[TheClimate.Vote] January 2, 2020 - Daily Global Warming News Digest.
Richard Pauli
richard at theclimate.vote
Thu Jan 2 09:56:44 EST 2020
/*January 2, 2020*/
[according to the NYTimes]
*The biggest climate stories you might have missed -- but still have
time to read.*
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/12/13/climate/year-in-review.html
[Michael Mann is a most respected climate scientist]
*Australia, your country is burning - dangerous climate change is here
with you now*
Michael Mann
I am a climate scientist on holiday in the Blue Mountains, watching
climate change in action
Wed 1 Jan 2020
After years studying the climate, my work has brought me to Sydney where
I'm studying the linkages between climate change and extreme weather events.
Prior to beginning my sabbatical stay in Sydney, I took the opportunity
this holiday season to vacation in Australia with my family. We went to
see the Great Barrier Reef - one of the great wonders of this planet -
while we still can. Subject to the twin assaults of warming-caused
bleaching and ocean acidification, it will be gone in a matter of
decades in the absence of a dramatic reduction in global carbon emissions.
We also travelled to the Blue Mountains, another of Australia's natural
wonders, known for its lush temperate rainforests, majestic cliffs and
rock formations and panoramic vistas that challenge any the world has to
offer. It too is now threatened by climate change...
I witnessed this firsthand.
I did not see vast expanses of rainforest framed by distant blue-tinged
mountain ranges. Instead I looked out into smoke-filled valleys, with
only the faintest ghosts of distant ridges and peaks in the background.
The iconic blue tint (which derives from a haze formed from "terpenes"
emitted by the Eucalyptus trees that are so plentiful here) was replaced
by a brown haze. The blue sky, too, had been replaced by that brown haze.
The locals, whom I found to be friendly and outgoing, would volunteer
that they have never seen anything like this before. Some even uttered
the words "climate change" without any prompting.
The songs of Peter Garrett and Midnight Oil I first enjoyed decades ago
have taken on a whole new meaning for me now. They seem disturbingly
prescient in light of what we are witnessing unfold in Australia.
The brown skies I observed in the Blue Mountains this week are a product
of human-caused climate change. Take record heat, combine it with
unprecedented drought in already dry regions and you get unprecedented
bushfires like the ones engulfing the Blue Mountains and spreading
across the continent. It's not complicated...
The warming of our planet - and the changes in climate associated with
it - are due to the fossil fuels we're burning: oil, whether at midnight
or any other hour of the day, natural gas, and the biggest culprit of
all, coal. That's not complicated either.
When we mine for coal, like the controversial planned Adani coalmine,
which would more than double Australia's coal-based carbon emissions, we
are literally mining away at our blue skies. The Adani coalmine could
rightly be renamed the Blue Sky mine.
In Australia, beds are burning. So are entire towns, irreplaceable
forests and endangered and precious animal species such as the koala
(arguably the world's only living plush toy) are perishing in massive
numbers due to the unprecedented bushfires.
The continent of Australia is figuratively - and in some sense literally
- on fire.
Yet the prime minister, Scott Morrison, appears remarkably indifferent
to the climate emergency Australia is suffering through, having chosen
to vacation in Hawaii as Australians are left to contend with
unprecedented heat and bushfires.
Morrison has shown himself to be beholden to coal interests and his
administration is considered to have conspired with a small number of
petrostates to sabotage the recent UN climate conference in Madrid
("COP25"), seen as a last ditch effort to keep planetary warming below a
level (1.5C) considered by many to constitute "dangerous" planetary warming.
But Australians need only wake up in the morning, turn on the
television, read the newspaper or look out the window to see what is
increasingly obvious to many - for Australia, dangerous climate change
is already here. It's simply a matter of how much worse we're willing to
allow it to get.
Australia is experiencing a climate emergency. It is literally burning.
It needs leadership that is able to recognise that and act. And it needs
voters to hold politicians accountable at the ballot box.
Australians must vote out fossil-fuelled politicians who have chosen to
be part of the problem and vote in climate champions who are willing to
solve it.
Michael E Mann is distinguished professor of atmospheric science at
Pennsylvania State University. His most recent book, with Tom Toles, is
The Madhouse Effect: How Climate Change Denial Is Threatening Our
Planet, Destroying Our Politics, and Driving Us Crazy (Columbia
University Press, 2016).
