[✔️] March 22 , 2022 - Daily Global Warming News Digest

[👀 Richard Pauli]

/*March 22, 2022*/

/[ DW documentary is about finding fresh water -  excellent - 40 min video]/
*Our drinking water - Is the world drying up? | DW Documentary*
Mar 20, 2022
DW Documentary

Only 0.3 percent of the Earth's total water supply is suitable for human 
consumption. Ominously, this precious resource is beginning to shrink. 
Natural water reservoirs are drying up due to climate change.

Glaciologist Daniel Farinotti surveys melting glaciers in the Swiss 
Alps. If glaciers continue to melt at the current rate, he says, there 
will be no ice left by the end of the century. The disappearance of 
glacial meltwater would have fatal consequences.

 From the heights of the Swiss Alpine glaciers, the documentary travels 
down to the seafloor, off the coast of Malta. Here, the crew of the 
German expedition ship "Sonne" wants to track down mysterious freshwater 
deposits in the Mediterranean. Next up is Peru where, in a bid to 
counteract the threat of water shortages, work is underway on projects 
that use ancient Incan methods.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_t6sg2C-jqw



[BBC says... ]
*Climate change: 'Madness' to turn to fossil fuels because of Ukraine war*
By Matt McGrath
The UN Secretary General says the rush to use fossil fuels because of 
the war in Ukraine is "madness" and threatens global climate targets.

The invasion of Ukraine has seen rapid rises in the prices of coal, oil 
and gas as countries scramble to replace Russian sources.

But Antonio Guterres warns that these short-term measures might "close 
the window" on the Paris climate goals...
- -
"This is madness. Addiction to fossil fuels is mutually assured 
destruction."

Countries must "accelerate the phase out of coal and all fossil fuels," 
and implement a rapid and sustainable energy transition.

It is "the only true pathway to energy security."

Mr Guterres says the solutions to the climate crisis mostly lie in the 
hands of the G20 group of richest nations, which produce around 80% of 
global emissions.

While many of these countries have taken great steps to slash emissions 
by 2030, there are a "handful of holdouts, such as Australia."

Coal must be banished, Mr Guterres says, with a full phase-out for 
richer nations by 2030, and 2040 for all others, including China.

Coal "is a stupid investment," according to the Secretary General, 
"leading to billions in stranded assets."...
- -
He says the way forward is to build coalitions to help major emerging 
economies to move rapidly away from fossil fuels.

He highlights the case of South Africa. During COP26 several countries 
including the UK, US and others agreed to an $8.5bn financing programme 
to end South Africa's reliance on coal.

Mr Guterres says the pieces are coming together for similar coalitions 
in Indonesia, Vietnam and elsewhere.

Money is one of the key problems in addressing the climate issue and Mr 
Guterres has called for a major ramping up in finance to help countries 
adapt to rising temperatures.

He points out that right now, one person in three globally is not 
covered by early warning systems for disasters - in Africa six in ten 
people are not protected.
In 2022, he argues, richer countries must finally make good on their 
well-worn promise to provide a $100bn a year to the developing world.
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-60815547



/[  most certainly. A badly needed reform ] /
*Universities must reject fossil fuel cash for climate research, say 
academics*
Open letter from 500 academics likens fossil-energy funding of climate 
solutions to tobacco industry disinformation
Fiona Harvey, environment correspondent - 21 Mar 2022
Universities must stop accepting funding from fossil fuel companies to 
conduct climate research, even if the research is aimed at developing 
green and low-carbon technology, an influential group of distinguished 
academics has said.

Rowan Williams, the former archbishop of Canterbury, the Nasa data 
scientist Peter Kalmus, and prominent US climate scientist Michael Mann 
are among close to 500 academics from the US and the UK who have written 
an open letter addressed to all university leaders in the two countries, 
calling on them to reject all funding from fossil fuel companies.

Accepting money from fossil fuel companies represented “an inherent 
conflict of interest” and could “taint” essential research and 
“compromise” academic freedom, they wrote. For the companies, it was a 
chance to “greenwash” their reputations and skew the findings of 
research in a way favourable to them...
The letter draws a comparison to the tobacco industry and its 
disinformation campaigns, noting that numerous public heath and research 
institutions reject tobacco funding for these reasons and calling on 
fossil fuel cash to be treated similarly.

