[✔️] March 16, 2022 - Daily Global Warming News Digest
👀 Richard Pauli
richard at theclimate.vote
Wed Mar 16 07:13:37 EDT 2022
/*March 16, 2022*/
/[ in desperation, we ask governments to step up ]/
*House Democrats call on Biden to restart climate negotiations in
stalled spending plan*
MAR 15 2022
-- More than 80 House Democrats this week called on President Joe Biden
to restart negotiations over his delayed social spending bill and push
forward critical climate change funding.
-- The letter comes several months after the House passed more than $500
billion in climate change investments as part of the president’s Build
Back Better Act.
-- Since then, the legislation has stalled in the Senate and talks
between the White House and some key senators have essentially stopped.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/15/democrats-urge-biden-to-restart-climate-negotiations-in-stalled-plan.html
/[ affordable housing is sustainable - only if it is not flammable. ]/
*People Deserve to Know Their Houses Are Going to Burn*
The old way of insuring against fires isn’t working anymore.
By Emma Marris
Since 2016, more than 50,000 structures in California have been
destroyed by wildfire. During fire season in the West, when the sky is
dim with smoke and the sun’s an eerie red, you might find yourself
breathing in tiny carbonized particles of what used to be someone’s
front-porch swing.
These fires are only going to get worse as the climate warms. Unless we
want to keep risking lives and inhaling incinerated dreams, something
has to change...
- -
The California Department of Insurance last month released new
regulations that require insurance companies to reward homeowners who
take steps to protect their home from wildfire, such as clearing brush
and trees from the immediate vicinity of their home or putting on a
fire-resistant roof. The policy is being widely praised. But it raises a
broader question: As climate risks to our property, our livelihoods, and
our lives mount, to what extent should we cushion the blow of these
dangers, and is there a limit to how much, or how long, we pay? Is there
a point where protecting people from risk begets more risk?
California makes a good case study because it leads the nation in both
annual number and extent of wildfires. Climate change—no surprise—is
making things much worse. Eighteen of the 20 largest fires in California
history have happened since the turn of the millennium—12 of them since
2016.
Mark Bove, a meteorologist and the senior vice president of
natural-catastrophe solutions for Munich Reinsurance America, told me
that the California-wildfire situation was rocking the insurance
industry. “We are trying to figure out this new landscape along with
everybody else,” he said. “All the premium earned over three decades of
writing business was gone in the wine-country and Camp fires.” One
estimate, from the actuarial firm Milliman, penciled out that two years
of fires undid 26 years of profits for the state’s insurers. (Insurers
themselves, though, were insulated in part from these losses by their
own reinsurance.)
Insurance companies are prohibited by state law from using models of
future conditions to set their rates, but with the fires of the past
five or so years, even backwards-looking risk calculations are beginning
to prompt insurers to raise rates or refuse to renew policies. Some
areas are becoming so risky that insurance companies simply won’t sell
policies there.
The California Department of Insurance last month released new
regulations that require insurance companies to reward homeowners who
take steps to protect their home from wildfire, such as clearing brush
and trees from the immediate vicinity of their home or putting on a
fire-resistant roof. The policy is being widely praised. But it raises a
broader question: As climate risks to our property, our livelihoods, and
our lives mount, to what extent should we cushion the blow of these
dangers, and is there a limit to how much, or how long, we pay? Is there
a point where protecting people from risk begets more risk?
California makes a good case study because it leads the nation in both
annual number and extent of wildfires. Climate change—no surprise—is
making things much worse. Eighteen of the 20 largest fires in California
history have happened since the turn of the millennium—12 of them since
2016.
Mark Bove, a meteorologist and the senior vice president of
natural-catastrophe solutions for Munich Reinsurance America, told me
that the California-wildfire situation was rocking the insurance
industry. “We are trying to figure out this new landscape along with
everybody else,” he said. “All the premium earned over three decades of
writing business was gone in the wine-country and Camp fires.” One
estimate, from the actuarial firm Milliman, penciled out that two years
of fires undid 26 years of profits for the state’s insurers. (Insurers
themselves, though, were insulated in part from these losses by their
own reinsurance.)
Insurance companies are prohibited by state law from using models of
future conditions to set their rates, but with the fires of the past
five or so years, even backwards-looking risk calculations are beginning
to prompt insurers to raise rates or refuse to renew policies. Some
areas are becoming so risky that insurance companies simply won’t sell
policies there.
