[TheClimate.Vote] June 22, 2020 - Daily Global Warming News Digest
Richard Pauli
richard at theclimate.vote
Mon Jun 22 09:42:29 EDT 2020
/*June 22, 2020*/
[Best ever interview with John Cook]
*Busting Climate Myths : The Psychology of Denial*
Jun 21, 2020
Just Have a Think
Debunking myths about Climate Change is a crucial factor in closing the
gap between public and scientific consensus. The good news is that the
gap is narrowing quickly. How do we know that? Because dedicated
scientists like Dr John Cook, founder of the Skeptical Science website,
have been studying the psychology of denial and taking real polls among
thousands of everyday folks for well over a decade. This week we talk to
Dr Cook about the psychological tactics used by the fossil fuel
propaganda machine and we discuss his brand new book entitled Cranky
Uncle vs Climate Change, which teaches us how to overcome the obstacles.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHYKwkpmilY
- - -
[Cranky Uncle and misinformation - video]
*Cranky Uncle vs. Climate Change lecture (16 mins)*
May 6, 2020
John Cook
A compilation of animated videos debunking the most common myths about
climate change, using cartoons from the Cranky Uncle vs. Climate Change
book:
http://crankyuncle.com/book
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hARJcK6FizA
https://crankyuncle.com/
https://crankyuncle.com/blog/
[cartoon carbon info and repair]
*Who Is Responsible For Climate Change? - Who Needs To Fix It?*
Kurzgesagt - In a Nutshell
This video is part of a series about climate change supported by
Breakthrough Energy - a coalition founded by Bill Gates, that is working
to expand clean-energy investment and support the innovations that will
lead the world to net-zero carbon emissions.
https://www.gatesnotes.com/Climate-and-energy?WT.mc_id=20200625100000_ClimateCtr2020_CTRKurt-YT_&WT.tsrc=CTRKurtYT
Also a special thanks to the team at Our World for helping us out with
data and research!
https://ourworldindata.org/
Sources & further reading:
https://sites.google.com/view/sourcesclimateresponsibility/
Since the Industrial Revolution, humans have released over 1.5 trillion
tonnes of carbon dioxide or CO2 into the earth's atmosphere. In the
year 2019 we were still pumping out around 37 billion more. That's
50% more than the year 2000 and almost three times as much as 50 years
ago. And it's not just CO2. We're also pumping out growing volumes of
other greenhouse gases such as methane and nitrous oxide. Combining all
of our greenhouse gases, we're emitting 51 billion tonnes of carbon
dioxide equivalents each year.
And emissions keep rising - but they need to get down to 0!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GOFt2-3Ij8
[reporting a re-calculation ]
*World has six months to avert climate crisis, says energy expert*
International Energy Agency chief warns of need to prevent post-lockdown
surge in emissions
"This year is the last time we have, if we are not to see a carbon
rebound," said Fatih Birol, executive director of the International
Energy Agency.
Governments are planning to spend $9tn (7.2tn) globally in the next few
months on rescuing their economies from the coronavirus crisis, the IEA
has calculated. The stimulus packages created this year will determine
the shape of the global economy for the next three years, according to
Birol, and within that time emissions must start to fall sharply and
permanently, or climate targets will be out of reach.
"The next three years will determine the course of the next 30 years and
beyond," Birol told the Guardian. "If we do not [take action] we will
surely see a rebound in emissions. If emissions rebound, it is very
difficult to see how they will be brought down in future. This is why we
are urging governments to have sustainable recovery packages."...
- -
In a report published on Thursday, the IEA - the world's gold standard
for energy analysis - set out the first global blueprint for a green
recovery, focusing on reforms to energy generation and consumption. Wind
and solar power should be a top focus, the report advised, alongside
energy efficiency improvements to buildings and industries, and the
modernisation of electricity grids...
- -
Investors were also keen to put private sector money into a green
recovery, alongside government stimulus spending, said Stephanie
Pfeifer, chief executive of the Institutional Investor Group on Climate
Change, representing funds and asset managers with $26tn in assets. "The
IEA has shown [a green recovery] is not only desirable, but economically
astute. Investors are fully committed to playing their part in this
process."