“Universities and the research they produce are vital to delivering a 
rapid, just transition away from fossil fuels. However, such efforts are 
undermined by fossil fuel industry funding. Academics should not be 
forced to choose between researching climate solutions and inadvertently 
aiding corporate greenwashing,” the signatories wrote.

Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at 
Pennsylvania State University, told the Guardian: “This sort of funding 
has been used to compromise leading academic institutions. It’s a 
two-for for polluters: they purchase the imprimatur of these 
institutions and their presumed authority and objectivity, while funding 
research that often translates into advocacy for false solutions and 
‘kick the can down the road’ prescriptions like massive carbon capture, 
which is unproven at scale, and geoengineering, which is downright 
dangerous. That is entirely the wrong path forward.”

Genevieve Guenther, founder and director of the End Climate Silence 
campaign, and an affiliate at the New School university in New York, 
said: “Funding research enables oil and gas companies to ground their 
promotional statements in enough truth to give substance to the green 
shadows in which they hide their most polluting and deadly activities. 
We must remove fossil-energy interests from our institutions so that our 
children can have a chance at a liveable future.”

Universities have been under pressure from their students and some 
academics for several years to divest their investments, such as pension 
funds and endowments, away from fossil fuels, and many have done so. 
However, this is the first major call from senior academics for them to 
go further and cut all research ties with fossil fuel companies.

There is no clear estimate for how much money universities accept from 
fossil fuel companies, as most do not publish their sources. An 
investigation for the Observer last year found UK universities alone had 
taken at least £89m from oil companies in the previous four years.

Some scientists disagree with the letter. James Hansen, former chief 
scientist at Nasa and one of the first scientists to warn governments of 
the impending climate crisis, told the Guardian: “It’s the wrong focus, 
causing young people to waste their energy on unproductive activities, 
while they actually have the potential to lead a solution.”

Bob Ward, policy director at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate 
Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics, said it 
was reasonable for universities to accept funding from fossil fuel 
companies if those businesses showed genuine commitment to transforming 
themselves. “Fossil fuel companies that are genuinely committed to the 
transition [to a low-carbon economy], including net zero emissions, can 
and should receive help from university researchers, particularly with 
the development of technologies for carbon capture and storage, 
renewables and emissions reductions. However, universities should be 
careful about accepting funding directly or indirectly from oil, gas and 
coal companies that are not genuinely committed to the clean energy 
transition and which are attempting to greenwash their reputations.”

A spokesperson for Imperial College London, which the Observer found 
last year had accepted £54m from oil companies since 2017, said: 
“Decarbonisation is our top priority when working with energy companies. 
This goal requires a radical shift in industrial systems, technologies 
and business models in the energy sector. We are using our influence and 
expertise to accelerate this transition and actively engage with energy 
companies to push them to meet the Paris Agreement targets. We will 
monitor progress and only continue to work with companies who 
demonstrate commitment and credible action to achieving these targets.”

Some academics argue that fossil fuel funding is needed to develop the 
technologies necessary for a low-carbon economy, and that if western 
universities reject such funding it will be accepted in other countries 
around the world.

Guenther disagreed: “It’s a myth that fossil-energy companies are 
spending large sums to aid the green transition. According to the IEA’s 
2021 World Energy Investment report, a mere 1% of fossil-energy 
companies’ capital expenditure is devoted to research, development or 
deployment of technologies that either abate or do not produce 
greenhouse gas emissions.” /[It is not a myth that they spend huge 
amounts to fund other institutions that do the influencing... like API, 
Donors Trust, ]/

At the end of this month, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 
will publish the third part of its comprehensive review of climate 
science, examining the potential ways of cutting greenhouse gas 
emissions. This will include technology such as renewable energy and 
nuclear power, and novel ideas such as sucking carbon dioxide out of the 
air.

The report will throw the spotlight on the potential technological 
solutions to the climate crisis, which will require tens or hundreds of 
billions of pounds in funding to be brought to market and deployed 
widely around the world.

