[✔️] April 6, 2022 - Daily Global Warming News Digest
👀 Richard Pauli
richard at theclimate.vote
Wed Apr 6 07:54:01 EDT 2022
/*April 6, 2022*/
/[ Simple video cartoon is very current, recent history & correct
analysis - https://youtu.be/LxgMdjyw8uw ]/
*We WILL Fix Climate Change!*
Apr 5, 2022
Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell
Visit https://brilliant.org/nutshell/ to get started learning STEM for
free, and the first 200 people will get 20% off their annual premium
subscription.
Sources & further reading:
https://sites.google.com/view/sources-can-we-fix-climate/
Our home is burning. Rapid climate change is destabilizing our world. It
seems our emissions will not fall quickly enough to avoid runaway
warming and we may soon hit tipping points that will lead to the
collapse of ecosystems and our civilization.
While scientists, activists and much of the younger generation urge
action, it appears most politicians are not committed to do anything
meaningful while the fossil fuel industry still works actively against
change. It seems humanity can’t overcome its greed and obsession with
short term profit and personal gain to save itself.
And so for many the future looks grim and hopeless. Young people feel
particularly anxious and depressed. Instead of looking ahead to a
lifetime of opportunity they wonder if they will even have a future or
if they should bring kids into this world. It’s an age of doom and
hopelessness and giving up seems the only sensible thing to do.
But that’s not true. You are not doomed. Humanity is not doomed.
OUR CHANNELS
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
German Channel: https://kgs.link/youtubeDE
Spanish Channel: https://kgs.link/youtubeES
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxgMdjyw8uw/
/ /[ not decarbonizing, is a bad business decision] /
/- -
/
/[ Murderous Intent - opinion by static cartoon drawing]/
*A tiny group of wealthy people refuse to stop making more money in
order to save the planet*/
/First Dog on the Moon/
/https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/4e323a7edbfebbde35fa1da7e54a6103f0458062/0_0_2400_6397/master/2400.jpg?width=620&quality=45&auto=format&fit=max&dpr=2&s=6754340a22c81f5e9d6d9ed14b5d71be
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/apr/06/a-tiny-group-of-wealthy-people-refuse-to-stop-making-more-money-in-order-to-save-the-planet
/
/
/
/
/[ XR reports the news from the UN (where is mainstream media?) - video
https://youtu.be/FGjCiA3AOiI ]/
*UN Chief: The TRULY DANGEROUS RADICALS are the ONES THAT INCREASE THE
FOSSIL FUELS PRODUCTION*
Apr 5, 2022
Extinction Rebellion UK
The United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres called the latest
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report “a litany of
broken climate promises” showing the world is “on a fast track to
climate disaster.”
Guterres noted that “climate activists are sometimes depicted as
dangerous radicals”, but, for him, “the truly dangerous radicals are the
countries that are increasing the production of fossil fuels.”
In a video message, he said the report “is a file of shame, cataloguing
the empty pledges that put us firmly on track towards an unlivable world.”
According to the new publication, the planet is on a pathway to global
warming of more than double the 1.5-degree limit agreed in Paris.
“Some government and business leaders are saying one thing – but doing
another. Simply put, they are lying. And the results will be
catastrophic,” said Guterres.
“Investing in new fossil fuels infrastructure is moral and economic
madness. Such investments will soon be stranded assets – a blot on the
landscape, and a blight on investment portfolios,” he warned.
Help XR mobilise and donate: https://chuffed.org/project/xrapril2022
Extinction Rebellion UK: https://extinctionrebellion.uk/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/xrebellionuk
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/XRebellionUK/
Map of UK XR groups: https://map.extinctionrebellion.uk/
International: https://rebellion.global/
1. Tell The Truth
2. Act Now
3. Beyond Politics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGjCiA3AOiI
/[ it's about time. ]/
*Broadcast meteorologists are taking up the task of communicating the
effects of climate change as crisis accelerates*
“If there’s a meteorologist out there who doesn’t feel comfortable
talking about climate science, they’re missing the boat.”...
- -
It’s an opportunity that should be embraced, he and Fisher said.
Page said climate change presents meteorologists with the opportunity of
being a good resource to audiences, giving people good information, to
“make sure that they’re not just googling something and getting some
really half-baked information on the internet.”
A forecast is something that has become easy to get in a number of
places, Fisher pointed out.
People aren’t sitting down at night to watch their evening news because
it’s the only time they can get their weather forecast.
“One way that we adapt to that is by offering a bigger umbrella of
information and that includes climate, that includes astronomy, what’s
going on in the night skies, gardening, light planning,” the CBS Boston
forecaster said. “You have to talk about some value-added things. And so
there is plenty of time to talk about this.”
