[TheClimate.Vote] March 9, 2019 - Daily Global Warming News Digest

[Richard Pauli]

/March 9, 2019/


{New Baba Brinkman videos - rapper, educator, philosopher}
*Redemption (feat Jessie Davis) – Baba Brinkman Music Video*
https://youtu.be/d0awFSnTeI4
*Rap Guide to Climate Chaos*
("Passionate and engaging... and very funny" – The Stage) explores the 
science, politics, and economics of the world's hottest topic with equal 
parts humor and urgency.
https://www.sohoplayhouse.com/soho-playhouse-events/2018/12/30/baba-brinkmans-rap-guide-to-climate-chaos-4rely-xdyaa-8pw56-ze2p3-c8l87
Baba Brinkman's YouTube channel
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCz9Qm66ewnY0LAlZlL4HK9g


[Rain melts snow faster than sunshine]
*Rain may be causing a worrying amount of ice to melt in Greenland*
ENVIRONMENT 7 - March 2019
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2195972-rain-may-be-causing-a-worrying-amount-of-ice-to-melt-in-greenland/
- - -
[CBS news reports on study]
*Unusual winter rains driving sea level rise in the Arctic*
BY LYNNE EDWARDS - MARCH 7, 2019
Warmer air is turning what should be snowfall in the Arctic to rainfall, 
which could accelerate sea level rise beyond current predictions. 
Researchers are warning that rainy weather is becoming increasingly 
common over parts of the Greenland ice sheet, triggering sudden melting 
events that are eating away at the ice and priming the surface for more 
widespread melting in the future.

A study published Thursday in the scientific journal Cryosphere says 
some parts of the ice sheet are even receiving rain in the winter -- a 
new phenomenon that will spread as the Earth's climate continues to warm.

Greenland has been losing ice in recent decades due to progressive 
warming. Since about 1990, average temperatures over the ice sheet have 
increased by as much as 3.2 degrees in the summer, and up to 5.4 degrees 
over the winter. The 660,000-square-mile sheet is now believed to be 
losing about 270 billion tons of ice each year.

Most of the ice loss was, until recently, thought to come from icebergs 
calving, or breaking off into the ocean. But direct meltwater runoff has 
now come to dominate, accounting for about 70 percent of the loss, the 
study published in Cryosphere says. Rainy weather, the study's authors 
say, is increasingly the trigger for that runoff.

The researchers combined satellite imagery with on-the-ground weather 
observations from 1979 to 2012 in order to pinpoint what was triggering 
melting in specific places. Satellites are used to map melting in real 
time because their imagery can distinguish snow from liquid water. The 
scientists also used a camera-equipped drone to map the area.
For the study, 20 automated weather stations spread across the ice sheet 
offered data on temperature, wind and precipitation. Combining the data 
sets, the researchers zeroed in on more than 300 events in which they 
found the initial trigger for melting was rainy weather.

"That was a surprise to see," said the study's lead author, Marilena 
Oltmanns, of Germany's GEOMAR Centre for Ocean Research. She said that 
over the study period, melting associated with rain doubled during 
summer and tripled in the winter.

Total precipitation over the ice sheet did not change; what did change 
was the form of precipitation. All told, the researchers estimate that 
nearly a third of total runoff they observed was initiated by rainfall.
Melting can be driven by a number of factors, but the introduction of 
liquid water is one of the most powerful, said Mark Tedesco, a 
glaciologist at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory 
and co-author of the study.
Warm air, of course, can melt ice directly, but is not very efficient by 
itself, he said. But warmer temperatures produce cascading effects, one 
being the likelihood of rain falling when snow typically should.

Liquid water carries a great deal of heat, and when it soaks into a 
snowy surface, it melts the snow around it, releasing more energy. 
Meanwhile, the warmer air that brought the rain often forms clouds, 
which hold the heat closer to the Earth's surface.

