[TheClimate.Vote] October 2, 2019 - Daily Global Warming News Digest.

[Richard Pauli]

/October 2, 2019/

[KQED audio 6 mins]
*Climate Change Despair Is Real. This Is How You Fight It*
Experts seem to agree on a three-part strategy: [clip from transcript]

*Come together in community. *"Find allies who understand what
[you're] feeling… and get together with them," said Craig Chalquist,
a psychologist and professor at the California Institute of Integral
Studies. He said it can even be something informal. Often, people
struggle with these feelings in isolation, since bringing up climate
change is taboo in many social situations.
*Process your feelings*. This can happen through talking, grief
groups and spending time in nature. Really? Just talk about such a
huge issue? Chalquist said yes, adding that people with eco-anxiety
then "quickly move from that phase into, 'What can I do?'"
*Identify what specific problems speak to you, and get to work.*
Interested in oceans? Food systems? Reforestation? Chalquist said
because all these aspects of the environment are connected, "to work
on one is actually to bring some healing to the whole thing."...

https://www.kqed.org/news/11776098/climate-change-despair-is-real-this-is-how-you-fight-it


[Louisiana]
*Oil Company Will Pay $100 Million for Damaging Louisiana Coast*
https://www.climateliabilitynews.org/2019/09/27/louisiana-oil-gas-settlement-climate-change/

- - -

[Colorado River mess]
*Eco-groups sue feds, allege that Glen Canyon Dam plan ignores climate 
change*
"That analysis did not evaluate the complete loss of power generation at 
Glen Canyon Dam, because decommissioning the dam would not meet the 
purpose, need, and objectives of the LTEMP," the agency wrote in 
response to Save the Colorado's comments submitted during the 
environmental review.

In past interviews, Reclamation officials said Lake Powell plays a vital 
role in storing water from the Colorado River. The reservoir marks the 
boundary between the river's Upper and Lower basins; without it, 
officials said, the Upper Basin would not have been able to consistently 
meet its obligations to the Lower Basin.
"We are claiming that there won't be enough water to release anything, 
and they blew off the climate-change predictions," replied Gary Wockner, 
Save the Colorado's executive director.

This year, the dam is expected to release 9 million acre-feet of water. 
The elevation of Lake Powell at the end of August was 3,619 feet above 
seal level, or 81 feet below "full pool," holding 13.6 million 
acre-feet, which is 56% full. That's up 48 feet from late last year, 
when it was at 38% capacity.

The environmental groups' chief complaint is the agency relied 
exclusively on "historic" inflow data, without considering the lower 
flows climate-change models forecast. Instead of studying structural 
changes the groups argue are needed to preserve the Colorado River, the 
bureau is relying on incremental fixes, such as the recently adopted 
Drought Contingency Plan, as it hobbles from one crisis to the next.
Some models indicate Powell could fall below the level needed for 
producing power, and it would reach "dead pool," at 3,370 feet, under 
the driest scenario. The suit contends this failure skewed the operating 
plan toward a "business as usual" approach that may not be sustainable 
much longer.

"We must throw 'incrementalism' out of the toolbox, take climate science 
seriously, and plan for so-called 'Black Swan' drought events on the 
Colorado River," said Wockner, referring to the theory developed by 
scholar Nassim Nicholas Taleb. A black swan is an event that comes as a 
surprise and carries astonishing consequences but in hindsight seemed 
predictable.
https://www.sltrib.com/news/environment/2019/10/01/eco-groups-sue-feds/

- -

[LegalPlanet - Big Oil headed to court in Baltimore]

"The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals today denied fossil fuel co's
motion to stay remand pending outcome of their appeal, sending the
case back to the state court where it was filed, and where it
belongs.  Unless SCOTUS steps in, this case is headed to discovery.
Buckle up.  Here's some commentary from UCLA's Ann Carlson breaking
it down."

