[TheClimate.Vote] February 27, 2021 - Daily Global Warming News Digest

[Richard Pauli]

/*February 27, 2021*/

[Bill Gates speaks frankly -  in the first minute of this video]
*Bill Gates on Climate Crisis, Texas Freeze, Bezos Partnership*
Feb 22, 2021
Bloomberg Technology
Feb.22 -- Bill Gates, co-chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation 
and co-founder of Microsoft, discusses the importance of addressing 
climate change, the recent extreme-weather event in Texas, and his 
collaboration with Amazon.com Inc. Chief Executive Officer Jeff Bezos. 
He speaks with Bloomberg's Emily Chang on "Bloomberg Technology."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pP38xsIq6_A


[Optimistic outlook ]
*How Biden Can Tackle the Climate Crisis*
Joe Biden has promised to ensure climate justice, but will his 
administration rise to the challenge? With the Biden Administration 
pledging to take the climate crisis seriously, some grounds for optimism 
exist.
February 25, 2021 - Tina Gerhardt - THE PROGRESSIVE
A first auspicious sign was President Joe Biden’s creation of two new 
positions: the U.S. Special Presidential Envoy for Climate, the first 
climate-focused appointment to the National Security Council, and the 
first National Climate Adviser, who will coordinate climate policy 
across the federal government. To the first post, Biden appointed John 
Kerry, former Secretary of State (2013-2017) and Senator from 
Massachusetts (1985-2013); and to the second, he appointed Gina 
McCarthy, who ran the Environmental Protection Agency during the Obama 
Administration.

In addition to these two posts, Biden has rounded out his climate team 
with the following nominations: Jennifer Granholm for Secretary of 
Energy; Deb Haaland for Secretary of the Interior; Brenda Mallory for 
chair of the Council on Environmental Quality; and Michael S. Regan for 
head of the EPA. This team confirms that the administration will focus 
not only on addressing climate change but also on ensuring climate justice.
- -
Most importantly, by centering the climate crisis the Biden 
Administration makes clear it views it not as a single issue, narrowly 
construed, but as a lens through which to view all else. Being mindful 
of how the climate crisis intersects with other issues—such as defense, 
education, foreign policy, health care, housing, and labor, to name a 
few—will be key to addressing it.

The Green New Deal exemplifies this approach with a call to provide “all 
people of the United States with—high-quality health care; affordable, 
safe, and adequate housing; economic security; and clean water, clean 
air, healthy and affordable food, and access to nature.”

The Biden Administration has both the need and the potential to move 
forward quickly on the climate crisis. So much depends on how well it does.

[Tina Gerhardt is an environmental journalist and academic who covers 
climate change, international climate negotiations and domestic energy 
policy, hurricanes and sea level rise. Her work has been published by 
Common Dreams, Grist, The Nation, The Progressive, Sierra and the 
Washington Monthly. Twitter: @TinaGerhardtEJ]
https://portside.org/2021-02-25/how-biden-can-tackle-climate-crisis


[evolving language - climate refugee]
UNHCR - UN Refugee Agency
*Environment, Disasters and Climate Change*
Climate change and disaster displacement
Research indicates that the Earth’s climate is changing at a rate that 
has exceeded most scientific forecasts. Some families and communities 
have already started to suffer from disasters and the consequences of 
climate change, which has forced them to leave their homes in search of 
a new beginning.