Between 1993 and 2014, global sea-level rise accelerated from about 2.2 
millimeters (0.19 inches) per year to 3.3 millimeters (0.13 inches), and 
much of that acceleration is thought to be due to melting of the 
Greenland ice sheet. Projections of sea-level rise for the end of this 
century generally range from two to four feet, but most of those 
projections don't account for the myriad conditions impacting the ice in 
Greenland, or the fate of the much larger ice mass in Antarctica.

CBS News correspondent Mark Phillips joined NASA scientists last fall as 
they conducted "Operation Icebridge," a surveillance mission to study 
the Antarctic ice sheet.

"The Antarctic ice sheet is discharging more than two Olympic sized 
swimming pools worth of ice, into the ocean, every second," the 
mission's alarmed chief scientist Joe MacGregor told Phillips.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/unusual-winter-rains-driving-sea-level-rise-in-the-arctic/


[podcast interview with Berners-Lee]
*WHY CLIMATE CHANGE IS NOT JUST AN ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE*
MARCH 8, 2019 - JEFF SCHECHTMAN
Some have decried the Green New Deal because it touches on numerous 
areas outside of climate change, including universal health care, a 
universal basic income, job guarantees and worker rights. The assumption 
has been that climate change exists in some kind of a vacuum.

Mike Berners-Lee, an English researcher, writer on greenhouse gases, 
professor at Lancaster University, and our guest on this week's 
WhoWhatWhy podcast, argues that the critics have it all wrong -- because 
everything is connected.

We cannot even begin to address climate change without also looking at 
food, biodiversity, income inequality, population, plastics, and more.

Berners-Lee says that the challenges facing humanity today are 
inescapably global and interconnected. It no longer works, he tells Jeff 
Schechtman, to tackle environmental issues one at a time or to keep 
science, economics, sociology, politics, and psychology separate from 
one another. All parts of our complex global system must be addressed 
simultaneously if we are to have any positive impact.

Despite all our individual and collective efforts with alternative 
energy and conservation, we have not made even the slightest improvement 
in the global "carbon curve," Berners-Lee says. Moreover, in a kind of 
environmental Catch-22, it turns out that greater energy efficiency can 
sometimes increase carbon output.

Nevertheless, Berners-Lee is slightly optimistic that we can solve some 
of these problems and improve our global quality of life.

After all, he reminds us, Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos notwithstanding, it's 
very unlikely that we're going to find another planet to move to anytime 
soon. As Berners-Lee says, "there is no planet B."...
- - -
So if you look at the climate, if you look at the carbon emissions 
curve, it's carrying on rising year by year exactly as we might've 
predicted it would've done if humans had never noticed that climate 
change was an issue. So in other words, if you look at the sum total of 
all the talk and debate and policy making and targets and actions on 
every scale, from the individual to the company to the state, if you add 
all of that up, the sum total of it is absolutely no change whatsoever...
- - -
And one of the things about the free market is that … a totally 
unconstrained free market, is that it doesn't have the capability to 
deal with a global challenge. It doesn't have the capability to deal 
with a situation where the individualistic needs of small parts of the 
market don't fit with the overall global systemic need that we need to 
respond to. So we're going to need … there are clearly some areas in 
however you're feeling about this, it's pretty easy to prove that at 
least in some places, it is going to be essential to put some 
interventions into the market.
      So one example is, we need a global constraint on the fossil 
fuels. And actually, there are other examples as well around resource 
uses. There are links to the fossil fuel, there are some things about 
land and food, and so on. And we could talk about a good handful of 
clear constraints that need to be introduced. So markets absolutely, 
yes, but totally free ones, they can't help us deal with the Anthropocene...
- - -
...there's kind of a race going on between the science of what's 
happening in the world and the human response to it. Who's going to get 
there first? Are we going to wake up first? Or is the system going to 
collapse first? So it's absolutely, the race is on.
- - -
If we're going to make all the change that it takes to deal with climate 
change, we kind of may as well deal with everything else while we're at 
it. Because it's actually not so much more bother. If you look at the 
things around the food and land system that deal with climate change, 
actually they're very, very similar. They're the same things that will 
help us preserve our biodiversity and help us fend off our antibiotics 
crisis and feed a growing global population. So from every perspective, 
it's the same sorts of actions that will help us. And in terms of the 
thoughtfulness with which we need to go about our daily lives and the 
way that we need to tune into what our impacts are on the planet and on 
all the other people around the planet, wherever they live in the world, 
it's that same thoughtfulness that will help us deal with all the other 
environmental situations that are rising upwards.
https://whowhatwhy.org/2019/03/08/why-climate-change-is-not-just-an-environmental-issue/