Jason Hickel, an economic anthropologist who is signatory to the letter, 
said the funding should come from governments. “The US and UK are among 
the richest countries on Earth, and their governments enjoy total 
monetary sovereignty. They have the capacity to finance the necessary 
research many times over, at the touch of a button. Most of the major 
innovations and public projects that have changed history over the past 
century have relied on public funding for research,” said Hickel, who is 
professor of environmental science at the Autonomous University of 
Barcelona and a fellow of the LSE.

The letter did not specify whether companies with interests in fossil 
fuels amid a broader portfolio should be included in the ban. Ilana 
Cohen, a Harvard student who led the organisation of the letter, said it 
was directed at the top 200 fossil fuel companies.

Cohen said the organisers had confined the call to US and UK 
universities for now as these are where many fossil fuel companies are 
concentrating their funding, but that it could be widened in future to a 
global effort.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2022/mar/21/universities-must-reject-fossil-fuel-cash-for-climate-research-say-academics



/[  Arizona newspaper report  ] /
*How low can the Colorado River go? Drought forces states to face tough 
choices about water*
Brandon Loomis
Arizona Republic  3-21-2022
SALT LAKE CITY — Water managers from across the Colorado River Basin are 
preparing to negotiate new rules for allocating the river's dwindling 
flow and sharing the pain of a deepening shortage.

They’re adapting the 100-year-old Colorado River Compact to a river that 
little resembles the bountiful gusher that negotiators from seven states 
and the federal government in 1922 thought — or hoped — would bless the 
Southwest forever. The stakes rise with every foot that Lake Mead and 
Lake Powell fall, as the states and the water users within them 
recognize they’re due for a tighter squeeze.

Arizona gets more than a third of its water from the river, growing 
abundant crops around Yuma and homes around Phoenix and Tucson. The Las 
Vegas area gets most of its water from the river and has built a deeper 
pipe in Lake Mead to assure its continued access. Late-developing states 
like Wyoming use water for ranching and energy development, and are 
hoping to continue growing on it.

“We’re all going to lose,” Southern Nevada Water Authority General 
Manager John Entsminger told his counterparts from across the watershed 
on Friday at a river law symposium at the University of Utah’s Wallace 
Stegner Center for Land, Resources and the Environment.

His warning was less a lament than a call to action on behalf of a river 
that some 40 million people from the headwaters in Wyoming and Colorado 
to the delta in Mexico are using up.

“We’re up to the challenge because we don’t have a choice,” said 
Entsminger, whose agency in Las Vegas has embraced water austerity by 
banning most new grass lawns and golf courses and restricting new pool 
sizes.

Before the states, Indigenous communities and water districts can agree 
on a new plan to more conservatively divvy the water, they’ll need to 
agree on how low the river might go.

The 1922 negotiators asserted that the river could supply more than the 
15 million acre-feet distributed among the seven states that share it, 
with some left over to flow into Mexico. The 2022 negotiators are 
debating whether they should plan for just 11 million acre-feet, as 
Entsminger’s Nevada agency already has penciled into its water security 
plans.

Today in Arizona, a 326,000-gallon acre-foot is about enough to supply 
three households for a year.

Since 2000, the river has delivered on average 12.3 million acre-feet a 
year, which is generally a couple of million less than the region has 
used. Consequently, the giant reservoirs that were full back then have 
tanked, Lake Mead to about a third of capacity, Lake Powell to a quarter.

Although the compact assigned specific shares to the upper and lower 
basins of the 1,450-mile river, the U.S. Interior Department’s Bureau of 
Reclamation in 2007 agreed with the states on an adaptive plan that 
reduces some users’ deliveries when reservoirs dive past certain 
thresholds. States including Arizona have built on those rules, 
sometimes paying tribes and other users to keep water in Lake Mead. But 
the guidelines expire at the end of 2025, and the states, tribes and 
water districts will spend the next few years debating a new, likely 
harsher, blueprint.

A federally declared shortage based on the 2007 rules already has fallen 
hard on some users who aren’t high on the river’s list of first-in-time, 
first-in-right appropriations, such as central Arizona farmers.