And when it comes to New England and climate change, that means talking
about sea level rise, increasing precipitation events, and the fact that
there’s less extreme cold, Fisher said.
Weather is one of the most collective experiences that can be had, so
providing context should be a goal, he said.
It’s something that audiences watching, or listening to, their favorite
meteorologists can anticipate only growing in the future, Epstein said.
It’s not going to decrease, he stressed.
“The public should expect to see more and more data, information,
stories on how the changing climate is affecting everything from our
daily lives to plants to animals and of course sea level,” Epstein said.
“This isn’t going away and it’s not going to reverse itself. And so it’s
here to stay.”
https://www.boston.com/news/local-news/2022/04/05/broadcast-meteorologists-climate-change/
/[ wars have always meant profit - but this is too opportunistic ]/
*Big Oil's Wartime Bonus: How Big Oil Turns Profits Into Wealth*
Apr 05, 2022
- -
As the war drags into its second month, Big Oil remains the only winner
in sight. To ensure its windfall profits land in investors’ pockets,
companies rely on two main tactics: First, they repurchase shares of
their own stock and retire them, reducing the number of shares
outstanding and driving up the value of each share remaining in
investors’ hands. Second, they increase dividends, the quarterly
payments investors receive for owning shares.
Amid high gas prices and war in recent months, oil and gas companies
have kicked both tactics into overdrive, a new analysis from Friends of
the Earth, BailoutWatch, and Public Citizen has found/:
/*https://bailout.cdn.prismic.io/bailout/f8f2bc61-f533-4f85-9945-9a8dd63312ff_Big+Oil%27s+Wartime+Bonus.pdf*/
/https://bailoutwatch.org/analysis/big-oils-wartime-bonus/
/
/- -/
/[ //House Committee on Oversight and Reform - //our government is
"shocked, shocked..." this is a perfect time to stop subsidizing
fossil fuels ]
/*Chairs Maloney and Khanna Call on Big Oil to End Stock Buybacks, Use
Record Profits to Help Americans at the Pump and Invest in Clean Energy*
Apr 4, 2022 Press Release
Committee Analysis Shows Big Oil Spends Far More Enriching Investors and
Executives Than Producing Clean Energy
Washington, D.C. (April 4, 2022)—Today, Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney, the
Chairwoman of the Committee on Oversight and Reform, and Rep. Ro Khanna,
the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Environment, sent a letter to fossil
fuel executives at ExxonMobil, BP America, Chevron, and Shell Oil
Company, urging them to use their record-breaking profits to help
Americans facing pain at the gas pump instead of enriching investors
with stock buybacks and dividends. The Chairs also urged Big Oil to
utilize their windfall profit to finally invest in renewable energy
projects to reduce the fossil fuel dependency that has empowered
dangerous autocrats like Vladimir Putin.
“As Vladimir Putin’s illegal war against Ukraine is raising gas prices
and hurting Americans at the pump, fossil fuel companies are taking
advantage of the crisis by raking in record profits and spending
billions of dollars to enrich their executives and investors,” the
Chairs wrote. “As part of the Committee’s ongoing investigation into
Big Oil’s disinformation on fossil fuels and climate change, we found
that as profits rose last year, Exxon, Chevron, BP, and Shell spent more
than $44 billion to enrich investors with stock buybacks and dividends.
This year, you have promised to funnel at least $32 billion more to your
investors, while committing less than half that amount to urgently
needed lower-carbon investments. Big Oil must immediately stop
profiteering off the crisis in Ukraine/.”
/
https://oversight.house.gov/sites/democrats.oversight.house.gov/files/2022-04-04.CBM%20Khanna%20to%20Woods-Exxon%20et%20al.%20re%20Stock%20Buybacks.pdf/
/
/- -
/
/[short, like a firecracker ]/
*Stopping Climate Change Is Doable, but Time Is Short, U.N. Panel Warns*
A major new scientific report offers a road map for how countries can
limit global warming, but warns that the margin for error is vanishingly
small.
Brad Plumer and Raymond Zhong
April 4, 2022
Nations need to move away much faster from fossil fuels to retain any
hope of preventing a perilous future on an overheated planet, according
to a major new report on climate change released on Monday, although
they have made some progress because of the falling costs of clean energy.
The report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a body of
experts convened by the United Nations, warns that unless countries
drastically accelerate efforts over the next few years to slash their
emissions from coal, oil and natural gas, the goal of limiting global
warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, or 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit, will likely
be out of reach by the end of this decade.
