[✔️] May 23, 2021 - Daily Global Warming News Digest

Sun May 23 08:05:18 EDT 2021

/*May 23, 2021*/

[it's called climate destabilization]
*Twenty-one dead as extreme weather hits ultramarathon in China*
Hail, freezing rain and high winds hit runners at high-altitude, 100km 
race in Yellow River stone forest in Gansu province
- -
A “significant” drop in temperatures had been forecast in most parts of 
Gansu over the weekend but there was anger on Chinese social media that 
officials had failed to plan for bad weather.

“Why didn’t the government read the weather forecast and do a risk 
assessment?” one commentator wrote.

“This is totally a man-made calamity. Even if the weather is unexpected, 
where were the contingency plans?”

At the news briefing on Sunday, Baiyin officials bowed and apologised, 
saying they were saddened by the tragic deaths of the runners and that 
they were to be blamed...
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/23/runners-dead-extreme-weather-hits-mountain-running-race-gansu-china

[better check again - 2 min video news ]
*Report suggests Canada's methane emissions higher than previously 
estimated*
May 22, 2021
Global News
Researchers in Nova Scotia say Canada's climate strategy may be based on 
estimates of methane emissions that are inaccurately low.

Even though we can't see it or smell it, it's considered a potent 
greenhouse gas and the report suggests more methane is leaking from 
Canada's oil patch than previously believed.

Ross Lord explains the miscalculation and what it means for the country.
For more info, please go to https://globalnews.ca
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DN1mRGt8q_0

[New living]
*Off-the-grid homes are coming to your neighborhood, as climate change 
creates suburban survivalists*
Diana Olick - MAY 21 2021
-- Increasingly extreme weather from climate change is now a year-round 
phenomenon. This has homebuilders reconsidering how they design and 
power new homes, and how to take them off the grid.
-- Major grid failure or “blackout” events in the United States, 
impacting 50,000 or more people, jumped by more than 60% since 2015.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/21/climate-change-creates-demand-for-off-the-grid-homes-.html

[Wired]
*The Ford F-150 Lightning Is the Electric Vehicle of Dystopia*
The automaker says the battery inside the pickup can power a home for 
three days—useful in a world of fires, floods, and freezes.
WHEN TESLA CEO Elon Musk took to a stage in 2019 to unveil the company’s 
all-electric Cybertruck pickup, observers were shocked, and that's 
putting it mildly. The look was, as one industrial designer told WIRED 
at the time, “anti-humanistic,” a ride devised, seemingly, for a Mad Max 
future. Despite his role as the mascot for zero-emission vehicles, Musk 
is not always sanguine about humanity’s future on Earth—hence all the 
Mars stuff—so the truck’s unorthodox design made some sense.
Aarian Marshall writes about autonomous vehicles, transportation policy, 
urban planning, and everyone’s favorite topic: How to destroy traffic. 
(You can’t, really.)
https://www.wired.com/story/ford-lightning-f150-electric-vehicle-dystopia/
- -
[buy an electric vehicle]
*This Electric Ford Is Climate-Change Ready*
Not only is it zero emissions, but it can power your home for up to ten 
days in the event of an infrastructure collapse

    The truck will have one electric motor on each axle, making for a
    total of 426 horsepower and 775 pound-feet of torque. According to
    Ford, it should have a range of 230 miles in real-world conditions.

https://www.outsideonline.com/2424045/electric-ford-f-150-lightning

[Greta's chops stick]*
**Greta Thunberg calls out Chinese state-run media for 'fat-shaming' her 
in a scathing article that questioned her veganism*
https://www.businessinsider.com/greta-thunberg-calls-out-china-for-fat-shaming-her-2021-5

[Our Government at Work]
*CONGRESS PLANS CLIMATE RESILIENCY — BUT MOSTLY FOR THE MILITARY*
Since 2019, Congress has repeatedly held hearings on climate resiliency 
for bases, but hardly ever talks about schools, public housing, or prisons.
Alleen Brown - May 22 2021
AT A CONGRESSIONAL hearing Wednesday, senators peppered military leaders 
with questions about the resilience of Defense Department infrastructure 
to the climate crisis. Members of both parties asked the officials for 
updates on individual bases’ resiliency plans, questioned how they were 
balancing climate adaptation with other priorities, and discussed a list 
of the most climate-vulnerable military installations — a congressional 
mandate that President Joe Biden doubled down on last month.