[Release the floodwaters...]
*Citing 'Permanent Oil Price Decline,' Norwegian Fund's Fossil Fuel 
Divestment Could Spark Global 'Shockwave' *
www.commondreams.org
"The decision should sound like a red alert for private banks and 
investors whose oil and gas assets are becoming increasingly risky and 
morally untenable," say climate campaigners
by Jon Queally, staff writer
In a move that climate campaigners say should send a "shockwave" through 
the global oil and gas industry, the Norwegian Sovereign Wealth 
Fund--the largest of its kind in the world--has recommended the Norway 
government divest the entirety of the fund's $40 billion holdings from 
the fossil fuel industry.
In a statement on Friday, Minister of Finance Siv Jensen explained the 
decision is meant to "reduce the vulnerability" of the Norwegian fund 
"to permanent oil price decline." With an estimated $1 trillion in total 
holdings, Norway's Sovereign Wealth Fund is the largest publicly held 
investment in the world. According to a spokesperson for the finance 
ministry, the fund currently has roughly 66 billion Norwegian krone 
($7.5 billion) invested in energy exploration and production 
stocks--approximately 1.2% of the fund's stock portfolio.

The recommendation from the Norwegian fund will now be sent to the 
nation's parliament for approval.

Climate groups that have pushed aggressively for divestment from the 
fossil fuel industry in recent years as a key way to decrease the threat 
of greenhouse gases and runaway global warming celebrated the 
announcement as a possible crucial turning point.

"We welcome and support this proposal," said Yossi Cadan, senior 
divestment campaigner at 350.org, "if it passes through parliament it 
will produce a shockwave in the market, dealing the largest blow to date 
to the illusion that the fossil fuel industry still has decades of 
business as usual ahead of it. The decision should sound like a red 
alert for private banks and investors whose oil and gas assets are 
becoming increasingly risky and morally untenable."

Bill McKibben, one of the group's co-founders, called it a "huge, huge, 
huge win."
In a statement, 350 added:

    In order to avoid the most catastrophic impacts of climate change
    and keep global warming below 1.5°C we have to keep fossil fuels in
    the ground and shift finance towards sustainable energy solutions
    for all. Climate impacts are already hitting home and we have no
    time left to lose. Last year Nordic heatwaves, wildfires in the
    Arctic Circle and alarming news of the thickest Arctic sea ice
    starting to break up, showed how climate change is close to home for
    Norway. It seems unthinkable for Norwegian financiers to continue to
    invest in companies that are causing this chaos.

Catherine Howarth, chief executive of ShareAction, which provides 
analysis for investors focused on creating a more sustainable society, 
said the Norwegian fund's announcement "is further evidence that 
investors are growing increasingly dissatisfied with oil exploration and 
production companies."..

Institutional investors that manage sovereign wealth funds and pensions 
funds, she added,  "are withdrawing their capital from oil and gas 
companies on the grounds that quicker-than-expected growth in clean 
energy and associated regulation is making oil and gas business models 
highly vulnerable. This announcement will put pressure on investors to 
ramp up their engagement with integrated oil majors ahead of [annual 
general meeting] season" when stock holders gather to assess and review 
company performance and strategies.

While the financial reality of the climate crisis comes into increasing 
view for global investors and markets, 350.org says that credit belongs 
to the campaigners from around the world who have bravely stood up to 
demand an end to the financial and energy hegemony of the fossil fuel 
industry.

At the heart of the global divestment campaign, the group said, "is a 
people-powered grassroots movement--it's ordinary people pushing their 
local institutions to take a stand against the fossil fuel industry 
--the industry most responsible for the current climate crisis."