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2022/03/wildfire-insurance-california-fair-plan/627065/
/[ Now necessary to watch ice melt ] /
*Sea ice that slowed the flow of Antarctic glaciers abruptly shatters in
three days*
by Lily Roberts, Earth Institute at Columbia University
MARCH 14, 2022
In just three days in late January, a mass of ice the size of
Philadelphia fragmented from the Larsen-B embayment on the Antarctic
Peninsula and floated away, after persisting there for more than a
decade. NASA satellites captured the break-up between January 19 and 21,
and with it saw calving of icebergs from Crane Glacier and its neighbors
as the sea ice no longer buttressed their fronts. Now more vulnerable to
melting and acceleration into the ocean, the glaciers that line the
Antarctic Peninsula could add directly to sea level...
- -
The Larsen Ice Shelf is situated along the northeast part of the
Antarctic Peninsula, in the Weddell Sea. It is divided into four regions
that occupy distinct embayments along the coastline, termed Larsen A, B,
C and D running north to south, each of which has undergone its own
changes in the last few decades. The great mass of the ice shelf holds
back the flow of many glaciers from the steep mountains towards the sea,
where they contribute to sea level rise. Larsen-A was the first to
disintegrate in 1995, followed by the abrupt partial collapse of
Larsen-B in 2002. Larsen-C was the fourth largest Antarctic ice shelf as
of July 2017, when a giant iceberg, named A68, calved from it, drawing
worldwide attention to the region. Being furthest south, and hence least
subject to warming, the only portion to be considered relatively stable
is Larsen-D.
The loss of 3,250 square kilometers of ice from the Larsen B ice shelf
in 2002 has been blamed on warmer ocean waters that melted it from
below, and on the presence of meltwater on its surface, which also
accelerated the loss of ice. With only a remnant portion left behind
following the collapse, this section was much less stable and vulnerable
to further disintegration. It grew thinner, which allowed glaciers on
the landward side to flow faster. Sea ice formed in the newly opened
area each winter, but it was not until 2011 that the sea ice remained
year round, and did not melt the following spring. Between 2011 and
2022, the glaciers were somewhat stabilized because the remnant
ice-shelf and sea ice that was permanent and attached, fast to the land,
blocking their path into the ocean. But this large expanse shattered
within three days in January, captured by NASA's Terra and Aqua satellites.
Stef Lhermitte, a professor at TU Delft, who specializes in geoscience
and remote sensing, explained to GlacierHub that "[it's] difficult to
tell what actually caused the disintegration as the sea ice was already
showing cracks prior to the breakup." Others have suggested warmer
summer temperatures and foehn winds that carried warm and wet air to the
region are partly responsible. The breakup of annual sea ice also
occurred earlier than usual this year, which would have also helped
destabilize the ice. Nonetheless, "such rapid breakups are often typical
for fast ice, as fast ice is often a frozen collection of loose sea ice
segments. Once this breaks, it quickly disintegrates," Lhermitte added.
The recent break-up of ice in the Larsen-B embayment is important
because the large glaciers that were buttressed by the ice are now
exposed to the sea. Unlike sea ice and melt from an ice shelf, glaciers
add directly to sea level. Although sea ice frozen to land is not as
effective as holding back the flow of glaciers than the original ice
shelf that was once present in the Larsen-B embayment, it has played a
role in minimizing contributions to sea level rise from the Antarctic
Peninsula over the last decade.
At the same time as scientists watched the breakup at Larsen-B, a new
study was published that details the life cycle of the huge iceberg that
calved from Larsen-C in 2017, A68. It was the sixth largest iceberg ever
documented by satellite observations, comparable to the size of Delaware
when it first broke from the ice shelf. A68 ceased to exist after
three-and-a-half years, when it underwent rapid disintegration near the
South Georgia Islands east of the southern tip of South America in
January 2021.
The path of the A68 iceberg between July 2017 and March 2021. As it
drifted in the vicinity of the South Georgia islands, it is estimated to
have dumped 152 billion tonnes of fresh water and nutrients into the
surrounding ocean. (As seen in Figure 1). Credit: Laura Gerrish
https://scx1.b-cdn.net/csz/news/800a/2022/sea-ice-that-slowed-th-2.jpg
Study lead author, Anne Braakmann-Folgmann, who has researched A68,
explains that concerns were raised when it calved because "it reduced
the remaining ice shelf area by a significant amount [and] Larsen-A and
-B had already disintegrated." Iceberg calving is known to influence the
stability of the parent ice shelf that it leaves behind, but since 2017,
what is left of Larsen-C has remained stable.
With warming temperatures and changing climatic patterns, notable events
along the Larsen ice shelf are predicted to occur more frequently.
Scientists are able to track each section of the Larsen Ice Shelf
closely, documenting ice shelf collapse, growth of sea ice and the long
survival of giant icebergs which threaten distant areas. As warming
continues, questions prevail over how long the Larsen-D portion will
remain stable. Its location closer to the South Pole has protected it
from the impacts of climate change—so far. Reducing emissions is not
only important for ice on the Antarctic Peninsula, but for the larger
East and West Antarctic ice sheets, too.
https://phys.org/news/2022-03-sea-ice-antarctic-glaciers-abruptly.html
/[ Dave Roberts gets to drive a nice electric car ] /
//*The lovely Ford Mustang Mach-E and the danger of electric cars*
So. Much. Power.