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jun/18/world-has-six-months-to-avert-climate-crisis-says-energy-expert
[JAMA reports direct harm]
June 18, 2020
*Association of Air Pollution and Heat Exposure With Preterm Birth, Low
Birth Weight, and Stillbirth in the US*
A Systematic Review
*Key Points*
Question Are increases in air pollutant or heat exposure related to
climate change associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes, such as
preterm birth, low birth weight, and stillbirth, in the US?
Findings In this systematic review of 57 of 68 studies including a
total of 32 798 152 births, there was a statistically significant
association between heat, ozone, or fine particulate matter and adverse
pregnancy outcomes. Heterogeneous studies from across the US revealed
positive findings in each analysis of exposure and outcome.
Meaning The findings suggest that exacerbation of air pollution and
heat exposure related to climate change may be significantly associated
with risk to pregnancy outcomes in the US.
*Abstract*
Importance Knowledge of whether serious adverse pregnancy outcomes are
associated with increasingly widespread effects of climate change in the
US would be crucial for the obstetrical medical community and for women
and families across the country.
*Objective* To investigate prenatal exposure to fine particulate matter
(PM2.5), ozone, and heat, and the association of these factors with
preterm birth, low birth weight, and stillbirth.
*Evidence Review* This systematic review involved a comprehensive
search for primary literature in Cochrane Library, Cochrane
Collaboration Registry of Controlled Trials, PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov
website, and MEDLINE. Qualifying primary research studies included human
participants in US populations that were published in English between
January 1, 2007, and April 30, 2019. Included articles analyzed the
associations between air pollutants or heat and obstetrical outcomes.
Comparative observational cohort studies and cross-sectional studies
with comparators were included, without minimum sample size. Additional
articles found through reference review were also considered. Articles
analyzing other obstetrical outcomes, non-US populations, and reviews
were excluded. Two reviewers independently determined study eligibility.
The Arskey and O'Malley scoping review framework was used. Data
extraction was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for
Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline.
*Findings* Of the 1851 articles identified, 68 met the inclusion
criteria. Overall, 32 798 152 births were analyzed, with a mean (SD) of
565 485 (783 278) births per study. A total of 57 studies (48 of 58
[84%] on air pollutants; 9 of 10 [90%] on heat) showed a significant
association of air pollutant and heat exposure with birth outcomes.
Positive associations were found across all US geographic regions.
Exposure to PM2.5 or ozone was associated with increased risk of preterm
birth in 19 of 24 studies (79%) and low birth weight in 25 of 29 studies
(86%). The subpopulations at highest risk were persons with asthma and
minority groups, especially black mothers. Accurate comparisons of risk
were limited by differences in study design, exposure measurement,
population demographics, and seasonality.
*
**Conclusions and Relevance* This review suggests that increasingly
common environmental exposures exacerbated by climate change are
significantly associated with serious adverse pregnancy outcomes across
the US.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2767260
[Clean Energy for Biden]
*Washington State Clean Energy for Biden Fundraiser*
You are invited to join us in helping elect Joe Biden for President
Featuring a "fireside chat" with Maggie Thomas, a former climate advisor
to the
presidential campaigns of Governor Jay Inslee and Senator Elizabeth Warren.
Gregg Small, Executive Director of Climate Solutions is the moderator.
Thursday, June 25th 5:00-6:00 PM PST
Virtual platform with opportunity for participant questions
To register for the event, go to https://www.givegreen.com/BBIDENEVT2006V
[When in doubt, punt]
*Solar geoengineering could cause unwanted changes in climate, new
modelling suggests*
20 June 2020
Using aerosols to reflect sunlight and cool the planet will weaken storm
tracks in the temperate latitudes in both hemispheres, an international
team of scientists warn. Their modelling suggests that while such solar
geoengineering schemes could reduce the severity of winter storms, they
would also stagnate weather systems in the summer. This could lead to
more intense heat waves, increases in air pollution, and changes in
ocean circulation.