UNHCR recognizes that the consequences of climate change are extremely 
serious, including for refugees and other people of concern. The Global 
Compact on Refugees, affirmed by an overwhelming majority in the UN 
General Assembly in December 2018, directly addresses this growing 
concern. It recognizes that ‘climate, environmental degradation and 
natural disasters increasingly interact with the drivers of refugee 
movements.’...
- -
*‘Climate refugees’?*
The term “climate refugee” is often used in the media and other 
discussions. However, this phrase can cause confusion, as it does not 
exist in international law.  A “refugee” is defined as a person who has 
crossed an international border “owing to well-founded fear of being 
persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a 
particular social group or political opinion” (1951 Convention relating 
to the Status of Refugees). In some contexts, the definition extends to 
persons fleeing “events seriously disturbing public order” (1969 OAU 
Convention; 1984 Cartagena Declaration). Climate change affects people 
inside their own countries, and typically creates internal displacement 
before it reaches a level where it displaces people across borders. 
There may be situations where the refugee criteria of the 1951 
Convention or broader refugee criteria of regional refugee law 
frameworks may apply, for example if drought-related famine is linked to 
situations of armed conflict and violence – an area known as “nexus 
dynamics.” Regardless, the term “climate refugee” is not endorsed by 
UNHCR, and it is more accurate to refer to “persons displaced in the 
context of disasters and climate change.”
https://www.unhcr.org/en-us/climate-change-and-disasters.html


[Social disruption opinions]
*Covid and the climate crisis show why we need a new social contract 
between old and young*
Minouche Shafik
The burden to pay for people in retirement is too great on those facing 
debt, job insecurity and an uncertain future
Covid-19 continues to bring many inter-generational tensions to the 
fore. Older people bear the brunt of the disease’s impact on health; 
younger people have to make economic and social sacrifices to protect 
them. But the pandemic is just one reason why the social contract 
between the generations is under pressure.

Within families, the social contract between the generations is easy to 
understand. Parents want to give their children the capabilities and 
means to have a good life; children want their parents to have a 
comfortable old age. But at a societal level, the social contract 
between the generations is more complex. The legacy we leave to future 
generations has many dimensions – the stock of human knowledge and 
culture, inventions, infrastructure and institutions, and the state of 
the natural world. We owe a great deal to previous generations and most 
would agree that we also owe something to future generations we will 
never meet, and that each generation should leave the next at least as 
well off, and preferably better off than they were...
In many advanced economies, those born between the end of the second 
world war and the early 1960s benefited from decades of sustained 
economic growth, secure jobs with benefits and major gains in health and 
social conditions. The generations that followed have faced a world of 
more flexible and precarious work, rising house prices and a period of 
fiscal austerity after the 2008 financial crisis that reduced social 
spending in many countries. Many carry large debt burdens from student 
loans and credit cards, which limit their ability to afford a mortgage 
to buy a home, or start a family. The income gains and the prospect of 
security in old age experienced by past generations have stalled and, in 
some countries, reversed. The risks of poverty are shifting from older 
people to younger people. Today, there are many in advanced economies 
who believe the next generation will be worse off than their parents.

Meanwhile, so-called Generation Z (those born after 2000) are at the 
forefront of the youth protest about the climate crisis. “You will die 
of old age; we will die of climate change,” read the sign of a young 
protester at the climate strike in London in September 2019. These young 
people are not convinced that older generations are doing enough to 
leave them with an inhabitable planet or viable livelihoods...
How, then, can we rebalance the social contract between the generations? 
The best way we can improve the economic prospects of future generations 
is through education. A massive investment in early years is the most 
effective way to equalise opportunity for all young people. Ideally, 
each young person would start with an educational endowment to enable to 
them to develop skills throughout their lives. More investment in 
re-skilling is also needed to enable people to adapt as jobs change over 
time. The resulting economic gains would also help pay for the elderly 
care needs of an ageing population and make debt more sustainable in the 
future.

To reduce the fiscal burden on future generations, today’s older people 
will need to work longer. In most middle- and high-income countries, 
workers today can expect to spend about a third of their adult life in 
retirement. The basic problem is that the years in retirement relative 
to the years in work have grown too much. By 2060, all the G20 countries 
will have shrinking populations and the number of people over 65 who 
need to be supported by the working age population will have at least 
doubled. To avoid an undue burden on today’s young people, we need to 
link retirement ages explicitly to life expectancy, so that the ratio of 
time working and time in retirement comes into better balance. There 
must be a sensible way to finance social care that prevents destitution 
in old age and asks the better off to contribute.