That’s the threshold beyond which scientists say the dangers of global
warming — including worsening floods, droughts, wildfires and ecosystem
collapse — grow considerably. Humans have already heated the planet by
an average of 1.1 degrees Celsius since the 19th century, largely by
burning fossil fuels for energy.
But the task is daunting: Holding warming to just 1.5 degrees Celsius
would require nations to collectively reduce their planet-warming
emissions roughly 43 percent by 2030 and to stop adding carbon dioxide
to the atmosphere altogether by the early 2050s, the report found. By
contrast, current policies by governments are only expected to reduce
global emissions by a few percentage points this decade. Last year,
fossil fuel emissions worldwide rebounded to near-record highs after a
brief dip as a result of the coronavirus pandemic...
The report, which was approved by 195 governments and lays out
strategies that countries could pursue to halt global warming, comes as
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has caused oil and gas prices to skyrocket,
diverting political attention from climate change. In the United States
and Europe, leaders are focused on shoring up domestic fossil fuel
supplies to avoid painful price spikes and energy shortages, even if
that means increasing emissions in the short term.
Yet climate scientists say there is little margin for delay if the world
wants to hold global warming to relatively tolerable levels.
“Every year that you let pass without going for these urgent emissions
reductions makes it more and more difficult,” said Jim Skea, an energy
researcher at Imperial College London who helped lead the report, which
was compiled by 278 experts from 65 countries. “Unless we really do it
immediately, it will not be possible to limit warming to 1.5 degrees.”...
- -
Even in the best case, humanity is unlikely to eliminate all of its
planet warming emissions, the report warned. So countries will likely
also have to devise ways to remove billions of tons of carbon dioxide
from the atmosphere each year by around midcentury. One strategy could
be to plant more trees, although that may not be enough, the report
cautioned. Other options include devices that suck carbon out of the
air, though these technologies are still immature...
- -
“It’s unfortunate: These recent crises just demonstrate that if
decarbonization happened earlier, then China, as well as other regions,
would have been more resilient to some of these shocks,” said Cecilia
Han Springer, a China expert at Boston University. “But that means
there’s also an opportunity to double down.”
India’s government has increased energy efficiency in homes and
factories, given farmers solar-powered water pumps and helped promote
the rapid construction of solar farms. But the country’s state-run
electric utilities remain in fragile fiscal health, meaning there is no
guarantee that efforts to expand clean energy will be financially
sustainable.
Worldwide, slashing emissions requires overhauling the way governments,
businesses and even societies work, said Dr. Denton of the United
Nations University. “That’s not an overnight thing, and it comes with
some cost, whether we like it or not.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/04/climate/climate-change-ipcc-un.html
/[ This is not a song by Elvis ] /
*‘It’s now or never’: World’s top climate scientists issue ultimatum on
critical temperature limit*
Sam Meredith -- APR 4 2022
-- “It’s now or never, if we want to limit global warming to 1.5°C,”
IPCC Working Group III co-chair Jim Skea said.
-- The 1.5 degrees Celsius goal is the aspirational temperature
threshold ascribed in the landmark 2015 Paris Agreement.
-- The IPCC’s latest report follows a series of mind-bending extreme
weather events worldwide.
-- For instance, in just the last few weeks, an ice shelf the size of
New York City collapsed in East Antarctica following record high
temperatures and heavy rains deluged Australia’s east coast, submerging
entire towns.
The fight to keep global heating under 1.5 degrees Celsius has reached
“now or never” territory, according to a new report released Monday by
the world’s leading climate scientists.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/04/ipcc-report-climate-scientists-issue-ultimatum-on-1point5-degrees-goal.html
/[ From SLATE ] /
*How to Convince People to Leave Homes at Serious Risk From Climate Change*
BY FANILLA CHENG AND YULIYA PANFIL
APRIL 01, 2022
Nearly 100 million Americans live on the coasts, and they are continuing
to move there at high rates. In fact, the coastal population has grown
by more than 15 percent since 2000—faster than the rest of the
country—and the population of coastline counties in the Gulf of Mexico
region increased by nearly one-quarter between 2000 and 2016. Coastal
areas have a population density that is more than five times greater
than the U.S. average.
These coastal hubs are under increasing threat from sea level rise,
vicious hurricanes, and other events driven by climate change. The
research organization First Street Foundation found in 2020 that 15
million homes across the United States are at substantial risk of
flooding, and things are only going to get worse. Scientists project
that in a few decades, almost half of Galveston, Texas; more than half
of Hoboken, New Jersey; and almost two-thirds of Miami Beach, Florida,
will become uninhabitable due to sea level rise...