Solar geoengineering involves cooling the Earth by reflecting incoming
sunlight and is seen by some scientists as a way of mitigating the
effects of global warming. One popular strategy involves placing
reflective aerosols in the stratosphere - using aircraft, balloons or
blimps - to block sunlight.
But the effects of solar geoengineering are unknown. It would not work
as simply as cooling the planet and therefore returning Earth's climate
to pre-industrial levels. Climate under solar geoengineering would be
different, as there would still be marked increases in atmospheric
carbon dioxide levels.
Extratropical storm tracks
Charles Gertler, a graduate student in the Department of Earth,
Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, in the US, and colleagues were interested in how injecting
aerosols into the atmosphere would impact the pole‐to‐equator
temperature gradient in both hemispheres, and the effect that could have
on extratropical storm tracks. These are regions in the mid and high
latitudes with heightened incidences of storms known as extratropical
cyclones, which play a significant role in determining the day-to-day
weather conditions in many parts of the world.
"About half the world's population lives in the extratropical regions
where storm tracks dominate weather," Gertler explains. He adds, "Storm
tracks feed off of meridional temperature gradients, and storm tracks
are interesting because they help us to understand weather extremes."
The team used various climate models to explore the effects of solar
geoengineering on storm tracks. First, they analysed simulations from
experiment G1 of the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project which
provides solar radiation management schemes for researchers to use with
climate models.
Balancing warming
In the G1 scenario solar radiation is reduced to balance warming caused
by a quadrupling of carbon dioxide concentrations, relative to
pre-industrial levels. This was run for 50 years and compared with a
model that kept carbon dioxide at pre-industrial level and one that
simulated a quadrupling of carbon dioxide concentrations, to provide a
baseline and a global warming scenario, respectively.
The team ran two other climate simulations. The first, known as 'half
G1', aims to model a scenario half-way between the G1 geoengineering
simulation and a future where carbon dioxide concentrations quadruple.
In the other model aerosols are injected into the stratosphere at four
different latitudes controlled by a feedback algorithm.
Their results, described in Geophysical Research Letters, show that
reflecting solar radiation to counteract global warming would weaken
storm tracks in both the northern and southern hemispheres. These
effects are driven by changes in mean temperature and humidity at
different latitudes that reduce the pole‐to‐equator temperature gradient
in both hemispheres. Essentially, reducing incoming solar radiation
cools the equator while the poles continue to warm.
"Novel changes in climate"
"Our results show that solar geoengineering will not simply reverse
climate change," Gertler explains. "Instead, it has the potential itself
to induce novel changes in climate."
In the Northern hemisphere storm tracks are also predicted to weaken
with climate change. The latest work suggests that this would occur at a
similar magnitude as with solar geoengineering. In the southern
hemisphere, however, global warming is expected to increase the
intensity of the storm tracks and shift them south. With solar
geoengineering these storm track would weaken, with some of the models
indicating that there may also be a poleward shift in these systems.
"A weakened storm track, in both hemispheres, would mean weaker winter
storms but also lead to more stagnant weather, which could affect heat
waves," Gertler says. "Across all seasons, this could affect ventilation
of air pollution. It also may contribute to a weakening of the
hydrological cycle, with regional reductions in rainfall. These are not
good changes, compared to a baseline climate that we are used to." In
the southern hemisphere changes in storm track intensity could impact
wind‐driven ocean circulations and affect the stability of Antarctic ice
sheets, the researchers warn.
"This work highlights that solar geoengineering is not reversing climate
change, but is substituting one unprecedented climate state for
another," Gertler says.
https://physicsworld.com/a/solar-geoengineering-could-cause-unwanted-changes-in-climate-new-modelling-suggests/
[video talk - what is science?]
*How to tell science from pseudoscience*
Jun 21, 2020
Sabine Hossenfelder
Each time I say "G5" I mean "5G". Sorry about that!