ANN CARLSON   October 1, 2019
*Let Discovery Begin!*
Unless the Supreme Court intervenes, discovery can begin in the 
Baltimore climate nuisance case
The oil companies that have fought cities around the country that have 
filed climate change nuisance cases against them may finally have to 
tell plaintiffs' lawyers about what they knew about the connection 
between climate change and their business activities, when they knew  
it, and what they did in response.  The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals 
has denied the oil companies' motion to stay proceedings in  Mayor and 
City Council of Baltimore v. BP et al pending the outcome of a federal 
appeal the oil companies have filed.  That means discovery should be 
able to proceed in state court unless the U.S. Supreme Court steps into 
intervene, a highly unlikely outcome.  (Full disclosure: I provide some 
pro bono consulting on the Baltimore case and several others.)

The City of Baltimore has, like a number of other municipalities around 
the country and the State of Rhode Island, sued oil companies alleging 
that they created a public and private nuisance in their sale, 
extraction, and production of fossil fuel products knowing that their 
products would cause and contribute to climate change. The cases seek 
compensation to pay for the damages the governments have and will 
continue to experience from harms like sea level rise, more intense heat 
waves, hurricanes and flooding, and more intense droughts and 
wildfires.   In the Baltimore case, the oil companies sought – as they 
have in all of the nuisance cases filed in state court -- to remove the 
case to federal court.  The reason for the removal motion is that the 
companies believe they are more likely to get the cases dismissed in 
federal court than in state court.  But in four out of five cases, 
including in Baltimore, Boulder, a California case brought by a group of 
cities and counties, and the State of Rhode Island, district court 
judges have denied the motions to remove.  Those cases are all on 
appeal.  In the case of Baltimore, the case against the oil companies 
can now proceed pending the outcome of the appeal.

It seems safe to assume that the oil companies do not want plaintiffs to 
be able to get into their old files, question their executives, and 
require the companies to answer written questions about their knowledge 
of climate change. Nor do they want to have to reveal what they have 
done to finance campaigns of disinformation to persuade the American 
public that climate change isn't real or isn't caused by humans.  They 
also prefer to keep hidden what they have done to protect their own 
assets against the ravages of climate change. We have already seen  
documents that provide answers to some of these questions but much more 
damning information is likely to come out during the long  discovery 
process.  Worst of all for the oil companies may be the questioning of 
executives – under oath -- by experienced trial lawyers who will ask 
them tough and uncomfortable questions about their knowledge and 
behavior.  The process of discovery will be long and drawn out and oil 
companies will put up every obstacle imaginable in an attempt to avoid 
answering questions along the way. But the cases have reached a new 
stage that no other climate change nuisance case has. Things are about 
to get interesting.
https://legal-planet.org/2019/10/01/let-discovery-begin/

- -

[Chris Hays talks with Rachel Maddow on her new book]
*Rachel Maddow On Corruption In the Oil And Gas Industry | All In | MSNBC*
Sep 30, 2019
MSNBC
In her new book, "Blowout," Rachel Maddow explains how Russian President 
Vladimir Putin uses his country's energy supply to manipulate power in 
Ukraine. Aired on 09/30/19.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3tTdN1Of3M
[The essential message begins at: https://youtu.be/j3tTdN1Of3M?t=455 ]



[Forbes carries an opinion]
*3 Reasons There Might Be No Path to Success on Climate Change*
Chunka Mui Contributor
... consider the pessimism of Daniel Kahneman, the Nobel Prize winning 
behavioral scientist: "I really see no path to success on climate 
change," he told George Marshall in Marshall's bracing book, "Don't Even 
Think About It: Why Our Brains are Wired to Ignore Climate Change."

Kahneman fears that climate change is a hopeless problem for three reasons:

*First, it lacks salience.* It is too "abstract, distant, invisible and 
disputed" to capture our attention. Without attention, there is no action.

*Second, dealing with climate change is typically thought to require 
people to accept short-term costs and reductions on living standard in 
order to address higher but uncertain future losses.* Such sacrifice is 
not in our nature. One University of Chicago poll found that while 72% 
of respondents believed that climate change is happening, half were 
unwilling pay even $1 each month to help address it.

*Third, climate change seems uncertain and contested*--"even if there is 
a National Academy on one side and some cranks on the other."

By focusing our minds on what might happen 10, 30 or even 80 years from 
now, far-off doomsday scenarios reinforce the abstract and distant 
nature of climate change. They widen the window of scientific 
uncertainty both the outcome and costs, and therefore enhance the 
opportunity for rebuttal and confusion.

