[TheClimate.Vote] January 1, 2019 - Daily Global Warming News Digest

[Richard Pauli]

/January 1, 2019/

[NYTime$ says]
*The Story of 2018 Was Climate Change*
Our best hope may be the weather...
- -
It is not a complex data series in an academic study or government 
report. It's not a measurement of sea level or ice depth in a place 
you've never been. It's right in front of you. And although weather 
patterns do have a lot of randomness, they are indeed changing. That's 
the thing about climate change: It changes the climate.
- -
The growing number of extreme events -- wildfires, storms, floods and so 
on -- are hard to ignore.
Only 40 percent of Americans called the quality of environment "good" or 
"excellent" in a Gallup Poll this year, the lowest level in almost a 
decade. And 61 percent said the environment was getting worse. In an NBC 
News/Wall Street Journal poll, 66 percent of Americans said they wanted 
to see action to combat climate change. Some polls even suggest that 
Republican voters are becoming anxious about the situation.
The politics of climate change remains devilishly hard, especially 
because so many people around the world feel frustrated about their 
living standards. France's "gilet jaune" protests, after all, were 
sparked by a proposed energy tax. Compared with day-to-day life, the 
effects of climate change have long felt distant, almost theoretical.
But now those effects are becoming real, and they are terrifying. To 
anyone who worries about making a case for climate action based on the 
weather, I would simply ask: Do you have a better idea?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/30/opinion/climate-change-weather-2018.html


[from DeSmogBlog]
*2018 Was a Year of Deadly Climate Disasters and an 'Ear Splitting 
Wake-Up Call'*
https://www.desmogblog.com/2018/12/28/year-deadly-climate-disasters-ear-splitting-wake-call-scientists
- - -
[from DeSmogBlog UK]
*Climate Heroes and Villains of 2018*
https://www.desmog.co.uk/2018/12/20/climate-heroes-and-villains-2018
- - -
[Heros at the bar]
*2018 in Climate Liability: When a Trend Became a Wave*
https://www.climateliabilitynews.org/2018/12/30/2018-climate-liability/


[Wikipedia defines Green New Deal]
*Green New Deal*
The Green New Deal (GND) is a proposed economic stimulus program in the 
United States that aims to address both economic inequality and climate 
change. The name refers to the New Deal, a combination of social and 
economic reforms and public works projects undertaken by President 
Franklin D. Roosevelt in response to the Great Depression.] Supporters 
of a Green New Deal advocate for a combination of Roosevelt's economic 
approach with modern ideas such as renewable energy and resource efficiency.
- -
*Proposals*
Broadly, the proposals for a Green New Deal echo the recommendations of 
United Nations organizations such as ICLEI or the TEEB, of global NGOs, 
and of the Basel II and related monetary accords, especially as these 
relate to reforms to measurement of fundamental ecosystem risk and 
financial liabilities. The reinsurance industry has also expressed 
support for the general principles of global carbon and emissions 
charges, for metrics of ecosystem destabilization risk, and for raising 
the price companies and individuals have to pay when using nature's 
services and natural resources.

Several measures proposed as part of a Green New Deal have already been 
implemented in one or more G8 or G20 countries including Norway, South 
Korea, the UK, Germany, and the US. The financial proposals echo some of 
the programs already underway at the IMF, World Bank, BIS and ECB that 
aim to better reflect the value of ecosystems and reduce systematic 
incentives to invest in "dirty" or destructive industries. Global 
indices like the Global Green Economy Index (GGEI) have been tracking 
national performance on many of the topics included in the Green New 
Deal framework, allowing for transparent comparisons and benchmarking 
between states. This approach enables an integrated view of how 
different aspects of a national green economy interact across climate 
change, efficiency sectors, green markets and the environment.

*Specific measures*

Government-led investment in energy and resource efficiency, as well
as reusable energies and microgeneration;
Low-carbon infrastructure redevelopment in order to create jobs;
A directed tax on the profits of oil and gas companies with proceeds
being invested in renewable energy and energy efficiency;
Financial incentives for green investment and reduced energy usage,
including low interest rates for green investment;
Re-regulation of international finance, including capital controls,
and increased scrutiny of financial derivatives - likely along the
lines of Basel II;
Curbing corporate tax evasion through compulsory financial reporting
and by clamping down on tax havens;
A Global Marshall Plan Initiative using "green quantitative easing"
to create money to fund the "great transition" to a society free of
fossil fuels and other measures that aim to preserve the biosphere.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_New_Deal
- - -
[Nukes trump Green New Deal]
*The Green New Deal Promises Peace and Progress. Will Nuclear Advocates 
Undermine It?*
By Harvey Wasserman, The Progressive
30 December 18
The environmental policy centerpiece of the incoming Democratic House of 
Representatives has ignited tremendous grassroots enthusiasm.
he environmental policy centerpiece of the incoming Democratic House of 
Representatives is what's now known as "The Green New Deal." But it's 
already hit deeply polarizing pushback from the old-line Democratic 
leadership. And it faces divisive jockeying over the future of nuclear 
power.