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/02/australia-your-country-is-burning-dangerous-climate-change-is-here-with-you-now
[Bloomberg Opinion]
*A Decade of Climate Science Confirmed What We Already Knew*
The future will be warmer, stormier, and more extreme.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-12-31/climate-change-a-decade-of-science-confirmed-what-we-knew
[heat and drought and wind]
*Why the Fires in Australia Are So Bad*
Bush fire season is nothing new to Australians, but this summer has been
calamitous -- and it's far from over.
By Andy Parsons and Russell Goldman
Jan. 1, 2020
This fire season has been one of the worst in Australia's history, with
at least 15 people killed, hundreds of homes destroyed and millions of
acres burned. And summer is far from over.
This week, thousands of residents and vacationers in southeastern
Australia were forced to evacuate to shorelines as bush fires encircled
communities and razed scores of buildings. Military ships and aircraft
were deployed on Wednesday to deliver water, food and fuel to towns cut
off by the fires.
The hot, dry conditions that have fueled the fires are nothing new in
Australia. Here's why this fire season has been so calamitous.
What is causing the fires?
Record-breaking temperatures, extended drought and strong winds have
converged to create disastrous fire conditions.
As a severe heat wave gripped most of the country in mid-December,
Australia recorded its hottest day on record, with average highs of
107.4 degrees Fahrenheit, or 41.9 degrees Celsius. The heat wave is
continuing this week in southeastern Australia, with temperatures
expected to reach 105 in Canberra, the capital.
The extreme heat has followed the driest spring on record. Most of New
South Wales and Queensland have been experiencing shortfalls in rain
since early 2017. The drought has hit the country's most productive
agricultural areas, including some of those now ablaze...
- - -
Australia is normally hot and dry in the summer, but climate change,
which brings longer and more frequent periods of extreme heat, worsens
these conditions and makes vegetation drier and more likely to burn.
The catastrophic fire conditions have put an intense focus on the
Australian government's failure to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide,
which traps heat when released into the atmosphere.
Even as emissions continue to soar, the country, currently governed by a
conservative coalition, has found it difficult to reach a political
consensus on energy and climate change policy. Those politics, in part,
are influenced by Australia's long mining history and its powerful coal
lobby....
more at - https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/01/world/australia/fires.html
[Followers of money]
*Climate change investing catches on with millennials who believe it's
pressing -- and profitable*
-As climate warnings become more dire, investors have become more
interested in climate change-related investments, which did well in
2019 but haven't had a good track record longer term.
-In the past year, some climate change ETFs have outperformed and
analysts expect the climate change theme to become a much bigger
part of the stock market, taking its place as a large part of ESG
investing and individual sectors.
-The focus on climate is moving away from the traditional energy and
alternative energy plays, with the financial sector increasing its
focus on investments and risks related to climate.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/12/31/climate-change-investing-catches-on-with-millennials.html
- - -
[more money from Motley Fool]
*These Were the 5 Best Renewable Energy Stocks of 2019*
*5. Brookfield Renewable Partners (up 81%)*
Providing a diversified approach to investing in renewable energy,
Brookfield Renewable Partners (NYSE:BEP) has a portfolio of assets
covering the gamut of clean energy: hydropower, wind, solar, energy
storage, and biomass...
*4. Plug Power (149%)*
Bouncing back from a year in which they plunged 48%, shares of Plug
Power (NASDAQ:PLUG) have risen significantly higher in 2019...
*3. SolarEdge Technologies (169%)*
It didn't take long in 2019 before shares of SolarEdge Technologies
(NASDAQ:SEDG) began to burn brighter in shareholders' eyes following the
company's January announcement of its closing of a majority stake in
S.M.R.E. Spa...
*2. Ballard Power (190%)*
Like its fuel-cell peer, Plug Power, Ballard Power Systems (NASDAQ:BLDP)
also delighted shareholders in January...