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 
3.0 License
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/03/08/citing-permanent-oil-price-decline-norwegian-funds-fossil-fuel-divestment-could


[How many?]
*Atlantic Coast Pipeline Offers Only Two Dozen Permanent Jobs*
Sharon Kelly, DeSmogBlog
The companies building the Atlantic Coast Pipeline say the project will 
support 17,000 jobs -- no small amount of work anywhere, but especially 
in parts of West Virginia where the economy has long relied on coal 
mining. However, an investigation spearheaded by high school students 
revealed that the pipeline will barely create any permanent jobs...
https://truthout.org/articles/atlantic-coast-pipeline-offers-only-two-dozen-permanent-jobs/



[getting to know what we don't know]
*How brain biases prevent climate action*
Cognitive biases that ensured our initial survival now make it difficult 
to address long-term challenges that threaten our existence, like 
climate change. But they can help us too...
- - -
Psychologists have identified more than 150 cognitive biases we all 
share. Of these, a few are particularly important in explaining why we 
lack the will to act on climate change.

    --Hyperbolic discounting. This is our perception that the present is
    more important than the future. Throughout most of our evolution it
    was more advantageous to focus on what might kill us or eat us now,
    not later. This bias now impedes our ability to take action to
    address more distant-feeling, slower and complex challenges.
    --Our lack of concern for future generations. Evolutionary theory
    suggests that we care most about just a few generations of family
    members: our great-grandparents to great-grandchildren. While we may
    understand what needs to be done to address climate change, it's
    hard for us to see how the sacrifices required for generations
    existing beyond this short time span are worth it.
    --The bystander effect. We tend to believe that someone else will
    deal with a crisis. This developed for good reason: if a threatening
    wild animal is lurking at the edge of our hunter-gatherer group,
    it's a waste of effort for every single member to spring into action
    -- not to mention could needlessly put more people into danger. In
    smaller groups, it was usually pretty clearly delineated who would
    step up for which threats, so this worked. Today, however, this
    leads us to assume (often wrongly) that our leaders must be doing
    something about the crisis of climate change. And the larger the
    group, the stronger this bias becomes.
    --The sunk-cost fallacy. We are biased towards staying the course
    even in the face of negative outcomes. The more we've invested time,
    energy or resources into that course, the more likely we are to
    stick with it – even if it no longer seems optimal. This helps
    explain, for example, our continued reliance on fossil fuels as a
    primary source of energy in the face of decades of evidence that we
    both can and should transition to clean energy and a carbon neutral
    future.

These cognitive biases evolved for good reason. But they're now 
hamstringing our ability to respond to what could be the largest crisis 
humanity has ever created or had to face.
*
**Evolutionary upside*
The good news is that our biological evolution hasn't just hindered us 
from addressing the challenge of climate change. It's also equipped us 
with capacities to overcome them.
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20190304-human-evolution-means-we-can-tackle-climate-change



[March 15]
*Madison students planning strike, will walk out of class March 15 to 
protest climate change*
East High students say there is no "Planet B"
MADISON, Wis. - Madison students are joining young adults from across 
the country in the fight against climate change.

On Friday, March 15, Madison-area students will gather at East High 
School at 11:15 a.m. Then, at exactly 11:45 a.m., they will march down 
East Washington to the State Capitol.

The strike is meant to show students' solidarity on the climate crisis: 
they're petitioning the government to take bold action to help fight the 
irreversible affects of climate change. Student organizers say the 
strike will make it clear there is no compromising on science.

Once at the Capitol, students will hold a rally on the State Street 
side. Following the rally, students will be invited inside the Capitol 
to make their voices heard once more.

The "Climate Strike" is a push to support the Green New Deal proposed by 
Congress. Students also hope local government officials will draft new 
policies at the state and city levels to combat climate change.