The Green New Deal's most visible public advocate, newly elected 
twenty-nine-year-old U.S. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, 
Democrat of New York, has laid out a preliminary blueprint advocating an 
energy economy meant to be based entirely on "renewable" and "clean" 
sources. According to a report in The Hill, fossil fuels and nuclear 
power are "completely out" of her plan.

The draft proposal has ignited tremendous grassroots enthusiasm, with 
massively favorable poll readings, even among some Republicans. 
Substantial grassroots pressure has grown on presumptive House Speaker 
Nancy Pelosi to form a Green New Deal Committee chaired by Ocasio-Cortez.

But on December 20, the Democratic leadership announced it will not 
support a separate House Committee on the deal. Instead, it will proceed 
with a panel on climate change, to be chaired by Florida Representative 
Kathy Castor, who has taken substantial funding from the fossil fuel 
industry. It remains unclear whether Ocasio-Cortez will even get a seat 
on the committee.

But the grassroots push for a Green New Deal is clearly not going to go 
away. The youthful Sunrise Movement has vowed to fight for it, along 
with a wide range of others, including Senator Bernie Sanders, 
Independent of Vermont, a likely 2020 presidential contender.
- -
The Green New Deal idea conjures visions of the vast "alphabet agency" 
programs birthed by Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt in the 1930s.

With unparalleled pageantry, New Deal Democrats put millions of 
Americans to work building roads, bridges, schools, libraries, museums, 
public swimming pools, local and national parks, and more. They proved 
that immense communal good could come from a solid government blueprint 
administered through a competent, well-orchestrated brain trust.

In contrast, the Trump Administration's promise to deal with 
"infrastructure" has involved none of the above. While denying the 
disaster of climate change, its energy policies have focused purely on 
handing cheap fossil drilling leases on public land (and waters) to 
Trump cronies.

It's also granted a $3.7 billion low-interest loan (added to $8.3 
billion previously granted by President Obama) to private developers of 
the last two U.S. nuclear reactors under construction, at Vogtle, 
Georgia. Already years behind schedule and billions over budget, the 
project may soar beyond $20 billion and still never be finished.

The fate of the Vogtle plant underscores a nuclear war that will cut to 
the heart of the Green New Deal and the climate issue as it plays out in 
the new Congress.

Already, The New York Times, with its long history of reactor advocacy, 
has featured an op-ed by U.S. Senator John Barrasso, Republican of 
Wyoming, advocating more nukes as a solution to the climate crisis. In 
an article running under a photo of a Chinese reactor under 
construction, Barrasso argues that "nuclear energy is produced with zero 
carbon emissions."

In fact, nuclear reactors do emit trace quantities of radioactive 
Carbon-14. The fuel rods that power reactor are produced with 
significant carbon in mining, milling, and enrichment. They pump huge 
quantities of waste heat directly into the eco-sphere, operating far 
less efficiently even than coal burners. They yield large quantities of 
radioactive waste, directly related to nuke weapons production. And five 
of them (Chernobyl 4 and Fukushima 1-2-3-4) have blown up.

Reactor enthusiasts like Barrasso invariably conjure visions of a "new 
generation" of small, modular nukes, and other techno-variants like 
molten salt and thorium, alleged to be safe, cleaner and cheaper that 
the current fleet. But there are few tangible indications such 
alternative reactors can come on line anytime soon, or beat the price of 
wind and solar, which continue to plummet. The criticism that renewables 
are intermittent is also losing its sting as large-scale battery arrays 
are also dropping in price while rising in efficiency and capacity.

Barrasso also advocates the continued use of fossil fuels, with various 
pipeline-related schemes for storing and using the resultant CO2. "The 
United States and the world," he says, "will continue to rely on 
affordable and abundant fossil fuels, including coal, to power our 
economies for decades to come."
- -
These pro-nuke arguments are echoed even by some self-proclaimed 
supporters of the Green New Deal. According to a report from 
DataforEnergy, principally written by Greg Carlock, at least part of the 
Green New Deal should be powered by "clean sources such as nuclear and 
remaining fossil fuel with carbon capture."

Such rhetoric will be tested by advocates characterizing atomic energy 
as "clean." Their fight for new reactor funding may quickly engulf much 
of the Green New Deal debate.

So will the struggle over the 98 U.S. reactors still licensed to 
operate. As they age, they continue to deteriorate and embrittle. 
Opponents of nuclear power want them shut down before they explode; 
advocates argue that without them, more fossil fuels will be burned.

