[TheClimate.Vote] October 1, 2020 - Daily Global Warming News Digest
Richard Pauli
richard at theclimate.vote
Thu Oct 1 09:52:17 EDT 2020
/*October 1, 2020*/
[follow the money]
*Shell to cut up to 9,000 jobs as oil demand slumps*
30 September 2020
Royal Dutch Shell has said it plans to cut 7,000 to 9,000 jobs as it
responds to challenges including the slump in oil demand amid the
Covid-19 pandemic.
The oil giant said the cuts would be implemented by 2022 and included
1,500 people who were taking voluntary redundancy.
It gave no indication of where the job losses would happen.
The move comes five months after it cut its dividend for the first time
since World War Two.
Shell chief executive Ben van Beurden said the job cuts were "the right
thing to do for the future of the company" as it strives to become a
net-zero emissions energy business.
Shell employs 83,000 people worldwide, including 6,000 in the UK. It has
been hit by a substantial drop in profits since the pandemic struck.
It saw a 46% fall in first-quarter net income to $2.9bn (£2.3bn), while
second-quarter income fell 82% to $638m.
The firm said third-quarter earnings were expected to be "at the lower
end of the $800m to $875m range"...
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-54351815
[current wildfire and smoke hazard maps]
*Hazard Mapping System Fire and Smoke Product*
https://www.ospo.noaa.gov/Products/land/hms.html
[current commentary]
*Proud Boys and petro-masculinity*
The hate group Trump called out at Tuesday's debate subscribes to a
version of masculinity that researchers say is a driving force behind
climate denial.
https://heated.world/p/proud-boys-and-petro-masculinity
- -
[academic source]
*Petro-masculinity: Fossil Fuels and Authoritarian Desire*
Cara Daggett
First Published June 20, 2018 Research Article
https://doi.org/10.1177/0305829818775817
As the planet warms, new authoritarian movements in the West are
embracing a toxic combination of climate denial, racism and
misogyny. Rather than consider these resentments separately, this
article interrogates their relationship through the concept of
petro-masculinity, which appreciates the historic role of fossil
fuel systems in buttressing white patriarchal rule.
Petro-masculinity is helpful to understanding how the anxieties
aroused by the Anthropocene can augment desires for
authoritarianism. The concept of petro-masculinity suggests that
fossil fuels mean more than profit; fossil fuels also contribute to
making identities, which poses risks for post-carbon energy
politics. Moreover, through a psycho-political reading of
authoritarianism, I show how fossil fuel use can function as a
violent compensatory practice in reaction to gender and climate trouble.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0305829818775817
[Bernie speaks minutes after viewing]
*Bernie Sanders Reacts to Trump Biden Debate*
Sep 29, 2020
Jimmy Kimmel Live
Senator Sanders talks about the debate between Donald Trump and Joe
Biden, Trump's refusal to accept real science, Biden's thoughts on the
Green New Deal and plans to combat the climate crisis, Trump refusing to
condemn white supremacists, whether televised debates are constructive,
Trump trying to do away with coverage for pre-existing conditions, the
hypocrisy of Lindsey Graham in respect to Trump's Supreme Court
nomination, Americans losing faith in the electoral process, Trump
cheating the tax system, and what he says to people who are thinking
about not voting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MO1o66Ti2bA
[Humorous, scientifically instructive video]*
**Climate Change Is An Absolute Nightmare - This Is Why*
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqwvf6R1_QY
["Debate" transcript from Hill Heat]
*The Biden-Trump Climate Debate, Transcribed With An Attempt At
Accurately Portraying Trump's Interruptions And Identifying His Falsehoods*
Posted by Brad Johnson Sept 30, 2020
*WALLACE:* I would like to talk about climate change.
*BIDEN:* So would I.
*WALLACE: *Okay. The forest fires in the west are raging now. They have
burned millions of acres. They have displaced hundreds of thousands of
people. When state officials there blame the fires on climate change,
Mr. President, you said, 'I don't think the science knows.' Over your
four years, you have pulled the US out of the Paris climate accord. You
have rolled back a number of Obama environmental records [sic]. What do
you believe about the science of climate change and what will you do in
the next four years to confront it?