*1. Enphase Energy (466%)*
As the best-performing renewable energy stock of 2019, Enphase Energy
(NASDAQ:ENPH) shocked investors and gained 466%...
more at -
https://www.fool.com/investing/2019/12/31/these-were-the-5-best-renewable-energy-stocks-of-2.aspx
[follow the money]
*Bank of England unveils climate stress test*
January 1st, 2020, by Kieran Cooke
Tackling climate change isn't just about replacing fossil fuels with
renewables, or planting more trees. It's about confronting climate
stress across society.
LONDON, 1 January, 2020 - The warming world means climate stress now
permeates every part of society. And so an entire financial system which
has underpinned the growth of a global economy largely dependent on
fossil fuels must be reoriented to deal with what is fast becoming a
full-blown crisis.
A campaign to halt or withdraw multi-million dollar investments from
industries associated with fossil fuel use is gaining momentum. And the
central banks - the institutions responsible for regulating countries'
financial systems - are now taking action.
Leading the charge is the venerable Bank of England (BOE), one of the
oldest such institutions in the world. In December it became the first
central bank to announce what it terms a banking stress test on climate
change.
Under the BOE's stress test framework, banks and insurance companies
will be required to go through their books to evaluate their exposure to
the impacts of climate change.
If, for instance, a British bank has loaned money to a company building
a coal-fired power plant, the BOE will require the bank concerned to
hold a substantial amount of additional capital to cover the risks of
the project being abandoned because of new regulations or other climate
change-related factors...
- - -
*Worthless assets possible*
"A question for every company, every financial institution, every asset
manager, pension fund or insurer is what's your plan (on climate
change)", Carney told the BBC.
He says that unless the finance sector and large companies wake up to
the scale of the climate crisis, many of the assets they now hold in
fossil fuels and other enterprises will become worthless.
Some financial institutions are taking action, says the BOE governor,
divesting from investments in fossil fuels and becoming involved in more
sustainable projects, but progress is still far too slow. Time is of the
essence.
"The climate emergency continues to build. The next year will be
critical", says Carney. - Climate News Network
more at -
https://climatenewsnetwork.net/bank-of-england-unveils-climate-stress-test/
[NET means Negative Emissions Technology - video interview]
*Jim Hansen: "We are all in the same boat..." NET's, nuclear + global
cooperation*
Dec 30, 2019
Nick Breeze
https://envisionation.co.uk
Nick Breeze interview with Professor James Hansen, former Director of
NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and American adjunct professor
directing the Program on Climate Science, Awareness and Solutions of the
Earth Institute at Columbia University.
Discussing negative emissions technology (NETS), ocean sinks, hope for
the future.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=seSxp2Dog3g
[Grist tells it]
**We broke down the last decade of climate change in 7 charts**
By Clayton Aldern and Emily Pontecorvo on Dec 31, 2019 at 3:58 am
As this hottest-on-record, godforsaken decade draws to a close, it's
clear that global warming is no longer a problem for future generations
but one that's already displacing communities, costing billions, and
driving mass extinctions. And it's worth asking: Where did the past 10
years get us?
The seven charts below begin to hint at an answer to that question. Some
of the changes they document, like the concentration of carbon dioxide
in the atmosphere and the number of billion dollar disasters that occur
each year, illustrate how little we did to reduce emissions and how
unprepared the world is to deal with the warming we've already locked
in. Even though more people believe in human-caused climate change now
than 10 years ago, a growing chasm in political partisanship makes it
more difficult than ever for Congress to pass climate legislation.
But by other measures, we might one day look back on the 2010s as a
turning point in our civilization's approach to climate change. The
growth of renewable energy and rapid retirement of coal-burning power
plants this decade illustrate that crucial changes to the world order
are currently well underway.
*1. Atmospheric carbon dioxide rose by about 25 parts per million.*
A line chart showing rising CO2 emissions between 2010 and 2019
Clayton Aldern / Grist
Let's start with the big picture, which is to say: the bad news. The
concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has not only continued
to rise over the past 10 years, but it is also now rising at a faster
rate than ever before.