But such choices are made in corporate boardrooms, not even by the free 
market. Pacific Gas & Electric, owner of two aging reactors near San 
Luis Obispo, has already admitted that it could replace both with 
renewable energy while burning no more coal, oil, or gas. If Green New 
Deal activists are to make a dent in our aging nuclear fleet, they'll 
have to make sure the slew of reactors about to close is replaced by 
renewables, not the fossil fuels the utilities still own and love.

Finally, along with nuke power, the question of how to fund the deal 
will be center stage. Mainstream proposals will focus on a new range of 
taxes.

But outspoken peace groups like Code Pink are eager to move the money 
out of the military and into the social/infrastructure programs that can 
rebuild the nation. High-profile campaigns led by activists Jodie Evans 
and Medea Benjamin were integral to the shocking defection of seven 
Republican Senators to deny the Trump Administration funding to support 
the Saudi war in Yemen.

Activists must now argue that the trillion-plus dollars we spend 
annually on arming the Empire should instead fund those wind turbines 
and solar panels at the heart of the Green New Deal.
https://progressive.org/dispatches/the-green-new-deal-promises-peace-and-progress-181227/


[Cultural driven]
*Leveraging Serial Dramas to Move the Needle on Climate Change*
Debra Safer
This video includes highlights from speakers Dr. Al Bandura, William 
Ryerson, and Kathy Le Backes (as well as moderator Sonny Fox, host Debra 
Safer) which look place on from the the 3/15/18 at Stanford University.
https://vimeo.com/298100051


[Classic opinion from Canada]
*The Moral Rot of Fossil Fuels*
Petroleum's corrupting influence is on wretched display more than ever 
before.
By Mitchell Anderson - Oct 2018
In case anyone needed a refresher on the moral rot associated with 
fossil fuels, this has been a hell of a month. Washington Post columnist 
and Saudi citizen Jamal Khashoggi, a vocal critic of the reigning oil 
oligarchy of Saudi Arabia, was disappeared in the Saudi embassy in 
Turkey on Oct. 2, possibly with the help of a bone saw.

Our Katie Hyslop's a 'Champion' for KidsOur Katie Hyslop's A 'Champion' 
For Kids
Excellent reporting on child welfare earns Tyee reporter recognition 
from advocacy coalition.

This gruesome murder was followed by a series of laughably implausible 
statements about what happened by a regime apparently accustomed to 
saying and doing whatever they want, confident that the rest of the 
world is so beholden to their oil they will likely do little. In this 
one aspect the Saudis are completely correct.

The House of Saud is almost singlehandedly responsible for the largest 
famine in the world, perpetrated by blockade on the neighbouring country 
of Yemen. Meanwhile the U.S. and Canada have been arming Saudi Arabia 
for years now, and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has egregiously 
referred to Canadian-built heavy assault vehicles equipped with 
105-millimetre cannons as "jeeps."

Former prime minister Stephen Harper personally assured the Saudi king 
that Canada would keep the details of the $15-billion arms deal secret, 
a capitulation continued by the Trudeau government, which has so far 
ignored calls to cancel the sale so obviously at odds with core Canadian 
values. Fourteen million people now face starvation in Yemen as Canada 
and the global community continue to politely tolerate the heinous 
adventures of the largest supplier of oil.

Much has also been made of the alleged reforms of Crown Prince Mohammad 
bin Salman, such as allowing women to drive cars in the 21st century. 
Less well publicized is the subsequent arrest of many women activists in 
the kingdom, some of whom may face the death penalty by public 
beheading, as one does in a civilized society.

Meanwhile the corrupting influence of petroleum is on wretched display 
elsewhere in the world. Venezuela is endowed with the largest proven oil 
reserves and unsurprisingly is ranked as one of most corrupt nations on 
Earth. Many in the impoverished population have been driven to eating 
their pets or even zoo animals. Up to four million people, or about 10 
per cent of the population, have been forced to flee a collapsing 
economy and inflation rates of nearly 100 per cent per month.

Russia has the largest reserves of natural gas in the world and, in 
spite of President Vladimir Putin's aspirations to global greatness, his 
nation is ranked by Transparency International as only marginally less 
corrupt than Haiti. Russian fossil fuel revenues have funded a storied 
ecosystem of billionaire oligarchs and organized crime whose most 
pressing apparent problem is laundering their money into Western banks 
so it can be enjoyed elsewhere.

Here in Canada oil continues to impair our collective ability to respond 
in a principled way to the largest threat facing the planet. The most 
recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assured 
anyone brave enough to read it that we have about 12 years to 
drastically decarbonize our economy before most of the horsemen of the 
apocalypse saddle up for a little ride.