*TRUMP:* I want crystal clean water and air. I want beautiful clean air.
We have now the lowest carbon. If you look at our numbers right now, we
are doing phenomenally. [Ed.: False.] But I haven't destroyed our
businesses. Our businesses aren't put out of commission. If you look at
the Paris accord, it was a disaster from our standpoint. And people are
actually very happy about what is going on, because our businesses are
doing well.
As far as the fires are concerned, you need forest management in
addition to everything else. The forest floors are loaded up with trees,
dead trees that are years old, and they're like tinder and leaves and
everything else. You drop a cigarette in there, the whole forest burns
down. You've gotta have forest management, you've gotta have cuts ...
*WALLACE:* What do you believe about the science of climate change, sir?
*TRUMP:* Uh, I believe that we have to do everything we can to have
immaculate air, immaculate water and do whatever else we can that's
good. You know, we'e planting a billion trees, the billion tree project,
and it's very exciting to a lot of people.
*WALLACE:* Do you believe that human pollution, gas, greenhouse gas
emissions contributes to the global warming of the planet?
*TRUMP:* I think that lot of things do, but to an extent yes, I think to
an extent yes, but I also think we have to do better management of our
forests. Every year, I get the call, California's burning, California is
burning. If that was cleaned, if that were, if you had forest
management, good forest management, you wouldn't be getting those calls.
You know, in Europe they live their forest cities. They're called forest
cities and they maintain their forests. I was with the head of a major
country it's a forest city. He said, 'Sir, we have trees that are far
more, they ignite much easier than California. There shouldn't be that
problem.' [Ed.: He completely made this up.] I spoke with the Governor
about it. I'm getting along very well with the governor. But I said, 'At
some point you can't every year have hundreds of thousands of acres of
land just burned to the ground.'
*WALLACE*: But sir ...
That's burning down because of a lack of management.
*WALLACE:* But sir, if you believe in the science of climate change, why
have you rolled back the Obama Clean Power Plan which limited carbon
emissions and power plants? Why have you relaxed...?
*TRUMP: *Because it was driving energy prices through the sky.
*WALLACE:* Why have you relaxed fuel economy standards that are going to
create more pollution from cars and trucks?
*TRUMP:* Well, not really because what's happening is the car is much
less expensive and it's a much safer car and you talk it about a tiny
difference. And then what would happen because of the cost of the car
you would have at least double and triple the number of cars purchased.
We have the old slugs out there that are ten, twelve years old. If you
did that, the car would be safer. It would be much cheaper by $3,500.
[Ed.: Basically everything he said here is false.]
*WALLACE:* But in the case of California they have simply ignored that.
*TRUMP*: No, but you would take a lot of cars off the market because
people would be able to afford a car. Now, by the way, we're going to
see how that turns out. But a lot of people agree with me, many people.
The car has gotten so expensive because they have computers all over the
place for an extra little *[WALLACE:* Okay.] bit of gasoline. [BIDEN:
That's not...] [Ed.: False.] And I'm okay with electric cars too. I
think I'm all for electric cars. I've given big incentives for electric
cars. [Ed.: False.] But what they've done in California is just crazy.
*WALLACE*: All right, Vice President Biden. I'd like you to respond to
the president's climate change record but I also want to ask you about a
concern. You propose $2 trillion in green jobs. You talk about new
limits, not abolishing, but new limits on fracking. Ending the use of
fossil fuels to generate electricity by 2035 and zero net emission of
greenhouse gases by 2050. The president says a lot of these things would
tank the economy and cost millions of jobs.
*BIDEN:* He's absolutely wrong, number one. Number two, if, in fact,
during our administration in the Recovery Act, I was in charge, able to
bring down the cost of renewable energy to cheaper than or as cheap as
coal and gas and oil. [Ed.: Getting there.] Nobody's going to build
another coal-fired plant in America. No one's going to build another
oil-fired plant in America. They're going to move to renewable energy.
Number one, number two, we're going to make sure that we are able to
take the federal fleet and turn it into a fleet that's run on their
electric vehicles. Making sure that we can do that, we're going to put
500,000 charging stations in all of the highways that we're going to be
building in the future.