In 2013, the famous atmospheric carbon monitoring station on Mauna Loa,
first installed by Charles David Keeling in 1958, measured levels above
400 parts per million for the first time ever. By 2016, that number
became the annual low. The earth's atmosphere has not contained this
much carbon dioxide in millions of years -- since before Homo sapiens
walked the earth. And unless we find some way to suck carbon out of the
atmosphere, the Keeling curve will not dip below 400 parts per million
again in your lifetime, your children's lifetime, or their children's
lifetime, because carbon dioxide can hang around in the atmosphere for
hundreds of years.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has estimated that in
order to limit planetary warming to 1.5 degrees, we can't let
atmospheric CO2 concentrations rise above 430 parts per million. Based
on current trends, we only have about another 10 years left to transform
our energy system before we blow right past that number as well.
*2. Climate change got expensive.*
A bar chart showing an increasing frequency of billion-dollar disasters
between 2010 and 2019
Clayton Aldern / Grist
One of the best-established consequences of global warming is that it
makes natural disasters, like fires and floods, more frequent and
severe. In the 2010s, the costs of this consequence came into sharp
focus as billion-dollar disasters struck the United States again and
again. Hurricanes Irene and Sandy pummeled the Northeast, Maria forever
changed Puerto Rico, Florence shook up North Carolina, and Harvey
drowned Houston, Texas just weeks before Irma sank Florida. Super
Typhoon Yutu, the worst storm to hit U.S. soil since 1935, wreaked havoc
on the northern Mariana Islands in the Philippines. There was record
flooding in the Midwest and Californians were struck by some of the
largest and most destructive fires the Golden State has ever seen.
If there's an upside to any of this, it's that these storms disrupted
the status quo. The massive expense, destruction, and displacement they
brought may be prompting people to question why these storms seem worse
than ever before, to consider moving to higher ground (or to Buffalo),
or to demand adaptation and mitigation measures in their hometowns.
*3. More people accept the basic premises that it's getting hot and that
it's our fault.*
Two line charts showing an increasing percentage of people between 2010
and 2019 who believe climate change is happening and caused by humans
Clayton Aldern / Grist
When it comes to climate change, there's plenty to argue about. Should
we open new nuclear plants? Would a carbon tax work? Does cap and trade
have a net benefit? But if there are two things that nobody should be
arguing about, they're the facts that the planet is getting hotter, and
that it's because of human activity.
Among scientists, that score was settled a long time ago. But for some
reason, the average Joe has taken a lot longer to come around to the
idea…some reason that probably has a lot to do with the billions of
dollars spent by fossil fuel companies to seed skepticism about the
science of climate change and then muddy the waters around what we
should do about it. There will always be skeptics and conspiracy
theorists, but this decade, we've seen more and more Americans come to
accept the basics of climate science, which could translate into more
political will to take action in the 2020s.
*4. But there's a widening partisan divide when it comes to worrying
about the environment.*
A line chart showing a widening partisan divide for environmental
concern between 2010 and 2019
Clayton Aldern / Grist
In 2008, Nancy Pelosi and Newt Gingrich sat on a couch together and
proclaimed, "Our country must take action to address climate change."
Three years later, Gingrich would write off the bipartisan television
spot as "probably the dumbest single thing I've done in recent years."
What happened?
The short answer is: polarization. As audiences siloed themselves away
in fortified partisan media towers and conservatives balked at the
theoretical price tag of climate action -- or came to see the climate
movement as a liberal ploy to usher in an era of big government -- this
decade saw the twisting of environmentalism writ large into a
dramatically polarizing issue. Today, one's environmental positions in
the United States are nearly as predictive of political party
affiliation as one's views on gun control and race.
With a new decade before us, a U.S. presidential election on the
horizon, and ever-increasing urgency to act on climate change, the
current hyperpolarization of the issue promises to prove a challenge to
the collective action we'll need.
*5. Coal continued its death spiral.*
A line chart showing cumulative retired coal capacity in the United
States between 2010 and 2019
Clayton Aldern / Grist
Even though there was no slowing of the Keeling curve's relentless climb
this decade, the mix of sources producing all of that atmospheric carbon
on the ground changed quite a bit. Coal-fired power plants, easily the
most polluting and carbon-intensive source of energy at our disposal,
saw a major decline this decade. From 2000 to 2009, the total generating
capacity of coal-fired power plants taken offline in the United States
was 6 gigawatts. From 2010 to 2009, that number jumped to 80 gigawatts
-- enough to power about 43 million homes.