Apparently three election cycles away from Armageddon is still far too 
far into the future to engage our political machinery. In fact 
Conservative parties throughout the nation have seized on the strategy 
of actively fighting climate action as the best way to achieve power. 
Even formerly principled leaders such as Alberta Premier Rachel Notley 
now genuflect before the oil industry, fighting a pitched battle on its 
behalf to export unprocessed Canadian resources, often no further 
offshore than price-gouging refineries in Puget Sound.

One of the reasons it is so difficult to trigger political change on 
carbon reduction is the vast amount of dark money spent by the fossil 
fuel industry to undermine the credibility of climate science. This has 
been both an odious and effective investment with only 45 per cent of 
Americans in 2015 believing climate change is a very serious problem.

It is undeniable that cheap, abundant energy has lifted vast numbers of 
people out of poverty and contributed to a lifestyle of agency and 
affluence unimaginable in the recent past. However, these hard-won gains 
are soon to be swept aside by the impacts of mounting levels of carbon 
in the atmosphere. Climate refugees are already pouring into many parts 
of the world and a credible case can be made that climate change 
contributed to the civil war in Syria.

Having the dominant source of energy in the form of a finite resource 
largely held in private hands is a recipe for ongoing corruption, war 
and inaction on climate. While a rapid move towards renewables is 
already underway, this is largely propelled by the profit motive and 
disruptive technologies. Where is the bold action from democratic 
institutions?

If anything, governments throughout the world remain part of the problem 
rather than the solution, contributing over $5 trillion in subsidies to 
the fossil fuel sector, the equivalent of 6.5 per cent of global GDP. 
Here in Canada, $3.3 billion of your tax dollars are shelled out to oil 
and gas companies every year – the highest economic proportion within 
the G7. This generous largess also does not count the $4.5 billion in 
public money recently splurged on the Trans Mountain Pipeline or the 
additional $7 billion to complete the planned upgrade.

Ottawa's much touted carbon pricing scheme is a long overdue step in the 
right direction but will initially collect less money from polluters 
than the public giveaways flowing in the opposite direction.

The tide is beginning to turn. A recent report shows that renewable 
energy has now pulled even with the economic might of fossil fuels, 
accounting for $4 trillion in global trade. In addition to not 
undermining life itself, a future based on distributed renewable energy 
enjoys many other positives, such as not producing murderous regimes or 
contributing to famines.Powerful vested interests will fight this 
transition tooth and nail. Elected leaders will look to public opinion 
on whether or not to act. Our future and our morality hang in the balance.
https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2018/10/26/Moral-Rot-Fossil-Fuels/


[Beckwith explains some academic papers]
*No Arctic Sea-Ice; Greenland Exposed; Coast is Toast; Jet Streams Kaput*
Paul Beckwith
Published on Dec 31, 2018
Recently released by NOAA, the Arctic Report Card 2018 details profound 
changes underway in the Arctic from rapid temperature increases.
"What happens in the Arctic does not stay in the Arctic." Quote: 
Beckwith, 2009
Abrupt Climate Change; "you ain't seen nothing yet". As Arctic sea-ice 
hurtles to oblivion, Greenland becomes exposed as the last bastion of 
coldness in the vast Arctic region. Shortly thereafter, around the 
world, "the coast is toast", or rather submerged. Jet streams Kaput...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BssFdx5s4g


*This Day in Climate History - January 1, 1990 - from D.R. Tucker*
January 1, 1990: In his World Day of Peace message, Pope John Paul II 
declares:

"The gradual depletion of the ozone layer and the related
'greenhouse effect' has now reached crisis proportions as a
consequence of industrial growth, massive urban concentrations and
vastly increased energy needs. Industrial waste, the burning of
fossil fuels, unrestricted deforestation, the use of certain types
of herbicides, coolants and propellants: all of these are known to
harm the atmosphere and environment. The resulting meteorological
and atmospheric changes range from damage to health to the possible
future submersion of low-lying lands.

"While in some cases the damage already done may well be
irreversible, in many other cases it can still be halted. It is
necessary, however, that the entire human community - individuals,
States and international bodies - take seriously the responsibility
that is theirs.

"The most profound and serious indication of the moral implications
underlying the ecological problem is the lack of respect for life
evident in many of the patterns of environmental pollution. Often,
the interests of production prevail over concern for the dignity of
workers, while economic interests take priority over the good of
individuals and even entire peoples. In these cases, pollution or
environmental destruction is the result of an unnatural and
reductionist vision which at times leads to a genuine contempt for man.

"On another level, delicate ecological balances are upset by the
uncontrolled destruction of animal and plant life or by a reckless
exploitation of natural resources. It should be pointed out that all
of this, even if carried out in the name of progress and well-being,
is ultimately to mankind's disadvantage."

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/messages/peace/documents/hf_jp-ii_mes_19891208_xxiii-world-day-for-peace_en.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.