It was the type of detailed climate conversation that’s necessary in an 
era of a deepening emergency — but a discussion that Congress has 
relegated disproportionately to military matters. This week’s session 
was the ninth congressional hearing focused on protecting national 
security and military installations from climate risk since early 2019, 
according to a list of around 300 climate-related hearings held since 
the start of that year. A review of the list, compiled by the Climate 
Action Campaign, suggests that Congress has prioritized military climate 
readiness over climate resilience for other types of publicly funded 
infrastructure.
- -
“Looking at climate change through a militarized frame promotes a search 
for military solutions.”...
- -
“Instead of pouring more resources into DoD agencies to retool military 
bases, we should start planning to close many of these bases.”...
- -
https://theintercept.com/2021/05/22/congress-climate-military/

[trans-doomscrolling]
*We Need to Change How We Talk About Climate Action*
BY HOLLY BUCK
The Left needs a message on climate action that’s about giving more 
opportunities for working-class people rather than restricting 
individual behavior.
The prospects for climate action are starting to look more promising. 
Climate activists have injected the issue into the news agenda and 
spooked investors. Coal has peaked, and there’s talk of a peak in oil 
demand later this decade, too. Even the future of gas has come into 
question. Around the globe, countries, cities, and companies are making 
net-zero commitments...
- -
We may have ruled out the worst-case existential scenarios and will now 
have to deal with a horrific 3°C of warming instead of 4, 5, or 6 
degrees. Perhaps we can even cap it at 2°C. Can we stop to breathe? And 
does the turn away from worst-case scenarios mean that we can 
effectively rule out geoengineering as a necessary tool?

It’s complicated. Let’s talk about three challenges we’ll have to 
navigate during this decade, one possible opportunity, and one near-term 
obstacle.

*Understanding Net Zero*
The first challenge is becoming increasingly clear. Net-zero emissions 
does not constitute a phaseout of fossil fuel production. Rather, net 
zero implies there will be some amount of residual, “difficult-to-abate” 
emissions balanced against some degree of negative emissions. The 
quantity of this remaining amount is going to be the focus of intense 
debate during the 2020s....
- -
Instead of phasing out production as a goal, we have “energy transition” 
instead — a friendly alternative term that skips over grimmer language 
such as “managed decline” or “exit” of fossil fuels. The idea of energy 
transition allows for an organic switch to renewables as they become 
cheaper than fossil fuels. The rise of solar provides support for this: 
its price has fallen by 89 percent over the past ten years and is now 
cheaper than coal, which is a key reason why so many coal plants have 
closed.

However, scientific analysis tells us that fossil fuels have to be 
actively retired, not just allowed to die a natural death. If we are 
going to stay under 1.5°C, production needs to decrease by 6 percent per 
year this decade. Instead of pursuing this goal, the world’s countries 
are planning an average increase of 2 percent per year, according to a 
report that looks at the “Production Gap” between existing plans and 
what we need to do...
- -
more at - 
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2021/05/climate-change-green-new-deal-technology

[More of our government, ready to work]
*Facing Hurricane and Wildfire Seasons, FEMA Is Already Worn Out*
Multiple missions, combined with years of record disasters, have 
strained the agency — and scientists predict an unusually severe 
disaster season ahead.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/20/climate/fema-staff-wildfires-hurricane-season.html

[one form of grass roots demonstration]
*Climate activists protest against BP sponsorship at British Museum*
A demonstration also took place at the Science Museum in London where 
Shell is a sponsor
- -
According to the campaign group, BP sponsorship provides less than 1% of 
the British Museum’s annual income. These cultural deals are up for 
renewal this year, and for Danny, who helped organise the protest, the 
British Museum is making an “active choice” in upholding its sponsorship 
with BP.

He said: “They’re choosing to stick with the sponsor, and they are 
actively making a choice to keep propping up a company that is 
incredibly complicit in the climate crisis.”...
- -
Also on Saturday, youth activists from UK Student Climate Network 
(UKSCN) led a protest at the Science Museum, in response to a new 
climate exhibition sponsored by Shell.

Izzy Warren, 17, from west London, who was attending the demonstration, 
said: “In the past, drawing links between oil sponsorship and the impact 
of climate change has been hard. When you’ve got an exhibition on 
climate change and solutions being sponsored by an oil company, there is 
something very wrong with that, and I think that’s why this one has got 
a lot of attention.”

On Tuesday, the group launched a boycott of the new exhibition, Our 
Future Planet, after the museum ignored an open letter demanding the 
Science Museum drop its Shell sponsorship, backed by more than 170 
scientists and climate organisations.

Shell has come under huge pressure from shareholders voting for carbon 
emission reductions, while the International Energy Agency has said 
investments in new oil and gas exploration need to end if the world is 
to reach net zero by 2050...
- -
Warren added: “I think it is a very cheap way for oil companies to have 
social licence in our museums to operate and make it seem like they are 
contributing more good. In reality, they are destroying our planet, and 
destroying people’s homes and people’s livelihoods.”