Is the earth flat? Is 5G is a mind-control experiment by the Russian
government? What about the idea that COVID was engineered by the vaccine
industry? In this video I explain how you can tell apart science from
pseudoscience. Instead of giving you a long and mostly useless
philosophical lecture, I will tell you a simple criterion that you can
apply for most cases, which is that scientific models are the ones that
explain lots of observations with few assumptions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9ylQC5bPpU
[Digging back into the internet news archive]
*On this day in the history of global warming - June 22, 2006 *
The New York Times reports on the National Academy of Sciences'
affirmation of Michael Mann's 1999 "hockey stick" paper...
...in a 155-page report, the 12-member panel convened by the
National Academies said "an array of evidence" supported the main
thrust of the paper. Disputes over details, it said, reflected the
normal intellectual clash that takes place as science tests new
approaches to old questions.
The study, led by Michael E. Mann, a climatologist now at
Pennsylvania State University, was the first to estimate widespread
climate trends by stitching together a grab bag of evidence,
including variations in ancient tree rings and temperatures measured
in deep holes in the earth.
It has been repeatedly attacked by Republican lawmakers and some
business-financed groups as built on cherry-picked data meant to
create an alarming view of recent warming and play down past natural
warm periods.
At a news conference at the headquarters of the National Academies,
several members of the panel reviewing the study said they saw no
sign that its authors had intentionally chosen data sets or methods
to get a desired result.
"I saw nothing that spoke to me of any manipulation," said one
member, Peter Bloomfield, a statistics professor at North Carolina
State University. He added that his impression was the study was "an
honest attempt to construct a data analysis procedure."
More broadly, the panel examined other recent research comparing the
pronounced warming trend over the last several decades with
temperature shifts over the last 2,000 years. It expressed high
confidence that warming over the last 25 years exceeded any peaks
since 1600. And in a news conference here today, three panelists
said the current warming was probably, but not certainly, beyond any
peaks since the year 900.
The experts said there was no reliable way to make estimates for
surface-temperature trends in the first millennium A.D.
In the report, the panel stressed that the significant remaining
uncertainties about climate patterns over the last 2,000 years did
not weaken the scientific case that the current warming trend was
caused mainly by people, through the buildup of heat-trapping
greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
"Surface temperature reconstructions for periods prior to the
industrial era are only one of multiple lines of evidence supporting
the conclusion that climatic warming is occurring in response to
human activities, and they are not the primary evidence," the report
said.
The 1999 paper is part of a growing body of work trying to pull
together widely disparate clues of climate conditions before the age
of weather instruments.
The paper includes a graph of temperatures in the Northern
Hemisphere that gained the nickname "hockey stick" because of its
vivid depiction of a long period with little temperature variation
for nearly 1,000 years, followed by a sharp upward hook in recent
decades.
The hockey stick has become something of an environmentalist icon.
It was prominently displayed in a pivotal 2001 United Nations report
concluding that greenhouse gases from human activities had probably
caused most of the warming measured since 1950. A version of it is
in the Al Gore documentary "An Inconvenient Truth."
Senator James M. Inhofe, Republican of Oklahoma, and Representative
Joe Barton, Republican of Texas, have repeatedly criticized the Mann
study, citing several peer-reviewed papers challenging its methods.
The main critiques were done by Stephen McIntyre, a statistician and
part-time consultant in Toronto to minerals industries, and Ross
McKitrick, an economist at the University of Guelph in Ontario...
- -
The report was done at the request of Representative Sherwood
Boehlert, the New York Republican who is chairman of the House
Science Committee, who called last November for a review of the 1999
study and related research to clear the air.
In a statement, Mr. Boehlert, who is retiring at the end of the
year, expressed satisfaction with the results, saying, "There is
nothing in this report that should raise any doubts about the broad
scientific consensus on global climate change — which doesn't rest
primarily on these temperature issues, in any event — or any doubts
about whether any paper on the temperature records was legitimate
scientific work."
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/22/science/22cnd-climate.html?_r=0
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------/
/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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/attachments/20200622/b9efe998/attachment.html>
More information about the TheClimate.Vote
mailing list