Planning for a regular supply of just 11 million acre-feet would 
obliterate long-held assumptions about how much water some or all of the 
users thought they were entitled for future growth. Contingencies for 
that level could severely limit growth potential in the Upper Basin, 
where Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico and Utah are far from fully 
developing their collective 7.5 million acre-foot share outlined by the 
compact.

Those states are required to send on average another 7.5 million 
acre-feet downstream to the Lower Basin states of Arizona, Nevada and 
California, with another 1.5 million acre-feet promised to Mexico. If 
the states and water users agree, the Lower Basin could cut deeply into 
its already developed share, which many observers believe would spread 
the suffering more fairly. Failure to agree would leave the decision 
solely to the U.S. Interior secretary, or to the courts if states sue 
each other.
*
**'We have to plan for less'*
While the water experts who gathered in the S. J. Quinney College of 
Law’s moot courtroom know they must plan on less water, some aren’t 
ready to publicly commit to a number that will alarm water users back 
home. Arizona Department of Water Resources Director Tom Buschatzke, for 
instance, needs legislative approval for any deal he might make.

“I won’t say 11,” Buschatzke quipped from the symposium stage, “because 
I might get arrested when I get off the plane in Phoenix tonight.”

Climate scientists who study and project the Colorado’s flows as the 
region warms believe even 11 million acre-feet could be wishful 
thinking. Some studies suggest heat’s toll on the water supply will drop 
the river to just 9 million acre-feet in coming decades, said Brad 
Udall, a Colorado State University researcher who has focused on the 
river for 20 years.

“I could live with 11” as a planning guideline, even if it’s optimistic, 
Udall said. That projection is stark enough to require bold action that 
water managers could later build upon. It would follow the trajectory 
that scientists like Udall say represents the region’s heat-induced 
aridification, as opposed to temporary drought.

Others think it would be wise to plan contingencies to protect a river 
that might deliver only 9 million acre-feet. Without adjustments to the 
Lower Basin’s guaranteed deliveries, a river that’s routinely that small 
would leave the Upper Basin less than half what it currently takes out.

“We have to plan for less,” said Colorado River District General Manager 
Andy Mueller, who represents water users in western Colorado. “You don’t 
plan a system on hope or politics.”

Colorado River:Dry boat ramps, exposed rocks at Lake Powell reveal the 
cost of a long drought

*The expanded role of tribes*
Tribal representatives and attorneys said federal and state negotiators 
must include Indigenous perspectives in these talks, far more than in 
past rounds. The original compact, in particular, did not consider the 
needs of tribes who now hold or, in some cases, expect to hold 
sufficient water rights to make critical contributions to climate 
adaptation and conservation of reservoir storage.

Everyone who shares the river must use it responsibly and in a way that 
protects a semblance of nature and harmony, said Nora McDowell, a member 
of the river’s Water and Tribes Initiative and former chairwoman of the 
Fort Mojave Tribe on the Lower Colorado.

“We have a responsibility to change what we’ve learned in the past 
hundred years of this compact being in place,” McDowell said. Tribes 
need a voice to ensure that the river itself is no longer an 
afterthought, she said. “It is time.”

Whatever volume the parties pick and plan for, those in the Upper Basin 
will want to alter the hard requirement that they deliver a set amount 
of water to the states below Glen Canyon Dam near the Arizona-Utah state 
line. And some in the Lower Basin concede they’ll likely have to bend on 
that provision to reach a deal.

Entsminger told The Arizona Republic that water users in both the upper 
and lower regions will have to bend, or they won’t reach an agreement. 
Asked if that meant the Lower Basin might have to cut back enough to 
allow for an even split of future flows with the Upper Basin, he said he 
was not ready to discuss how to allocate the water.

*“A 50-50 split would go a long way to solving problems,” said Amy Haas, 
who directs the Colorado River Authority of Utah.*
That’s certainly true for her state, but an even split would likely 
deepen the pain in Arizona, where the state has already maxed out its 
use of the river and would have to cut further to allow upstream 
development. Arizona’s Buschatzke, like Nevada’s Entsminger, has not put 
numbers on a preferred rationing plan, but said all of the river’s users 
must share the benefits and the pain.

“We need a discussion about equitable shares of the river,” said Udall, 
the Colorado State researcher. The Upper Basin states are still using 
less than two-thirds of what they were promised in 1922, and could not 
have foreseen back then how climate change would penalize them for their 
slower development.