A spokesperson for the Science Museum said: “We received a peaceful 
protest from UKSCN today. It took place without incident and visitors 
continued to have safe access to the inspiration of our museum and to 
the vaccination centre.”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/22/climate-activists-protest-against-bp-sponsorship-at-british-museum

[BBC offers a comment & analysis and the answer is yes.]
*Could humans really destroy all life on Earth?*
The seemingly insatiable human tendency to consume is changing our 
planet and the life on it, but can we change our behaviour?
- -
The Weizmann Institute study estimates that on average, each person on 
the globe now produces more anthropogenic mass than his or her 
bodyweight every week. "The finding that anthropogenic mass – human made 
stuff - now weighs as much as all living things, and the fact that it 
keeps accumulating rapidly, gives another clear perspective on how 
humanity is now a major player in shaping the face of the planet," says 
Professor Ron Milo, whose laboratory conducted this study. "Life on 
Earth is affected in a major quantitative manner by the actions of humans."
- -
The scale and size of the anthropogenic matter is alarming. Take the 
case of plastic – the birth of the modern plastics era came only in 
1907, but today we produce 300 million tons of plastics every year. 
Further, the realisation that after water, concrete is the most widely 
used substance on Earth is beyond comprehension.

The massive geoengineering process initiated by humans took an 
accelerated upswing when materials like concrete and aggregates became 
widely available. These two materials make up a major component of the 
growth in anthropogenic mass. Even the relatively recent human 
adventures of space exploration, which began about 60 years ago, is 
triggering a disastrous space junk problem. Alongside this we 
haphazardly observe polar cap melts, permafrost thaws, and global 
temperatures getting hotter.
- -
Humans have been conditioned to believe that creating something new is a 
meaningful purpose of life...
- -
The limits of science have never been more glaringly apparent when 
trying to solve this conundrum. Reliance upon green technological 
solutions alone is flawed because the focus is still based on new stuff 
and more use – not to alter lifestyles or business models that handed us 
this problem in the first place. Even if we can replace all fossil 
fuel-based vehicles with electric ones, for example, cities are already 
struggling to take road space from cars and electric vehicles have their 
own footprint on the world's resources due to the materials needed to 
build them...
- -
In the age of Anthropocene, humans may feel entitled to pin hope on 
technology to fix any problems so that they can continue to do what they 
are doing. Faced with the accumulation of long-lived plastic in the 
environment, for example, a spurt of innovation led to biodegradable 
coffee cups, bags for life and reusable straws. But while it is true 
that a sustainable growth model that includes our environment has much 
larger potential to persist, we need a different approach to 
sustainability that addresses our massive consumerism.
- -
The oceans may be acidifying faster today than they did in the last 300 
million years, primarily due to human activities
- -
While there is no proof that we will destroy ourselves, there are clear 
indications that we ignore the effects at our own peril. For example, 
some of the mass extinctions in the Earth's history are related to 
acidification of oceans. The oceans absorb about 30% of the carbon 
dioxide released into the atmosphere, which in turn increases the ocean 
acidity. The oceans may be acidifying faster today than they did in the 
last 300 million years, primarily due to human activities.

"Human life will be negatively affected because of the loss of the many 
ecosystem benefits and services provided by biological diversity," says 
Loria. "For example, water pollution may affect provisioning services, 
such as food and water, by causing a reduction in food diversity and/or 
in its quality and safety. Widespread degradation of ecosystems 
threatens the conditions of life on Earth, in particular the long-term 
survival of our own species."...
- -
Our impact on the planet is much is deeper than carbon footprints or 
global warming. It points to a future where the effects of anthropogenic 
matter will take over – if it hasn't already – the identity of the Earth 
and its life. In the face of this, humans themselves might lose out in 
the evolutionary race.

Eliminating materials like concrete or plastic or replacing them with 
alternatives is not going to address the fundamental problem with human 
attitudes and our unparalleled appetite for more. This is exactly where 
materialism can seamlessly transform into a known unknown risk factor in 
global catastrophe. The myriad of ways in which it can turn this planet 
into a mundane world is something our civilisation has never experienced 
before...
- -
In the absence of a fully secure evolutionary shield, we could depend on 
our intelligence to survive. Nevertheless, as Abraham Loeb, professor of 
science at Harvard University and an astronomer who is searching for 
dead cosmic civilisations puts it, "the mark of intelligence is the 
ability to promote a better future"...
- -
"If we continue to behave this way, we might not survive very long," he 
says. "On the other hand, our actions could be a source of pride for our 
descendants if they sustain a civilisation intelligent enough to endure 
for many centuries to come."

The story of Bhasmasura in Hindu Mythology offers an eerie parallel to 
the impact of materialism. As a devotee of Lord Shiva, he obtains a boon 
from Shiva, which empowers him to turn anyone into ashes with a mere 
touch on the head. Immediately after gaining this magical ability, he 
tries to test it on Shiva himself. Shiva manages to escape, the story goes.