They're hoping these proposals will be bipartisan. A recent poll done by 
the Yale Program on Climate Communication and the George Mason 
University Center for Climate Change Communication found that 92 percent 
of registered Democrats and 64 percent of registered Republicans back 
the Green New Deal plan.
https://www.channel3000.com/news/madison-students-planning-strike-will-walk-out-of-class-march-15-to-protest-climate-change/1053008107



[that's flesh eating bacteria to you and me]
*Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria Are Turning Up in Puget Sound Marine Life*
Researchers suspect human factors--such as wastewater runoff--may play a 
role.
by Hannah Thomasy - March 4, 2019
"If these are endangered animals, like the orcas that you have in Puget 
Sound, then it makes sense [to treat them], because saving one animal 
can actually save that whole population," says Maria Palamar, a wildlife 
veterinarian and cofounder of Resolve Conservation, an organization that 
uses technology and citizen science to address wildlife protection 
issues. Along with the southern resident killer whales, antibiotics have 
also been used to treat wild Hawaiian monk seals and loggerhead sea turtles.

Antibiotic-resistant bacteria in marine environments could be dangerous 
to humans, too. Marine bacteria can cause skin infections in people with 
even small scrapes or insect bites, or food poisoning in people who eat 
contaminated seafood, especially for seafood eaten raw, such as oysters. 
In certain countries, like Brazil and Australia, oysters have been found 
to harbor antibiotic resistant Vibrio parahaemolyticus or Escherichia 
coli (E. coli), both of which can be fatal to humans.

Palamar says understanding the geographic distribution of antibiotic 
resistance in wildlife is extremely important. "As we get more and more 
urbanized, and species are adapting to urban environments, we need to 
start considering what their role is in moving around these 
antibiotic-resistant bacteria that could come to farms, could come to 
pets, could come to humans," she says.

Scientists have yet to conclusively establish the source of 
antibiotic-resistant bacteria in Puget Sound, but humans likely play an 
important role says Linda Rhodes, an environmental microbiologist at the 
Northwest Fisheries Science Center. Culprits could include failing 
wastewater treatment or septic systems, runoff, and waste from livestock 
or even pets, she says.

Rhodes and her team have also found that Puget Sound has surprisingly 
high levels of certain types of fecal bacteria. By examining the genetic 
makeup of these bacteria, the researchers have shown they come from 
humans and ruminants, most likely cattle. This is particularly 
problematic as human and cattle feces can harbor a panoply of 
antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

Norman says that while most marine antibiotic resistance probably comes 
from land sources (like humans and livestock), the use of antibiotics in 
marine fish farms may also be cause for concern. (Although salmon 
farming is being phased out in Washington State, it is still allowed in 
neighboring British Columbia.)

Antibiotic resistance in marine animals is a problem that should concern 
everyone, not just conservationists, says Norman. "Animal health, human 
health, and environmental health are all connected," she says. "You 
can't really look at one without considering the other two. We 
ultimately are tied to the same water that these animals use."
https://www.hakaimagazine.com/news/antibiotic-resistant-bacteria-are-turning-up-in-puget-sound-marine-life/



[another Bill Blakemore video from 2011]
*Good News on Climate's Biggest Unknown: What Will the Humans Do?*
Two Happy Findings About Humans: No 'Tragedy of the Commons,' and 'The 
Ultimatum Game'
NATURE'S EDGE NOTEBOOK
Observation, Analysis, Reflection, New Questions
By Bill Blakemore
Climate scientists around the world have long said that "the biggest 
unknown" as they try to predict the rate and severity of global warming 
is the answer to their question, "What will the humans do?"

How much and how fast will we slow and reverse the greenhouse emissions 
that come from burning coal, oil and gas, felling forests and plowing up 
land, that are now causing the rapid rise of earth's temperature?

Amid all the bad news about that (scientists report a massive gap 
between what we're planning and what needs to be done)  there are two 
bits of good news.

The first is a discovery for which American political scientist Elinor 
Ostrom became, in 2009, the first woman to win the Nobel Prize for 
Economics.

She showed that the "Tragedy of the Commons" (its overuse and 
destruction) doesn't happen, at least when all the people who share the 
commons can get together and talk about it.

In other words, people aren't complete idiots.

She found that, when there are no internal or external forces preventing 
the "commoners" (who share, say, a large "commons" or pastureland in a 
medieval European town) from a free, open and robust discussion of how 
they should agree to govern and limit their use of it so it doesn't get 
overgrazed and thus ruined for all, then the commons goes on thriving.