Coal's downfall is complicated, owing more to the fracking boom and the
rise of a cheap alternative in natural gas than to environmental
regulations or clean energy policy. In 2016, natural gas surpassed coal
as the number one source of electricity generation in the U.S. for the
first time. Burning natural gas emits about half as much carbon dioxide
as coal, but those gains are diminished by the unknown quantity of
methane leaking from other parts of the natural gas lifecycle.
Coal's downward trend was not just a U.S. phenomenon. This year coal was
on track to see its biggest decline yet around the world. But again,
it's complicated. Other recent reports have found that coal's death
spiral may in fact look more like an arrow pointing to Asia. Coal
capacity in China and India grew over the past 10 years. The decisions
these two countries make about their energy mix in the next decade will
determine how much we are able to limit overall warming.
*6. Solar skyrocketed, but fossil fuels still dominate.*
A line chart showing the percent change in U.S. primary energy produced
by source between 2010 and 2019
Clayton Aldern / Grist
Despite coal's rapid decline, fossil fuels continued to make up the vast
majority of the U.S.'s energy mix this decade. But even though
renewables didn't make much of a dent in the overall energy mix -- they
still only made up about 11 percent of primary energy production in 2018
-- a shift is clearly underway. Solar energy production increased by
about 900 percent between 2010 and 2018, illustrating in stark terms the
expansion of the U.S. solar industry. This figure is only expected to
grow as analysts tabulate the end-of-decade values. Wind energy
production, too, is estimated to have tripled since 2010.
Keep in mind that only about 38 percent of the total raw energy produced
ends up feeding into the electric grid -- the rest goes to other uses.
In 2018, for example, about 70 percent of primary petroleum energy was
used in the transportation sector, where it accounted for more than 90
percent of the sector's energy consumption. Only about 1 percent of
primary energy used in the electric power sector comes from oil. Nuclear
power, on the other hand, exists wholly for the purpose of electricity
generation. The country's energy mix is a reminder that decarbonization
means more than just greening our electric grid.
*
**7. While coal flatlined, the price of renewables dropped precipitously.*
Line charts showing the percent change in the levelized cost of energy
by source between 2010 and 2019
Clayton Aldern / Grist
Natural gas wasn't the only energy source that got cheaper this decade.
Renewables also became more competitive on price. The cost of installing
photovoltaic panels, whether for a rooftop array or a commercial-scale
solar farm, dropped by about $5 per kilowatt since 2010. That's thanks
in part to the 30 percent federal solar investment tax credit (which is
set to begin phasing out soon) but also to the slew of cities and states
around the country that have passed renewable energy goals and created
their own incentives.
As solar panels became cheaper and more efficient, Americans on both
sides of the aisle furiously added them to their roofs, local
governments set them up along the side of the highway, and farmers put
them out to pasture. Solar panels still only make up a paltry 1.4
percent of our total electricity generation mix. But if wind and solar
continue at their current rate of growth, the U.S. has a shot at 100
percent renewable energy by 2050.
https://grist.org/climate/we-broke-down-the-last-decade-of-climate-change-in-7-charts/
[More MediaMatters lists of 2919]
*The 15 most ridiculous things media said about climate change in 2019*
WRITTEN BY TED MACDONALD
PUBLISHED 12/29/19
[plenty of video, but you must click to hear
https://www.mediamatters.org/fox-news/15-most-ridiculous-things-media-said-about-climate-change-2019]
*1. Fox commentator David Webb said peer-reviewed climate studies are
done by eco-terrorists and claimed that a pollution inequity study is
just "gobbledygook."*
On the March 13 episode of Fox & Friends, Fox Nation host David Webb
addressed a study about racial inequality in air pollution, which found
that "pollution is disproportionately caused by whites, but
disproportionately inhaled by black and Hispanic minorities." Rather
than actually acknowledging this very real and serious issue of
environmental racism, Webb just called the study "gobbledygook." He said
peer-reviewed studies like this one are often done by "eco-terrorists,"
which is quite the claim to make against one of the world's most
well-respected and well-cited scientific journals. He also tried to
deflect from the U.S. pollution problem by claiming that there is also
bad pollution in Africa. This was not the first time that Webb, who has
no scientific background, has made an outlandish statement about climate
change.