But humans may not be lucky enough to flee from their own actions. 
Unless, we offer a different vision rooted in reduction of consumption, 
the flames of our own materialism might consume both us and our Pale 
Blue Dot.

Santhosh Mathew is a professor of physics and astronomy Regis College, 
Greater Boston, and a science writer who has authored two books.
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20210520-could-humans-really-destroy-all-life-on-earth 

[recording the tab]
*Climate change tied to over $820 billion in health care costs per year: 
report*
BY ZACK BUDRYK - 5/21/21
The impacts of climate change and fossil fuel production are tied to 
more than $820 billion a year in physical and mental health care costs, 
according to a report issued Thursday by the Natural Resources Defense 
Council (NRDC).

The report, co-produced with the Medical Society Consortium on Climate & 
Health and Wisconsin Health Professionals for Climate Action, found that 
health problems from soot air pollution alone have a yearly price tag of 
$820 billion. Ozone pollution caused by burning fuels and increased 
temperatures, meanwhile, adds roughly $7.9 billion in annual health costs...
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/554750-climate-change-tied-to-over-820-billion-in-health-care-costs-per?rl=1

[always changing]
CLIMATE NOTE · May 17, 2021
*Global Warming’s Six Americas: A Review*
By Anthony Leiserowitz, Connie Roser-Renouf, Jennifer Marlon and Edward 
Maibach
https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Picture1.png
Strategic communication requires the identiﬁcation and understanding of 
target audiences for tailored communication. The Global Warming’s Six 
Americas analysis segments the U.S. public into six distinct audiences 
who each respond differently to the issue of climate change. The 
segments include the Alarmed, Concerned, Cautious, Disengaged, Doubtful, 
and Dismissive.

We first developed this framework in 2008 and have been studying and 
tracking changes in the groups for over a decade. The framework and 
segmentation approach has also been used to assess specialized audiences 
(e.g. broadcast meteorologists) and other countries (e.g. India, 
Australia, and Germany).
The article reviews how the Six Americas have changed over time, 
underlying theory, methodological innovations, and how the framework has 
informed the decision making of stakeholders ranging from scientists to 
government officials, journalists, educators, and advocates. We conclude 
by suggesting that future research should further develop and 
investigate the application of the Six Americas within the United 
States, while also developing tailored segmentations and related tools 
for other countries.

If you would like a copy, please contact us at climatechange at yale.edu 
with the Subject Line: Six Americas Review Paper request.
https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/global-warmings-six-americas-a-review/

[Content warning -- History of Denialism from the internet news archive 
- contains lies, disinformation & opinion manipulation ]
*On this day in the history of global warming  May 23, 2006 *

May 23, 2006: In perhaps the most hilariously demented attack on "An 
Inconvenient Truth," former Delaware Congressman and Governor Pete Du 
Pont declares in a Wall Street Journal op-ed that we don't need to 
reduce C02 emissions because C02 is "vital for plant growth."

    *Don't Be Very Worried*
    The truth about "global warming" is much less dire than Al Gore
    wants you to think.

      BY PETE DU PONT
      Tuesday, May 23, 2006 12:01 a.m. EDT

    Since 1970, the year of the first Earth Day, America's population
    has increased by 42%, the country's inflation-adjusted gross
    domestic product has grown 195%, the number of cars and trucks in
    the United States has more than doubled, and the total number of
    miles driven has increased by 178%.

    But during these 35 years of growing population, employment, and
    industrial production, the Environmental Protection Agency reports,
    the environment has substantially improved. Emissions of the six
    principal air pollutants have decreased by 53%. Carbon monoxide
    emissions have dropped from 197 million tons per year to 89 million;
    nitrogen oxides from 27 million tons to 19 million, and sulfur
    dioxide from 31 million to 15 million. Particulates are down 80%,
    and lead emissions have declined by more than 98%...
    - -
      The Climate Science study concludes that projections of global
    warming over the next century "have decreased significantly since
    early modeling efforts," and that global air temperatures should
    increase by 2.5 degrees and the United States by about 1 degree
    Fahrenheit over the next hundred years. The environmental pessimists
    tell us, as in Time magazine's recent global warming issue, to "Be
    Worried. Be Very Worried," but the truth is that our environmental
    progress has been substantially improving, and we should be very
    pleased.

      Mr. du Pont, a former governor of Delaware, is chairman of the
    Dallas-based National Center for Policy Analysis. His column appears
    once a month

http://web.archive.org/web/20060602003144/http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pdupont/?id=110008416

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

/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/20210523/7559495d/attachment.htm>