This may give some hope to those watching conversations such as those at 
the global climate summit this December in Durban, South Africa.

Ultimately, of course, the one commons we all use is the planet.

"The Tragedy of the Commons" is an idea presented by ecologist Garrett 
Hardin in an influential paper of that title published in the journal 
Science in 1968.

His "commons" metaphor suggested that individuals often each put as many 
sheep or cows as they can on the commons, which nobody owns, to benefit 
themselves, leading to its collapse.

Ostrom, then in her early 30s, spent the next 40 years checking out that 
thesis.

She examined societies of all kinds around the world and back through 
the ages, looking at many kinds of "commons" -- from pastures to 
fisheries, forests to watersheds, and many others.

What she found, impressing her colleagues worldwide, was that "the 
tragedy of the commons" often simply does not happen.

When the people who live around and actually use the commons can 
converse regularly about its use, they figure it out. They compare notes 
and begin to set their own rules and means of monitoring compliance.

Thus they may avoid pasture collapse and have a village life regular and 
comfortable enough so they can plan time for holidays, enjoy a good 
harvest feast together with their families, friends and sweethearts, 
start new families for a next generation, and (having secured enough 
food for all) even have reasonable time left over to write poetry and 
ponder the really daunting mysteries like the universe and existence itself.

Professor Hardin even readjusted his 1968 thesis to fit with Ostrom's 
findings, acknowledging the accuracy and excellence of her work.

So, good news. People aren't (always) idiots.

This raises an important question.

When they are idiots, what prevented them from talking it over and 
working out ways to save their commons?

A variety of studies to have found that, sometimes, outside parties, who 
may enter a commons with the aim of extracting something for their own 
gain, find ways to silence or divide local users of the commons in order 
to prevent their governance or control of it.

A number of economists and political scientists  (many with no guiding 
political party affiliation) now study how multi-national petroleum and 
gas companies, as well as large timber and agricultural business, may 
tend to silence or divide local people who live where these resources 
may be found, extracted and carted away to distant markets.

This is where two kinds of "commons" clash.

Two Kinds of Commons -- Local and Global

For example, the possible destruction of a forest or vast field of 
oil-rich tar-sands can contribute to the disruption of the heat balance 
of the all-enveloping commons of the planet's air and of the acidity of 
its oceans, simply because such destruction puts extra CO2 in the air.

But, suggests Ostrom, this catastrophic outcome does not need to happen 
if all the people who share this planetary commons can talk about it 
freely and vigorously -- as they try to do at such conferences as global 
UN climate summits and other venues.

In his book, "The Fate of Nature: Rediscovering our ability to rescue 
the earth," Alaskan journalist Charles Wohlforth, who reported for many 
years on the physical and social aftermath of the Exxon-Valdez oil 
spill, describes how Ostrom's good news about the human race is always 
at play, ready to be nurtured amid all the bad news about the human race.

Here's a brief video interview with Wohlforth about that. 
http://video-cdn.abcnews.com/100624_ann_ne_2.mp4

It is conducted, by the way, across the street from our ABC News offices 
in New York's Central Park, another commons recently saved from urban 
blight (which had ruined it by the 1970s), when the people who live 
around the park and use it most often took over its governance, forming 
The Central Park Conservancy.

The Tragedy of the Commons Doesn't Happen when people can talk – Charles 
Wohlforth and Nobel Prize Winner Elinor Ostrom
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/technology/2011/11/good-news-on-climates-biggest-unknown-what-will-the-humans-do/


*This Day in Climate History - March 9, 2017 - from D.R. Tucker*
March 9, 2017: In an appearance on CNBC, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt 
denies human-caused climate change.
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/09/epa-chief-scott-pruitt.html
https://thinkprogress.org/epa-head-falsely-claims-carbon-emissions-arent-the-cause-of-global-warming-262bd9b0937e#.oaigkdwq0 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/09/us/politics/epa-scott-pruitt-global-warming.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur 

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

/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.