We're going to build a economy that in fact is going to provide for the
ability of us to take 4 million buildings and make sure that they in
fact are weatherized in a way that in fact will, they'll emit
significantly less gas and oil because the heat will not be going out.
There's so many things that we can do now to create thousands and
thousands of jobs. We can get to net zero, in terms of energy production
[sic], by 2035. Not only not costing people jobs, creating jobs,
creating millions of good-paying jobs. Not 15 bucks an hour, but
prevailing wage, by having a new infrastructure that in fact, is green.
And the first thing I will do, I will rejoin the Paris accord. I will
join the Paris accord because with us out of it, look what's happening.
It's all falling apart. And talk about someone who has no, no
relationship with foreign policy. Brazil - the rainforests of Brazil are
being torn down, are being ripped down. More, more carbon is absorbed in
that rainforest than every bit of carbon that's emitted in the United
States. Instead of doing something about that, I would be gathering up
and making sure we had the countries of the world coming up with $20
billion, and say, 'Here's $20 billion. Stop, stop tearing down the
forest. And If you don't, then you're going to have significant economic
consequences.'
*WALLACE:* What about the argument that President Trump basically says,
that you have to balance environmental interests and economic interests?
And he's drawn his line.
*BIDEN: *Well, he hasn't drawn a line. He still for example, he wants to
make sure that methane's not a problem [sic]. You can now emit more
methane without it being a problem. Methane. This is a guy who says that
you don't have to have mileage standards for automobiles that exist now.
This is the guy who says that, the fact that ...
*TRUMP:* Not true. Not true.
*TRUMP:* He's talking about the Green New Deal.
*BIDEN:* It's all true. And here's the deal ...
*BIDEN: *I'm talking about the Biden plan. I'm ... I'm ...
*TRUMP:* And it's not 2 billion or 20 billion, as you said. It's 100
trillion dollars.
*WALLACE**(to TRUMP):* Let him go for a minute, and then you can go.
Where they want to rip down buildings and rebuild the building. It's the
dumbest, most ridiculous where airplanes are out of business,
where two car systems are out,
where they want to take out the cows too.
*BIDEN: *I'm talking about the Biden plan. I'm ... I'm ...
No.
That is not...
That is not...
*BIDEN: *Not true.
*TRUMP:T*hat's not true either, right?
*BIDEN:* Not true.
*TRUMP:*This is a 100 trillion-
*BIDEN:* Not true.
*TRUMP*:This is a 100 trillion-
*BIDEN:* Simply... Look-
*TRUMP:* That's more money than our country could make in 100 years if
we're -
*WALLACE:* All right. Let me . . . Wait a minute, sir.
That is simply not the case.
*WALLACE: *I actually have studied your plan, and it includes upgrading
4 million buildings, weatherizing 2 million homes over four years,
building one and a half million energy efficient homes. So the question
becomes, some, the president is saying, I think some people who support
the president would say, that sounds like it's going to cost a lot of
money and hurt the economy.
*BIDEN:* What it's going to do, it's going to create thousands and
millions of jobs.
*TRUMP:* 100 trillion dollars.
Good paying jobs.
*WALLACE:* Let him finish, sir.
*BIDEN:* He doesn't know how to do that.
*BIDEN: *The fact is, it's going to create millions of good paying jobs,
and these tax incentives for people to weatherize, which he wants to get
rid of. It's going to make the economy much safer. Look how much we're
paying now to deal with the hurricanes, deal with... By the way, he has
an answer for hurricanes. He said, maybe we should drop a nuclear weapon
on them, and they may-
*TRUMP:* I never said that at all-
*BIDEN:* Yeah, he did say that.
*TRUMP: *They made it up.
*BIDEN:* And here's the deal.
*TRUMP: *You make up a lot.
We're going to be in a position where we can create hard, hard, good
jobs by making sure the environment is clean, and we all are in better
shape. We spend billions of dollars now, billions of dollars, on floods,
hurricanes, rising seas. We're in real trouble. Look what's happened
just in the Midwest with these storms that come through and wipe out
entire sections and counties in Iowa. They didn't happen before. They're
because of global warming. We make up 15% of the world's problem. We in
fact ... But the rest of the world, we've got to get them to come along.