We must also do as much as we can to redress environmental damage. A 
good start would be to eliminate the $4-6 trillion in annual government 
subsidies to agriculture, water, fisheries and fossil fuels that 
actively encourage the exploitation of the environment. These subsidies 
mean it is not just free for companies to deplete the natural world, the 
taxpayer actually pays for them to do it. There needs to more investment 
in conservation and restoration of the biosphere, such as planting 
trees. Current public and private spending on conservation is about 
$91bn, less than 2% of what is spent on subsidies to degrade the 
environment. The next step is to measure things properly: where market 
prices do not convey the true value of environmental services, we must 
find other ways to factor them into our calculations and decisions. 
Finally, governments should use fiscal policy to change incentives, such 
as taxing carbon or incentivising green technologies.
Finding cohesion between the generations is complicated by the fact that 
older people tend to be more effective at exercising political power 
than young people. Research has shown that the share of older people in 
the population has a significant impact on the pattern of public 
spending. Put simply, more older people means more spending on pensions 
and less on education. Older voters are more averse to policies, such as 
low interest rates, that are intended to increase economic demand and 
maintain full employment but that lower returns on savings and risk more 
inflation. Having retired, they generally care less about unemployment, 
relative to the average citizen. Political parties in ageing societies 
are increasingly forced to cater to these demands.

One way or another, we must find a way to give more weight to the voices 
and interests of younger and future generations. Otherwise the social 
contract that shapes the future will be designed exclusively by those 
who will not live to see it, without the input of those who will. 
Investing more in education and skills, finding ways to manage the costs 
of pensions, health and social care, and redressing environmental damage 
would be enlightened investments by one generation in the next: this 
would benefit all of us and provide a new social contract for our time.

Minouche Shafik is director of the London School of Economics and 
Political Science, and the author of What We Owe Each Other: A New 
Social Contract
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/25/covid-climate-crisis-new-social-contract-old-young 




[Video volley in the Disinformation War]
*Honest Government Ad | News Corp Bargaining Code*
Feb 25, 2021
thejuicemedia
The Australien Government has made an ad about the new Media legislation 
it just passed, and it's surprisingly honest and informative.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqj2z3QaRyU



[AGU helps with preparing for Information battles - at 29:30 author 
speaks of her showdown with Trump on a climate report]
*Strengths and Limitations of Scientific Integrity Policies*
Feb 26, 2021
AGU
Scientific integrity protections in the federal government have become 
an increasingly important topic over the past few years. Many government 
agencies have scientific integrity policies to protect against 
violations of scientific and ethical standards, but these policies vary 
widely in breadth, strength, and clarity. In particular, issues of 
censorship and political interference, while clear violations of basic 
scientific integrity principles, are not always fully addressed by 
agency scientific integrity policies. Climate scientist Dr. Maria 
Caffrey will speak about her personal experience with scientific 
integrity issues in the federal government. Attorneys from the Climate 
Science Legal Defense Fund (CSLDF) will also discuss what scientists 
should know when encountering potential censorship or political 
interference. They will discuss what constitutes a violation of 
scientific integrity at various agencies, how different agencies handle 
scientific integrity complaints, what scientists should do when 
considering filing a scientific integrity complaint, and other recourse 
options for scientists seeking to address censorship and political 
interference. Speakers: Augusta Wilson, Climate Science Legal Defense 
Fund Maria Caffrey, Climate Scientist
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MQCSw3pX0c

- -

[news article in 2018]
*Wipeout: Human role in climate change removed from science report*
By Elizabeth Shogren / April 2, 2018

National Park Service officials have deleted every mention of humans’ 
role in causing climate change in drafts of a long-awaited report on sea 
level rise and storm surge, contradicting Interior Secretary Ryan 
Zinke’s vow to Congress that his department is not censoring science....
- -
Reveal obtained almost 2,000 pages of drafts of the report showing 
tracked changes and dating back to August 2016 – along with dozens of 
pages of other documents about the report and preparations to release it 
– in response to a public records request to the state of Colorado.