Faced with these grim facts, coastal cities, counties, and the federal
government are beginning to grapple with how to relocate vulnerable
coastal residents. Right now, the most common way to do this is through
a process called managed retreat: After a storm damages a home, the
government offers a property owner money to move away instead of
rebuilding. Typically, the amount of money matches the value of the
home, sometimes with a small additional incentive amount.
Over the past 40 years, the government has relocated nearly 45,000
people in this manner. But as the seas threaten to swallow up entire
cities, this incremental approach is becoming increasingly
unrealistic—financially, logistically, and politically. It’s also
increasingly inequitable.
First, consider the costs. According to Zillow the typical U.S. home
costs $308,000, and coastal homes are significantly more expensive on
average than inland properties. Relocating just 10 percent of the
homeowners that First Street Foundation identified as most vulnerable
would cost the government nearly $500 billion, to say nothing of
exponentially more expensive propositions like relocating airports,
hospitals, ports and other infrastructure.
Then, consider the logistics. Managed retreat buyouts are voluntary,
with each individual homeowner applying for, negotiating, and accepting
a relocation. That means buyouts are an administrative nightmare for
both municipalities and homeowners. As a result, a 2019 study found that
wealthier and less vulnerable counties in New England were more likely
to apply for buyout funds than more vulnerable Gulf Coast counties in
Florida, Louisiana, and Mississippi.
And finally, consider the politics. Property taxes are the backbone of a
municipal budget, and no city wants to lose its taxpayer base—especially
if it must continue providing the same municipal services and
maintaining roads, bridges, schools and hospitals for the few residents
who stay put. Fundamentally, there’s no world in which asking people to
move away from coastal homes they may have spent a lifetime saving up
for is good politics.
So, if buyouts just don’t work at scale, what is the alternative?
Florida has been experimenting with one approach that can address the
long-term problems while allowing people to stay put: conferring “life
rights,” coupled with other tools such as tax incentives, for vulnerable
properties. For instance, homes might become state property, but
residents would be allowed to remain in their homes during their
lifetime. Similarly, Norfolk, Virginia’s 2018 zoning ordinance provides
for a “life estate” option—allowing some residents to remain in their
homes throughout their lives, with their property interest terminating
when they die—to help enhance flood resilience and direct new, more
intense development to higher ground.
While this may be a promising long-term alternative, it doesn’t work if
a community needs immediate relocation due to worsening storms or
flooding. Alternatively, municipalities could experiment with offering
other forms of limited property ownership to residents in certain areas.
Once an area becomes too unsafe to live in, such as when the average
high tide line in a coastal community has risen past a certain level,
the homes in that area would stop being owned by the residents, and the
homes would become government property.
Another option would be to put these vulnerable properties into land
trusts (organizations that acquire and steward land) and subject them to
a “rolling easement.” This rolling easement could restrict harmful shore
protection measures such as seawalls (which often erode beaches and
destroy coastal habitats), remove pre-existing structures along the
coast, and provide notice to coastal residents that their property
rights are not infinite. Such a strategy would enable residents to stay
until it becomes too risky. North Carolina already prohibits permanent
shoreline protection structures, which often end up harming beaches and
coastlines.
Governments could also implement rebuilding restrictions to require
residents to move inland if their homes are destroyed by a storm or
flood, and prevent these residents from rebuilding in the same place.
Maine’s Sand Dune Rules and South Carolina’s Beachfront Management Act
both include restrictions on rebuilding a storm-damaged property, such
as when a structure is damaged by more than 50 percent of its appraised
value. The drawback of this approach is that it’s only activated after
damage and destruction occur. Furthermore, in some areas, it may be
difficult to find new property where affected residents can rebuild.
Financial incentives could also encourage more people to move away from
vulnerable areas.
New York offers such an inducement to homeowners in areas at regular
risk of flooding: If the homeowner agrees to relocate within the same
county, they could receive the fair market value of their home, plus an
additional incentive of 5 percent of the home value.
But at the end of the day, these are incremental efforts to address a
systemic problem. Perhaps what’s most critically needed is a
transformational effort that includes bold investment in vibrant,
attractive, and affordable residential and commercial development, built
on higher ground nearby that vulnerable coastal residents can readily
and enthusiastically relocate to.
We know that climate change is already causing widespread disruption,
and that sea levels are rising faster than ever, yet so far our response
to the climate crisis has been reactive and incremental. With time
running out to avoid a harrowing future, we need to act now to implement
the necessary far-reaching measures that match the extent of the crisis
we face.
https://slate.com/technology/2022/04/managed-retreat-government-policy-climate-change-flooding.html
/[ We lack only the tools of will-power and //morality//]/
*We have the tools to slow warming*
We actually have a better shot than we did a few years ago, according to
a new United Nations report. But powerful interests stand in the way.