That's why we have to get back into, back into the Paris Accord.
*WALLACE:* All right, gentlemen-
*TRUMP:* Wait a minute, Chris. So why didn't he do it for 47 years?
*BIDEN:* For 47-
You were vice president, so why didn't you get the world... China sends
up real dirt into the air. Russia does. India does. They all do. We're
supposed to be good. And by the way, he made a couple of statements.
*BIDEN: *That is not my plan. The Green New Deal is not my plan. If he
knew anything about, if he knew anything about ...
The Green New Deal is a hundred trillion dollars, not 20 billion. You
want to rebuild every building, you want to rebuild every building.
*WALLACE:* Gentlemen. . .
*TRUMP:* He made a statement about the military. He said I said
something about the military. He and his friends made it up, and then
they went with it. I never said it.
*BIDEN:* That is not true.
You're done in this segment.
Mister, please, sir.
Stop.
What he did is he said he called the military stupid bastards.
He said it on tape. He said stupid bastards. He said it.
I would never say that.
You're on tape . . [Snopes: Mostly false.]
I did not say that . . .
Play it. Play it-
*WALLACE:* Go ahead, Mr. Vice President, answer his final question.
*BIDEN:* The final question is, I can't remember which of all his
rantings he was talking about.
*WALLACE (laughing):* I'm having a little trouble myself, but...
*BIDEN:* Yeah.
*WALLACE:* And about the economy and about this question of what it's
going to cost.
*BIDEN:* The economy-
*WALLACE: *I mean, the Green New Deal and the idea of what your
environmental changes will do.
*BIDEN:* The Green New Deal will pay for itself as we move forward.
We're not going to build plants that, in fact, are great polluting plants-
*WALLACE:* So, do you support the Green New Deal?
*BIDEN:* Pardon me?
*WALLACE: *Do you support the ...
*BIDEN:* No, I don't support the Green New Deal.
*TRUMP: *Oh, you don't? Oh, well, that's a big statement.
*BIDEN:* I support the -
*TRUMP:* That means you just lost the radical left.
*BIDEN:* I support the Biden plan that I put forward.
*WALLACE:* Okay.
*BIDEN: *The Biden plan, which is different than what he calls the
radical Green New Deal.
Transcript from Rev.com with additional edits and formatting by Hill Heat.
http://www.hillheat.com/articles/2020/09/30/biden-trump-climate-debate-transcribed-with-an-attempt-at-accurately-portraying-trumps-interruptions
[election opinion]
*The End of Climate Change Denial Is the Start of Something Much Worse*
Brian Kahn
Sept 30, 2020
Last night's presidential debate was an abomination by just about any
standard. The sitting president told white supremacists to "stand by,"
took no responsibility for the deaths of more than 200,000 Americans
killed by covid-19, refused to back a peaceful transfer of power, and
generally lied with reckless abandon while moderator Chris Wallace
essentially took a nap in the green room for most of it then laughed off
the whole proceeding at the end.
As a climate reporter, the one "bright" spot was actually hearing
Wallace wake from his slumber to ask a series of climate questions in
the waning minutes of the debate. It broke 12 years of climate silence
at presidential debates (and proved Chris Wallace clearly reads
Earther). I have quibbles with the questions themselves, but President
Donald Trump's responses, in particular, showed that outright climate
denial is basically done for, at least at the policymaking level. The
only problem is, the toxic stew replacing it is much, much worse.
Without outright denial of human-caused climate change to lean on, Trump
and the rest of the far-right are reverting to anti-democratic,
potentially violent tactics to maintain their hold on power despite the
mutual destruction their goals will mean for us all.
Wallace's first question to Trump on climate was about his beliefs. In
2018, I said they were no longer worth asking him about because his
brain makes lace look like a wall of steel. The incoherence was present
again, but this time Trump copped to greenhouse gas emissions "to an
extent" causing the climate crisis. (They are the primary cause.) He
then segued to talking about California and also needing "better
management of our forest" while implying climate change played a role in
the state's devastating wildfires. The section of the debate discussing
science was also basically the only time during the 90 minutes of hell
that Trump actually shut up--and he even hedged in favor of electric cars!