David Roberts - March 15, 2022
A representative from Ford ... offered to loan me a Ford Mustang Mach-E
electric vehicle for a week. I've been driving it for a few days and I
thought I would report my early impressions, along with some larger
reservations.
*Holy s*** EVs are fun to drive*
I should note up top that I’m not a car guy. I don’t know much about
them, don’t much like them, and don’t much like driving them. I never
learned to drive a stick shift or change the oil. I don’t drool over
muscle cars or know what “hemi” means. Truth be told, I kind of hate car
culture.
I should also note that I have only ever driven two EVs in my life. The
first was the Kia EV6, which I test-drove last week. The second is this
Ford. I can say very little about the fine differences in EV driving
experience.
In short, I am the least qualified car reviewer on the planet...
- -
The ride is smooth and quiet, the stereo system kicks ass, and that
heated steering wheel … I mean, I’ve found nothing to complain about.
And I’m pretty good at complaining. Car & Driver named the Ford Mach-E
its EV of the year in 2021 and far be it from me to disagree.
*It’s not clear Americans can handle this kind of power... *
- -
EVs are such an enormous leap forward in environmental terms that it
feels somewhat perverse to question them, but nonetheless, despite all
the hype, despite all the fun, it's worth remembering that the top
priority — not just for climate hawks but for humanists of all sorts —
should be reducing the need for, and number of, cars.
The top priority should be making land use and planning choices that
encourage walkable communities, with amenities mixed in, so people can
get out of cars and get onto their feet or bicycles.
EVs are fun to drive. But no kind of driving is better than walking in
the fresh air, getting exercise and mixing with your neighbors. I hope
EVs don't pull our attention away from that fact.
https://www.volts.wtf/p/the-lovely-ford-mustang-mach-e-and?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjoxNjgzNTA5LCJwb3N0X2lkIjo0OTk4ODk0NywiXyI6IjBWZ2lzIiwiaWF0IjoxNjQ3MzA4Nzk0LCJleHAiOjE2NDczMTIzOTQsImlzcyI6InB1Yi0xOTMwMjQiLCJzdWIiOiJwb3N0LXJlYWN0aW9uIn0.6MQnP03CSQBqg6TLCu5D1LLoEEI4Fl-BHV-064ZxieM&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email&s=r#play
/[ Don't miss the great counter-misinformation video on flopping ]/
*U.S. Oil & Gas Companies Trying To Profit From War In Ukraine | Climate
Town*
Mar 9, 2022
ClimateTown https://www.youtube.com/c/climatetown
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJOuyckvDGY
/ [ It may be wise to follow global warming like a global sports
event of adaptation ]/
/[ See the movie - then action ]/
*Rebellion review – thoughtful documentary telling the real story behind
Extinction Rebellion*
How an unlikely bunch of grassroots activists changed the face of
climate-change protest in Britain forever
Cath Clarke -- 15 Mar 2022
This balanced, thoughtful documentary tells the story of Extinction
Rebellion from the inside. It’s directed by first-timers Maia Kenworthy
and Elena Sánchez Bellot, who capture the anything-is-possible euphoria
of the first wave of protests in April 2019 – activists feeling on the
right side of history, no longer powerless and alone with their
anxieties about climate change.
One of the activists is Farhana Yamin, an environmental lawyer who
superglued herself to Shell’s headquarters in London. A seriously
impressive no-nonsense woman, she has spent more than three decades
trying to make a difference from the inside, attending nearly every
major climate summit since 1991. Frustrated by the blah blah blah and
inaction (and the lobbying funded by the fossil fuel industry), she
joins the protesters. Her husband beams with pride as the police arrive.
Her son taps into his phone: “Mum is being arrested outside Shell”
(presumably on the family’s WhatsApp group).
The film-makers chronicle the inner tensions at XR with fairness and
sensitivity – this is a documentary that you feel you can trust. One of
XR’s co-founders Roger Hallam, an organic farmer, becomes a splintering
figure. His laser focus and stubbornness, so vital in starting a
movement from scratch, begins to look self-righteous and blinkered. When
XR members oppose flying drones close to Heathrow, he says it’s his job
to be unpopular. It’s painful watching footage of angry rush-hour
commuters confronting XR protesters glued to a train in east London.
Social media reactions flash up on screen: “Middle class telling working
class what to do.”