The lead author, University of Colorado geological sciences research 
associate Maria Caffrey, worked full time on the report on contract with 
the park service from 2013 through 2017.

Caffrey declined to discuss the editing and long delay in releasing her 
report, instead referring questions to the park service. Asked whether 
she has been pressured to delete the terms “anthropogenic” and “human 
activities,” she replied, “I don’t really want to get into that today.”

“I would be very disappointed if there were words being attributed to me 
that I didn’t write,” she said. “I don’t think politics should come into 
this in any way.”

Although references to human-induced change were deleted, data and maps 
showing the severity of impacts on the parks were unchanged.

In drafts dated January 2017 to May 2017, the executive summary starts: 
“Changing relative sea levels and the potential for increasing storm 
surges due to anthropogenic climate change present challenges to 
national park managers.”

But editing dated Feb. 6, 2018, changed that to: “Ongoing changes in 
relative sea levels and the potential for increasing storm surges 
present challenges to national park managers.”

In a section about 2012’s Hurricane Sandy, one of the costliest storms 
to hit the U.S., this sentence was deleted: “This single storm cannot be 
attributed to anthropogenic climate change, but the storm surge occurred 
over a sea whose level had risen due to climate change.”...
The introduction also was substantially altered in February. These two 
sentences were deleted: “While sea levels have been gradually rising 
since the last glacial maximum approximately 21,000 years ago, 
anthropogenic climate change has significantly increased the rate of 
global sea level rise. Human activities continue to release carbon 
dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere, causing the Earth’s atmosphere to warm.”

Other scientists who reviewed the draft reports said the deletions about 
the cause of climate change were alarming.

“It’s hiding from the public the reality of the causes and the possible 
options to

choose or influence what scenario plays out,” Lubchenco said.

Some of the editing apparently remained in play. Caffrey has pushed back 
on at least some of the deletions, according to a March draft.

Editing notes in a draft obtained by Reveal indicate that many of the 
deletions were made by Larry Perez, a career public information officer 
who coordinates the park service’s climate change response program.

Perez declined to comment on why the changes were made. Watchdog groups 
say that in some cases, career officials within the administration may 
be self-censoring to avoid angering Trump appointees. In others cases, 
they may be responding to verbal orders from superiors who have been 
told to avoid creating records that eventually could be made public.

The National Park Service’s scientific integrity policy prohibits 
managers from engaging in “dishonesty, fraud, misrepresentation, 
coercive manipulation, censorship, or other misconduct that alters the 
content, veracity, or meaning or that may affect the planning, conduct, 
reporting, or application of scientific and scholarly activities.” It 
also requires employees to differentiate between their opinions or 
assumptions and solid science.

Marcia McNutt, president of the National Academy of Sciences, said “the 
edits are glaringly in violation” of the science cited in the report and 
“such alterations violate” the policy.

“The individual who edited the document is making a personal 
opinion/assumption that runs counter to the scientific consensus that 
greenhouse gas emissions responsible for sea level rise are of 
anthropogenic origin and that the threat to the National Park Service 
assets arises primarily from human activities,” said McNutt, who led the 
U.S. Geological Survey, the Interior Department’s main scientific 
agency, from 2009 to 2013.

Clement, who worked for seven years as a high-ranking director in the 
Interior Department, said it would be unusual for such editing to occur 
without an order from a top supervisor.

“I can’t imagine a career man or woman would take those steps without 
some sort of direction,” he said.

The editing seemed to cross a line that Zinke drew during last month’s 
hearing before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

Sen. Mazie Hirono, a Democrat from Hawaii, pressed Zinke about censoring 
science. She asked him about department officials deleting this line 
from a press release about a newly published scientific article: “Global 
climate change drives sea-level rise, increasing the frequency of 
coastal flooding.”