- -
*2. Fox guest Patrick Moore says that "the climate crisis is not only
fake news, it's fake science."*
On the March 12 episode of Fox & Friends, climate denier and all-around
abominable human being Patrick Moore launched into a tirade about the
Green New Deal and climate change. He said climate change is "not only
fake news, it's fake science." He called it "not dangerous" and "not
made by people," while extolling the virtues of carbon dioxide. Moore, a
consultant who often falsely bills himself as Greenpeace's co-founder,
has previously raked in money from polluting industries. Moore launched
into the same boring tirade against climate change on the March 14
episode of Fox News @ Night, again claiming that climate change is "not
just fake news, it's fake science" and that there is "no hard evidence
that CO2 is causing the climate change."
Moore is a member of the Koch-backed CO2 Coalition, which claims that
rising carbon dioxide levels are actually good for the planet (spoiler
alert: they are not). Luckily for us, after a slate of Fox News
appearances in mid-March, Moore has not appeared on the network since.
- - -
*3. The New York Times' Bret Stephens downplayed climate change,
comparing policies addressing the crisis to insuring oneself against a
"potential" fire.*
On the March 26 episode of MTP Daily, New York Times op-ed columnist
Bret Stephens downplayed climate change by comparing policies fighting
the issue to a family bankrupting itself by buying unnecessary fire
insurance. Stephens stated that climate policy is "like a question of
there could be a fire in your house," and that "we have to take out fire
insurance. ... What you can't say is we're going to bankrupt ourselves
in the process of insuring ourselves against the potential risk."
What Stephens doesn't seem to understand here is that our house is
already on fire. There's no "risk" of climate change getting worse --
science tells us that it is here now, and that it will continue to get
worse unless we rapidly reduce our carbon emissions. Additionally, the
damages of climate change will cost much, much more than the policies
will cost to fight it, both in human lives and financial loss. So
Stephens' attempt to use a clever metaphor falls flat -- but what can we
expect from someone who has previously had laughably bad takes on
climate change?
- - -
*4. Fox commentators Diamond & Silk inexplicably link climate change to
the speed of Earth's rotation.*
On the April 5 episode of Fox & Friends, Fox Nation personalities
Diamond & Silk tried to link climate change to the speed of Earth's
rotation. Referring to the Green New Deal as "a green new scam," they
implored Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) to "talk to Mother Nature"
about climate change, before adding, "Because with the Earth rotating at
1,000 miles per hour, OK, 365 days of the year, we subject to feel
climate changing a little bit."
Climate change, which has absolutely everything to do with humans
burning carbon dioxide and nothing to do with the speed of Earth's
orbit, might actually be causing Earth to wobble on its axis. Maybe
Diamond and Silk meant to say this, but we don't think that's quite what
they were going for with this head-scratching take.
- - -
*5. Longtime Fox guest and industry shill Marc Morano claims that carbon
dioxide can't be pollution because "we exhale carbon dioxide."*
Marc Morano has been at the forefront of climate denial for over a
decade. Every year, he goes on Fox News to downplay or outright deny
climate change, saying completely absurd things that must make his
industry backers very happy. On April 30, he went on Fox & Friends to
talk about former Democratic presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke's
climate change plan. Morano stated that "carbon dioxide, humans -- we
inhale oxygen, we exhale carbon dioxide, so he's calling CO2 pollution,
which it's not." While it's true that we do breathe carbon dioxide, it
is indeed a pollutant and can be extremely harmful for humans. The U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has it listed as a dangerous
pollutant.
This is not the first time (and probably not the last) that Morano has
extolled the virtues of carbon dioxide pollution. Appearing on Varney &
Co. in December 2018, Morano said that carbon dioxide is actually a
positive for global warming. This schtick of Morano's is both tired and
dangerous, and the sooner he disappears from any conversation about
climate change, the better.