Hallam falls out with his daughter Savannah, who, like other young
protesters, seems to feel frozen out of decision-making at XR. Activists
of colour and others feel passionately about putting climate justice at
the centre of the transition to renewable energy. Children as young as
five are mining cobalt for solar panels and electric cars, says one
woman. “I don’t want the same world but eco.”
This is a film that gets a lot done in less than 90 minutes – it could
easily have run to double that length. There’s only a bit here on the
police crackdown on XR, which does lead to a wonderfully English moment
in which an officer stops a woman who looks to be in her 60s. He
suspects that she might be harbouring items that could be used in
criminal damage. She opens her handbag: “Gingerbread, a waterproof and a
flask of tea?”
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2022/mar/15/rebellion-review-thoughtful-documentary-telling-the-real-story-behind-extinction-rebellion
/[ Methane risk ]/
*‘Imminent’ tipping point threatening Europe’s permafrost peatlands*
14 March 2022
Large swathes of northern Europe and western Siberia may become
“climatically unsuitable” for carbon-rich permafrost peatlands within a
few decades, even under moderate warming scenarios, a new study warns.
These carbon-rich landscapes span more than 1.4m square kilometres (km2)
and contain around 40bn tonnes of carbon – about twice what is stored in
Europe’s forests.
The study finds that under a moderate warming scenario, around 75% of
this area could be too warm or too wet to maintain permafrost by the
2060s. However, the researchers stress, how much carbon is released –
and over what timescales – is very much an open question...
https://www.carbonbrief.org/imminent-tipping-point-threatening-europes-permafrost-peatlands
/[The news archive - looking back]/
*March 16, 2011*
CBS News reports on the aggressive anti-science attitudes of the 112th
Congress.
All 31 Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Committee declined
on Tuesday to vote in favor of a series of amendments acknowledging the
scientific consensus around climate change.
*House Republicans reject climate change science*
BY LUCY MADISON
MARCH 16, 2011 - CBS NEWS
The three amendments were attached to a bill aiming to curb the
Environmental Protection Agency's power to regulate greenhouse
gasses. They posited that "Congress accepts the scientific finding
... that 'warming of the climate system is unequivocal'"; that the
scientific evidence regarding climate change "is compelling"; and
that "human-caused climate change is a threat to public health and
welfare."
The committee passed the measure, but voted down the amendments,
with 30 of the 31 Republicans voting against them and one - Marsha
Blackburn, of Tennessee - declining to vote either way. Democrats
unanimously voted in favor of the amendments.
Republicans, who have strongly opposed Obama administration efforts
to regulate greenhouse gasses, have been pushing to strip the EPA of
its regulatory power. The party blocked Democratic efforts last year
to pass climate change legislation.
Rep. Henry Waxman (Calif.), the committee's ranking Democrat who
offered one of the three amendments, said they should not even be
necessary because the "finding is so obviously correct."
Rep. Joe Barton (R-Tex.), however, contended that the science of the
issue was "not settled."
"My good friend from California tries to make it clear that the
science is settled. I would say it's not settled," Barton said of
Waxman's amendment, according to the Hill.
The global scientific community is largely unified in the belief
that the climate is warming as a result of human actions, among them
the release of greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere.
Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) said Republicans' rejection of Waxman's
amendment showed "what it means to be on the wrong side of history
and the wrong side of science."
Daniel Lashof, the Director of the Climate Center at the National
Resources Defense Council (NRDC), told Hotsheet the GOP refusal to
acknowledge climate science reflected Republicans "substituting
ideology for science" in the face of political interests.
"They started with a conclusion - which is they don't want to limit
carbon pollution - and then worked backwards and put themselves in a
position where they had to deny science," he said, adding that he
thought the tendency to "ignore the facts and substitute politics"
was "disturbing."
Politico reported in January that nearly all of the leading GOP
presidential contenders have at some point expressed concerns about
the impact of climate change - including Tim Pawlenty, Mitt Romney,
and Mike Huckabee. (Huckabee is even purported to have at one time
supported cap-and-trade legislation - a charge he now vehemently
denies.)
Senate Democrats are also scrambling to block efforts in their
chamber to keep the EPA from having regulatory power over greenhouse
gases .
In a statement on Tuesday night, a White House spokesperson slammed
the Senate GOP's efforts, arguing that an amendment from Senate
Republicans "rolls back the Clean Air Act and harms Americans'
health by taking away our ability to decrease air pollution."
"Instead of holding big polluters accountable, this amendment
overrules public health experts and scientists," the statement
continued, according to the Hill. "Finally, at a time when America's
families are struggling with the cost of gasoline, the amendment
would undercut fuel efficiency standards that will save Americans
money at the pump while also decreasing our reliance on foreign oil."
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/house-republicans-reject-climate-change-science/
- -
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/20220316/8fd82540/attachment.htm>
More information about the TheClimate.Vote
mailing list