flushing away 
the future: report*
The report gave failing grades to the leading toilet paper, tissue and 
paper towel brands for using only virgin fibre pulp, mostly from 
Canada's old boreal forests
The voracious use of toilet paper in the United States -- with the 
average American using almost three rolls each week and major 
manufacturers spurning alternative fibres -- is destroying Canada's 
forests and causing widespread environmental damage, two international 
environmental groups say.
A report on tissue paper use gave failing grades to the leading toilet 
paper, tissue and paper towel brands for using only virgin fibre pulp, 
mostly from Canada's old boreal forests...
https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/u-s-plush-toilet-paper-use-wiping-out-canadas-forests-flushing-away-the-future-report



[going acidic]
*The Ocean Is Running Out of Breath, Scientists Warn*
Widespread and sometimes drastic marine oxygen declines are stressing 
sensitive species--a trend that will continue with climate change
- - -
In the past decade ocean oxygen levels have taken a dive--an alarming 
trend that is linked to climate change, says Andreas Oschlies, an 
oceanographer at the Helmholtz Center for Ocean Research Kiel in 
Germany, whose team tracks ocean oxygen levels worldwide. "We were 
surprised by the intensity of the changes we saw, how rapidly oxygen is 
going down in the ocean and how large the effects on marine ecosystems 
are," he says.

It is no surprise to scientists that warming oceans are losing oxygen, 
but the scale of the dip calls for urgent attention, Oschlies says. 
Oxygen levels in some tropical regions have dropped by a startling 40 
percent in the last 50 years, some recent studies reveal. Levels have 
dropped more subtly elsewhere, with an average loss of 2 percent globally...
- - -
Coastline fisheries can also face the added pressure of agricultural 
runoff fertilizing algal blooms that consume copious oxygen as they 
decay--as has long been the case in the Gulf of Mexico near the mouth of 
the Mississippi River. These "dead zones" force some fishes to seek 
higher oxygen areas on the edges of their typical ranges. This can help 
fishermen find them because the fishes congregate in these condensed 
areas, but it also provides a false sense of abundance and will not be 
sustainable in the long-term, Seibel notes.

To address the overall deoxygenation problem, Oschlies helped organize 
an international conference on the subject in Kiel last September. 
Attendees drafted an impromptu declaration called the Kiel Declaration 
on Ocean Deoxygenation to raise awareness among international 
governments, the United Nations and the public as well as to call for 
immediate action. They want governments and international groups to make 
more serious strides to slow climate change and cut back on the coastal 
runoff pollution that exacerbates oxygen decline. The researchers 
modeled the new declaration after the Monaco Declaration (pdf), which 
Oschlies thinks successfully helped raise international awareness around 
ocean acidification in 2008.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-ocean-is-running-out-of-breath-scientists-warn/


*This Day in Climate History - February 27, 2001 - from D.R. Tucker*
Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill sends a memo to President George W. Bush 
urging him to take strong action to combat carbon pollution. The memo is 
ignored, and O'Neill would be forced out as Treasury Secretary a year later.
http://books.google.com/books?id=ijQLBeDklxcC&pg=PA360&lpg=PA360&dq=paul+o%27neill+global+warming+memo+february+27&source=bl&ots=573aM1IF-O&sig=JrLs5DMwXJIc-AotPsqL-Z1VLHU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=yKnAUrCKB_K-sQT36ILQDQ&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=paul%20o%27neill%20global%20warming%20memo%20february%2027&f=false
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------/

/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.