- - -
*6. Daily Wire's Ben Shapiro says the real climate change deniers are
the ones trying to solve it.*
On the August 1 episode of The Ben Shapiro Show, The Daily Wire's Ben
Shapiro claimed that people like him are branded as climate deniers for
both recognizing that the problem exists and arguing that there are some
problems with collective action to address it. He then said that the
"true deniers" are those who recognize we need to take action right now,
for they are "denying the reality of the situation on the ground." This
is a magnificent spin on the climate change issue. The "reality of the
situation on the ground" is simple -- there is a clear need for
collective action to rapidly decarbonize our economy to fight climate
change, but those actions are being thwarted by fossil fuel companies
(like the ones that fund Shapiro's Daily Wire) and right-wingers of
Shapiro's ilk. Shapiro also brings up the rising emissions of China and
India. While climate advocates recognize that this is a serious issue,
the China and India argument is used by right-wingers to downplay the
need for the U.S. to take action on climate change. Shapiro does not
have a good history of talking about climate change, so his comments
here are no surprise.
- - -
*7. Daily Wire's Michael Knowles claims that it's "pagan" to be
concerned over climate change.*
Not to be outdone by his colleague Ben Shapiro, Michael Knowles offered
up his own ludicrous climate change take. On September 5, he talked
about climate change and the "secular left," saying that "the way
they're talking about it is not modern, and it's not scientific. This is
ancient, this is primitive, this goes back to our most pagan roots." He
also states that "in the modern secular view, we can save ourselves …
and the way we do it is not even by moral improvement or by living out
the virtues, it's by recycling, it's by not fracking, it's by killing
our babies."
Knowles really likes to deny climate change by comparing it to religion,
and he keeps trying to find more colorful ways to do so. The way
advocates talk about climate change is actually quite scientific, and
there have been decades of research on the issue as well as
near-unanimous consent on its occurrence.
- - -
*8. Fox guest Charlie Kirk thinks climate change can't be a problem
because the Obamas bought a beach house.*
One of the stupidest tropes to come out of the right-wing media echo
chamber about climate change this year had to do with the Obamas buying
a house on Martha's Vineyard. The Obamas bought a beach house, rising
sea levels might affect that house, and therefore, climate change must
be a hoax, or it can't really be that big of a deal. That argument was
unironically offered by a number of right-wing figures and outlets. One
of these figures was Charlie Kirk, a frequent Fox guest and co-founder
of the unabashedly racist Turning Point USA. Kirk tweeted this argument
at least three times this year, all with a thinking-face emoji. In the
last one, he downplayed the idea that climate change can even be
considered an existential threat.
To suggest that a beach house purchase overturns decades of scientific
consensus on climate change should probably disqualify someone from
being taken seriously, but nope, Kirk is still trotted out on Fox News
to give his opinion.
- - -
*9. Fox commentator Dan Bongino called global warming an "existential
threat" to "the truth" and said it's another liberal hoax.*
On October 21, former Secret Service agent, failed congressional
candidate, and current Fox News contributor Dan Bongino tweeted that
"global warming is an existential threat to the the truth" while calling
it "another hoax." This is not the first time that Bongino has said
something ridiculous about climate change -- in August he said the
crisis is "made up," and he tweeted that it was a hoax in September.
- - -
*10. Conservative author Dinesh D'Souza claimed that a "generation from
now, no one will recall climate change."*
Dinesh D'Souza, perhaps one of the most vile individuals still appearing
on Fox News, tweeted out this comment on November 9. What is really true
is that the next generation will grow up in a time of deadlier extreme
weather and social and economic conditions made worse by climate change.
But we hope that generation at least will not recall who Dinesh D'Souza is.
- - -
*11. While hosting a climate denier on his show, Tucker Carlson
complained of "relentless propaganda" about climate change.*
On his March 20 Fox News show, Tucker Carlson hosted climate denier
meteorologist Joe Bastardi to discuss climate change polling. Tucker
complained of "relentless propaganda" regarding climate change, and said
it's "clearly political, not science." Along with the irony of calling
climate change propaganda while hosting one of the biggest climate
change deniers around, Carlson made a few curious claims. He said that
only 2% of people "are most concerned about climate change." He's
extremely off base here -- recent polling suggests that 57% of citizens
believe that "global climate change [is] a major threat to the
well-being of the United States."