It shows that the flat out climate denial that dominated conservative
politics for most of this century has lost its grip. The reasons are
simple: Looking at the state of the world in 2020, it is impossible to
deny what's happening right outside our windows. Raging fires, wild
hurricanes, intense rainstorms, coastal cities flooding under sunny
skies due to rising seas.
But what's replacing denial is a darker evolution of conservatism in a
climate-constrained era. Trump has, first and foremost, served
industries actively making climate change worse by deregulating
everything from power plants to cars to endangered species and water
protections. That will accelerate the crisis that Trump begrudgingly
acknowledged. But you can't acknowledge a crisis then defend policies
that clearly make it worse.
Sure, he hand waved about the Green New Deal (which Democratic nominee
Joe Biden does not support, though his climate plan incorporates some of
its elements), lied about the cost of addressing climate change, and
said: "they want to take out the cows." They're predictable, tired-ass
Republican talking points stuff. All that is bad and unforgivable given
that repeating these talking points is designed to delay climate policy
that will, in turn, conscript millions around the world to suffering,
displacement, and death. But it's the policies and tactics Trump said
outside the climate portion of the debate that will have a truly
chilling impact on our ability to slow Earth's warming.
First up is the foundation of democracy itself: voting. Trump's refusal
to accept losing the election and wild lies about voter fraud are part
of a greater Republican push to disenfranchise voters. The goal is to
keep as many Americans from voting as possible. And for those who can
cast a ballot, Republicans are looking to invalidate them. It's a way of
maintaining minority rule, with a president who lost the popular vote
and a Senate that Republican control despite representing 15 million
fewer Americans. That perversion of democracy is step one to ensuring
climate policy remains a pipe dream, despite a majority of Americans
actually wanting the government to address the crisis.
Likewise, Trump's race to appoint Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney
Barrett--who he said during the debates was "good in every way" despite
much evidence to the contrary--will ensure the court represents business
interests for decades to come. Even if Democrats win the White House and
Senate, hold the House, and pass meaningful climate legislation (dare to
dream, right?), any challenge to it would appear before a court that has
six conservatives that could shoot down any new laws--not to mention
regulations put forward by executive order. A court with Coney
Barrett--whose entire judicial philosophy justifies reversing
precedents--could even overturn previous rulings, including a landmark
case that allows the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate
greenhouse gases.
The most putrid part of the debate, though, was Trump's call to the
Proud Boys, a far-right hate group, to "stand back and stand by." That
poses an immediate threat as the election approaches where the
Republican approach is disenfranchisement by any means necessary. In the
context of the climate crisis, it could lead to violent outcomes
targeting the most vulnerable among us.
In recent years, the rise of ecofascism has also put a new twist on a
hateful ideology. It left a horrific imprint on El Paso last year, when
a gunman killed 22 people. He wrote a manifesto decrying corporate
pollution and arguing the U.S. needed to "get rid of enough people" as
justification for cold-blooded murder.
Just this month, we've also seen the far-right embrace wildfire
conspiracy theories as a way to test boundaries and usurp power in
Oregon. While it's not textbook ecofascism, it's a sign of the growing
ways the far-right is using the climate crisis--which Republican
policies are making worse--to further its goals of white supremacy.
The coming decades will be a time of great upheaval. Activists will be
in the streets clamoring for just policies that meet the moment to deal
with climate change and the intertwined issues of racism and inequality
at the same time as Republicans are courting violent forces to repress
the popular will. Climate denial was a form of slow violence. Now, Trump
and Republicans appear to be embracing an accelerationist view while
propping up polluters at all costs.
Brian Kahn
Managing editor, Earther
https://earther.gizmodo.com/the-end-of-climate-change-denial-is-the-start-of-someth-1845227380
[don't go near warm waters - HAB = harmful Algal Bloom]
*How harmful algae respond to rising water temperatures*
by University of Delaware
As climate change leads to rising global ocean temperatures, the past
few decades have witnessed a significant increase in the frequency,
intensity and geographic range of harmful algal blooms (HABs).