By Somini Sengupta - - April 5, 2022
- -
That’s what I find most valuable in the new report this week from the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. It tells us the world already
has many of the tools required to shift away from fossil fuels and slow
down climate change quickly
It’s doable, in other words. It’s just not getting done...
- -
*Ditching fossil fuels is costly, but sticking with them is costlier.*
Shifting the global economy from coal to renewables won’t happen
spontaneously. It needs government subsidies to promote renewables
rather than to promote fossil fuels, which is currently the case. The
I.P.C.C. says governments and companies may need to invest three to six
times the $600 billion they currently spend annually on promoting clean
energy and reducing emissions.
A failure to do so would very likely be more expensive. The panel’s
projections say that countries will be poorer if they do not take action
to shift to renewable energy sources, and that estimate doesn’t even
count the economic benefits of improving public health and reducing
extreme weather disasters...
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/05/climate/we-have-the-tools-to-slow-warming.html
/[The news archive - looking back]/
*April, 6, 2000*
Predicting the controversies that would define the George W. Bush
administration, New York Times columnist Bob Herbert observes, "Mr.
Bush's relationship to the environment is roughly that of a doctor to a
patient -- when the doctor's name is Kevorkian."
''What happened during Bush's tenure is that by most measures
environmental quality in Texas has gotten worse,'' said Tom
(Smitty) Smith, director of the public interest group Texas
Public Citizen. ''Every chance that Bush has had, he's stood up
for the polluters.''
Mr. Bush's approach has not been subtle. His first appointment
to the state's environmental protection agency, the Texas
Natural Resources Conservation Commission, was Ralph Marquez, an
executive who had spent 30 years with the Monsanto Chemical
Company and had served as the chairman of the environmental
regulation committee of the Texas Chemical Council, a trade
association.
Great idea! Let's put a top chemical company guy in charge of
regulating pollution from chemicals. Let's put the biggest,
hungriest fox we can find right at that gaping entrance to the
chicken coop.
That was in 1995. Three weeks after Mr. Marquez's appointment,
the commission used its muscle to thwart a plan, already in the
works, to issue smog health advisories that would warn residents
whenever there were particularly high ozone levels in and around
Houston.
The business types in Houston hate health advisories and
anything else that calls attention to the city's dirty air. It's
bad for business. Just give the kids some cough drops.
Mr. Marquez doesn't even think ozone is particularly bad for
you. Testifying before a Congressional committee in November
1995, he said: ''After all, ozone is not a poison or a
carcinogen. It's a relatively benign pollutant compared with
other environmental risks.''
I've no doubt George W. is enjoying his spiffy new
environmentalist costume. The Bush men can always count on the
environment for a good laugh. Back in 1992, George H. W. Bush,
campaigning for re-election, gleefully derided Al Gore's
interest in the environment by dubbing the vice-presidential
candidate ''the Ozone Man.''
The business types loved it.
Bush the elder, smiling, said he was ''an environmental man''
too. He might as well have winked. He never expected anybody to
believe him. Costumes are about fun.
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/04/06/opinion/in-america-bush-goes-green.html?pagewanted=print
=======================================
*More daily summaries*
---------------------------------------
*Climate Nexus https://climatenexus.org/hot-news/*
Delivered straight to your inbox every morning, Hot News summarizes the
most important climate and energy news of the day, delivering an
unmatched aggregation of timely, relevant reporting. It also provides
original reporting and commentary on climate denial and pro-polluter
activity that would otherwise remain largely unexposed. 5 weekday
=================================
*Carbon Brief Daily https://www.carbonbrief.org/newsletter-sign-up*
Every weekday morning, in time for your morning coffee, Carbon Brief
sends out a free email known as the “Daily Briefing” to thousands of
subscribers around the world. The email is a digest of the past 24 hours
of media coverage related to climate change and energy, as well as our
pick of the key studies published in the peer-reviewed journals.
more at https://www.getrevue.co/publisher/carbon-brief
==================================
*The Daily Climate Subscribe https://ehsciences.activehosted.com/f/61*
Get The Daily Climate in your inbox - FREE! Top news on climate impacts,
solutions, politics, drivers. Delivered week days. Better than coffee.
Other newsletters too
more at https://www.dailyclimate.org/originals/
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------/
/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. This is a hobby production curated by Richard Pauli
By regulation, the .VOTE top-level domain 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/20220406/b4333372/attachment.htm>
More information about the TheClimate.Vote
mailing list