"The bottom line," Kahneman concluded, "is that I'm extremely skeptical 
that we can cope with climate change. To mobilize people, this has to 
become an emotional issue. It has to have immediacy and salience. A 
distant, abstract and disputed threat just doesn't have the necessary 
characteristics for seriously mobilizing public opinion."...
Kahneman's pessimism is unfortunately well supported by other 
researchers--and applies not just to climate change but to the broader 
challenge of why we, individually and as a society, underprepare for 
slow moving, predictable disasters. As solidly laid out by Robert Meyer 
and Howard Krunreuther in "The Ostrich Paradox: Why We Underprepare for 
Disasters":

"Our ability to foresee and protect against natural catastrophes has 
never been greater; yet, we consistently fail to heed the warnings and 
protect ourselves and our communities, with devastating consequences."
So, are we doomed? Perhaps. But, remember the observation of Arthur C. 
Clarke, in what has become known as Clarke's First Law:

"When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is
possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that
something is impossible, he is very probably wrong."

Let's hope that the distinguished Daniel Kahneman is "probably wrong." 
Also, take a lesson from Winston Churchill on the gathering storm of 
World War II: "Having got ourselves into this awful plight in 1939, it 
was vital to grasp the larger hope."
In future articles, I will lay out better ways to engage on the climate 
crisis and, hopefully, opportunities for grasping the larger hope..
https://www.forbes.com/sites/chunkamui/2019/10/01/3-reasons-there-might-be-no-path-to-success-on-climate-change/#31adc18319de


[bio diversity ramifications]
*Climate change could pit species against one another as they shift ranges*
Species have few good options when it comes to surviving climate 
change--they can genetically adapt to new conditions, shift their 
ranges, or both.

But new research in PNAS indicates that conflicts between species as 
they adapt and shift ranges could lead experts to underestimate 
extinctions, and underscores the importance of landscape connectivity.

Researchers at the University of British Columbia and the University of 
Montpellier trying to understand how species might respond to climate 
change conducted large-scale computer simulations which show that 
although movement and genetic adaptation to climate change each help 
maintain biodiversity, these two factors can come into conflict.

Dispersal refers to species movement across landscapes, while adaptation 
is the evolutionary response of organisms to environmental change. When 
species both disperse and adapt, faster evolving species prevent slower 
adapting species from shifting their ranges, driving them to extinction...
https://phys.org/news/2019-10-climate-pit-species-shift-ranges.html



[Oooops! time to chill out]
*Journal 'Nature' retracts ocean-warming study*
The retraction of the article came on the same day that the United 
Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released its latest 
report on the impacts warming on oceans and ice-covered regions.

The findings were some of the most dire to date, warning that if 
emissions continue, sea level rise could reach 3 feet by the end of the 
century, a more than 10% increase from 2013 predictions. At the same 
time, the report found that in some cities and islands hundred-year 
floods will become yearly events...
https://phys.org/news/2019-09-journal-nature-retracts-ocean-warming.html
- -
[in the Journal Nature]
*Retraction Note: Quantification of ocean heat uptake from changes in 
atmospheric O2 and CO2 composition*
Retraction to: Nature https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0651-8, 
published online 31 October 2018.

Shortly after publication, arising from comments from Nicholas
Lewis, we realized that our reported uncertainties were
underestimated owing to our treatment of certain systematic errors
as random errors. In addition, we became aware of several smaller
issues in our analysis of uncertainty. Although correcting these
issues did not substantially change the central estimate of ocean
warming, it led to a roughly fourfold increase in uncertainties,
significantly weakening implications for an upward revision of ocean
warming and climate sensitivity. Because of these weaker
implications, the Nature editors asked for a Retraction, which we
accept. Despite the revised uncertainties, our method remains valid
and provides an estimate of ocean warming that is independent of the
ocean data underpinning other approaches. The revised paper, with
corrected uncertainties, will be submitted to another journal. The
Retraction will contain a link to the new publication, if and when
it is published.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1585-5
[however, thermodynamic and physical destabilization will proceed]


*This Day in Climate History - October 2, 2008 - from D.R. Tucker*
Vice-presidential candidates Joe Biden and Sarah Palin spar over climate 
and energy issues in their lone debate, moderated by Gwen Ifill.
http://youtu.be/5qhox5P_jCg
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------/

/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.