Carlson also took the opportunity to launch a bigoted, xenophobic attack
on immigrants, baselessly claiming that "more people were killed last
year in the United States by illegal aliens than were killed by climate
change." This is an absurd and wholly unsupported statement -- there are
no known numbers of deaths for either issue, but what we do know is that
studies suggest undocumented immigrants actually commit fewer violent
crimes than native-born citizens. We also know that climate change is
amplifying extreme weather events, including heat waves, wildfires, and
hurricanes. Tucker's need to mention undocumented immigrants in climate
change segments speaks to a worrying trend of eco-fascism that he is
clearly fond of.
- - -
*12. Infowars host Alex Jones denied climate change and insisted that
Hurricane Dorian was manipulated by geoengineering.*
During a segment about Hurricane Dorian, Alex Jones pushed a weather
control conspiracy theory, questioning why the media are quick to blame
climate change for hurricanes and saying, "We're having some extreme
weather, and yes, a lot of it is being manipulated." He accused "global
warming advocates" of telling us all that "hurricanes are all our
fault." He also lamented those he said are silencing him, saying,
"George Soros and the Democratic Party have come out and they want it
outlawed for citizens to talk about the weather modification."
It goes without saying that humans cannot control hurricanes, although
this doesn't stop conspiracy theorists like Jones from saying that we
can. Human activity can affect hurricanes, though, and we already know
how: climate change, which can impact things like hurricane intensity
and rainfall. Jones' segment came shortly after President Donald Trump
suggested nuking hurricanes to stop them from hitting the U.S., so it's
possible Jones was defending the president.
- - -
*13. Rush Limbaugh complained that people pushing for climate action
"are ruining people's lives."*
Radio host Rush Limbaugh ran through a number of climate denier
statements on the August 1 episode of Hannity. He said that "there is no
man-made climate change" and that those actually trying to solve the
climate problem are "ruining people's lives." Limbaugh has been at the
forefront of climate denial for years and often says really ridiculous
things about the issue. And of course, contrary to what Rush says,
climate change is going to really, really screw with our lives.
- - -
*14. Former Environmental Protection Agency official and Fox guest Mandy
Gunasekara claimed that climate change is just something used to
distract people from Trump's accomplishments.*
On July 10, Mandy Gunasekara, former EPA official and co-founder of a
pro-Trump energy PAC, spouted climate denial on Fox News' America's
Newsroom. She called climate change "not an existential threat" while
also claiming that it is something being used to distract people from
Trump's accomplishments. Gunasekara has repeatedly denied climate change
in numerous right-wing media appearances this year, and she is a huge
cheerleader for the Trump agenda. That's no surprise, given her
background with climate denier Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK), her connection to
climate denial groups, and her favoritism towards fossil fuel producers.
We're also not quite sure which Trump accomplishments she is referring
to when she says climate change is a distraction, but perhaps it's his
devastating environmental rollbacks, his pro-polluter agenda, or his
completely nihilistic attitude toward the overall crisis.
- - -
*15. Fox & Friends co-host Pete Hegseth said, "Global climate change is
all about control."*
On the August 8 episode of Varney & Co., Fox & Friends co-host Pete
Hegseth threw a few climate denier arguments against the wall to see
which one would stick. Speaking on the topic of the recent release of
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's land and climate report,
Hegseth stated that "global climate change is all about control" and
that "there's been ways in which they've cooked the books." He repeated
a few of these same denier arguments on the August 13 episode of Fox &
Friends. Additionally, accusing scientists of "cooking the books" is
really ridiculous, as climate models have been extremely accurate over
the past several decades. Fox News has distorted the climate change
debate with its misinformation over the years -- instead of actually
having a nuanced discussion about the IPCC climate report's findings,
it's much easier for them to trot out the same tired arguments against
taking action.
https://www.mediamatters.org/fox-news/15-most-ridiculous-things-media-said-about-climate-change-2019
[Digging back into the internet news archive - guidance from D.R. Tucker]
*On this day in the history of global warming - January 2, 2014*
Chris Mooney of Mother Jones explains to the willfully ignorant that
snow doesn't disprove climate change.
http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2014/01/blizzards-dont-refute-global-warming
MSNBC's Chris Hayes and climate scientist Michael Mann point out the
absolute stupidity of the right-wing claim that snow disproves climate
change.
http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/right-mocks-rescued-climate-scientists-105626691902
http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/theres-global-warming-and-its-snowing-105637955899
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------/
/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.
More information about the TheClimate.Vote
mailing list