HABs occur when a small portion of the marine phytoplankton community
that consist of harmful algal species produce in high numbers, causing
adverse effects on their ecosystems. This can be witnessed in Delaware
and throughout the world when bodies of water turn green or brown in
summer. Some of these HABs produce toxins that pass through the food web
and cause fish and shellfish kills, which can affect human health...
- -
"I was very surprised to see how closely our results match with those
historical data," said Vidyarathna. "This shows the importance of local
monitoring programs like the UD Citizen Monitoring Program who collected
the data and shared them with us."
The next steps for the research are to look at the combined effects of
ocean warming and ocean acidification on harmful algal species. This is
important because global warming leads not only to higher ocean
temperatures but also to increasing ocean acidification, which may alter
the physiology of harmful algal species.
https://phys.org/news/2020-10-algae-temperatures.html
- -
[collected academic papers posted 2015]*
**Special Issue "Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs) and Public Health: Progress
and Current Challenges"*
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/toxins/special_issues/HABs
- -
[journal open access source ]
*Harmful Algae*
https://www.journals.elsevier.com/harmful-algae
- -
[free to read]
*Climate Change and Harmful Algal Blooms: Insights and perspective*
Abstract
Climate change is transforming aquatic ecosystems. Coastal waters
have experienced progressive warming, acidification, and
deoxygenation that will intensify this century. At the same time,
there is a scientific consensus that the public health, recreation,
tourism, fishery, aquaculture, and ecosystem impacts from harmful
algal blooms (HABs) have all increased over the past several
decades. The extent to which climate change is intensifying these
HABs is not fully clear, but there has been a wealth of research on
this topic this century alone. Indeed, the United Nations'
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) Special Report on
the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate (SROCC) approved in
September 2019 was the first IPCC report to directly link HABs to
climate change. In the Summary for Policy Makers, the report made
the following declarations with "high confidence":
- Harmful algal blooms display range expansion and increased
frequency in coastal areas since the 1980s in response to both
climatic and non-climatic drivers such as increased riverine
nutrients run-off.
- The observed trends in harmful algal blooms are attributed partly
to the effects of ocean warming, marine heatwaves, oxygen loss,
eutrophication and pollution.
- Harmful algal blooms have had negative impacts on food security,
tourism, local economy, and human health.
In addition, the report specifically outlines a series of linkages
between heat waves and HABs. These statements about HABs and climate
change and the high levels of confidence ascribed to them provides clear
evidence that the field of HABs and climate change has matured and has,
perhaps, reached a first plateau of certainty. While there are
well-documented global trends in HABs being promoted by human activity,
including climate change, individual events are driven by local,
regional, and global drivers, making it critical to carefully evaluate
the conditions and responses at appropriate scales. It is within this
context that the first Special Issue on Climate Change and Harmful Algal
Blooms is published in Harmful Algae.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1568988319302045
[Digging back into the internet news archive]
*On this day in the history of global warming - October 1, 2013 *
October 1, 2013: Syndicated columnist Eugene Robinson writes:
"Skeptics and deniers can make all the noise they want, but a landmark
new report is unequivocal: There is a 95 percent chance that
human-generated emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases
are changing the climate in ways that court disaster.
"That's the bottom line from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change, which Monday released the latest of its comprehensive,
every-six-years assessments of the scientific consensus about climate
change. According to the IPCC, there is only a 1-in-20 chance that human
activity is not causing dangerous warming.
"You may like those betting odds. If so, let's get together for a
friendly game of poker, and please don't forget to bring cash."
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/10/01/warm_enough_for_you_120159.html
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------/
/Archive of Daily Global Warming News
<https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/2017-October/date.html>
/
https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote
/To receive daily mailings - click to Subscribe
<mailto:subscribe at theClimate.Vote?subject=Click%20SEND%20to%20process%20your%20request>
to news digest./
*** Privacy and Security:*This mailing is text-only. It does not carry
images or attachments which may originate from remote servers. A
text-only message can 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.
Messages have no tracking software.
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/20201001/0ced298d/attachment.html>
More information about the TheClimate.Vote
mailing list