In his testimony, Zinke differentiated editing press releases from 
altering scientific reports. He also rebuffed suggestions that he 
considers references to climate change unacceptable, saying “man has 
been an influencer” on the warming climate.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, a Republican from Alaska and the committee’s 
chairwoman, summarized Zinke’s comments: “I think you were pretty clear 
… that within the department, you’re not altering the reports that are 
coming out from the agencies.”

Why the deletions matter
Caffrey, the park service report’s lead author, said it’s crucial that 
the report address the human role in climate change. One of her key 
findings is that decisions about reducing greenhouse gases will 
determine how much peril the coastal national parks face from sea level 
rise and storm surge.

The report calculates projected sea level rise in 2030, 2050 and 2100 
under four scenarios for global emissions. For instance, projections for 
the National Mall and Memorial Parks in Washington in 2100 range from 
1.74 feet to 2.62 feet. The low end envisions a future in which people 
burn significantly less coal and other fossil fuels, while the upper 
number reflects increases in use.

“What scenario we choose to follow in the future will have a significant 
impact on how we protect our resources, like the National Park Service 
resources,” Caffrey said. “I feel it’s an important part to include in 
the report because it’s an essential part of those findings.”

In an October 2016 webinar for park staff about her research, Caffrey 
showed an aerial photo that depicts Washington in 2100 if global 
emissions rise and a Category 3 hurricane hits the city. The National 
Mall and Constitution Avenue are flooded. Water surrounds museums.

“We can see the results could potentially be quite catastrophic,” 
Caffrey said in an interview.

The report is intended to be released with an interactive website that 
would allow the public and park managers to visualize rising waters in 
their favorite parks.

“You can zoom in and move around and see the underlying infrastructure 
and see what’s at risk,” said William Manley, a University of Colorado 
Boulder research scientist who worked on data, maps and the online viewer.

“The data and the viewer, if released, would help park decision-makers 
to see more clearly what decisions they should make to avoid costly 
mistakes,” he said. In addition, “the maps and information would be 
helpful to resource managers in preparation for any storms that were 
forecasted.”

For instance, if the report had been released by late last summer, park 
managers could have consulted it when Hurricanes Irma and Maria, both 
Category 5 storms, headed toward the U.S. Virgin Islands in September. 
The storm surge maps for Virgin Islands National Park could have shown 
managers which areas were likely to flood. The interactive viewer 
possibly could have helped evacuation planning.

“It’s becoming clearer and clearer to most Americans that weather 
patterns are changing, climate change is a real phenomenon, and it’s 
affecting things they care about, people they love and places that they 
love,” said Lubchenco, the former NOAA administrator.

“I think what we are seeing is an effort to undermine that realization 
in a very subtle way. And it’s very dangerous. It’s counter to the best 
interests of a fully democratic society.”
https://revealnews.org/article/wipeout-human-role-in-climate-change-removed-from-science-report/



[Digging back into the internet news archive]
*On this day in the history of global warming - February 27, 2001 *

Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill sends a memo to President George W. Bush 
urging him to take strong action to combat carbon pollution. The memo is 
ignored, and O'Neill would be forced out as Treasury Secretary a year later.

ISBN:9780743255462, 0743255461
Published:September 2, 2004
Publisher:Simon & Schuster
Author:Ron Suskind
Updated with a new afterword and including a selection of key documents, 
this is the explosive account of how the Bush administration makes 
policy on war, taxes, and politics -- its true agenda exposed by a 
member of the Bush cabinet.
This vivid, unfolding narrative is like no other book that has been 
written about the Bush presidency. At its core are the candid 
assessments of former Secretary of the Treasury Paul O'Neill, the only 
member of Bush's cabinet to leave and speak frankly about how and why 
the administration has come to its core policies and decisions -- from 
cutting taxes for the rich to conducting preemptive war.
O'Neill's account is supported by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Ron 
Suskind's interviews with numerous participants in the administration, 
by trans...
Source: Publisher

https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Price_of_Loyalty/ijQLBeDklxcC


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


/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/20210227/c58d68ce/attachment.html>