Still, he told The Republic, the states will likely need to agree on a 
deal that doesn’t force an even split on the Lower Basin, where 
California and Arizona have the watershed’s largest populations.

The Bureau of Reclamation in coming weeks will invite suggestions for 
what the new guidelines should consider, and it will launch a formal 
environmental review next year. The agency must balance the needs of 
seven states and 30 tribes while honoring treaty obligations with Mexico 
during, the agency’s program manager Carly Jerla said, and will need 
those partners to pull together.

“Our job here has never been harder,” Jerla said.
https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/arizona-environment/2022/03/21/climate-change-dries-colorado-river-force-new-rules-users/9453476002/



/[ honesty in journalism? ]/

*How can journalism get better at covering climate change? Being a 
bummer might help*

A new study of social media about a climate change conference found 
journalists’ negative tweets gained far more traction with users than 
positive ones. That’s one of the findings in this new collection of 
research into climate journalism.
By JOSHUA BENTON @jbenton March 21, 2022...

There has certainly been progress in recent years. The simple existence 
of anthropogenic climate change is treated as a he-said-she-said 
question than it used to be, and there are dozens of initiatives aimed 
at doing more and better reporting on how we’re changing the earth. But 
the continuing challenge is what drew me to the new special issue of 
Journalism Practice, which is all about the intersection of climate 
change and journalism and which launched on Friday. There are 17 
articles in all, and they’re all un-paywalled and available for anyone 
to read. Here were a few of the highlights of “Journalism, Climate 
Change, and Reporting Synergistic Effects of the Anthropocene” for me.

https://www.niemanlab.org/2022/03/how-can-journalism-get-better-at-covering-climate-change-being-a-bummer-might-help/

- -

/[See also source matter ]/
*Journalism Practice, Volume 16, Issue 2-3 (2022)*
https://www.tandfonline.com/toc/rjop20/16/2-3
https://www.tandfonline.com/toc/rjop20/16/2-3

- -

/[hear speakers from Brazil, Sweden, England & USA talk climate change & 
data journalism/science? Join us FRIDAY 11 a.m. Eastern US Time/ 3 p.m. 
UK Time]/
https://twitter.com/JournPractice/status/1504599335195004936/photo/1
https://twitter.com/JournPractice/status/1504599335195004936




/[   Down under ethics ] /
*Australia to make Big Tech hand over misinformation data*
By Byron Kaye - March 21, 2022
SYDNEY, March 21 (Reuters) - Australia's media regulator will be able to 
force internet companies to share data about how they have handled 
misinformation and disinformation under new laws that will bolster 
government efforts to rein in Big Tech.

The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) will also be 
able to enforce an internet industry code on uncooperative platforms, 
the government said on Monday, joining others around the world seeking 
to reduce the spread of harmful falsehoods online...
The planned laws are a response to an ACMA investigation that found 
four-fifths of Australian adults had experienced misinformation about 
COVID-19 and 76% thought online platforms should do more to cut the 
amount of false and misleading content online.

The laws broadly align with efforts by Europe to curb damaging online 
content, which are due to take effect by the end of 2022, although the 
European Union has said it wants even tougher measures to stop 
disinformation given some of the output from Russian state-owned media 
during the invasion of Ukraine...
"Digital platforms must take responsibility for what is on their sites 
and take action when harmful or misleading content appears," 
Communications Minister Paul Fletcher said in a statement.

Australians were most likely to see misinformation on larger services 
like Meta Platforms's Facebook (FB.O) and Twitter Inc (TWTR.N), the ACMA 
said.

False narratives typically started with "highly emotive and engaging 
posts within small online conspiracy groups" and were "amplified by 
international influencers, local public figures, and by coverage in the 
media", it added...
The authority also noted that disinformation, which involves 
intentionally spreading false information to influence politics or sow 
discord, was continuing to target Australians. Facebook had removed four 
disinformation campaigns in Australia from 2019 to 2020, it said.

It said conspiracy groups often urged people to join smaller platforms 
with looser moderation policies, like Telegram. If those platforms 
rejected industry-set content guidelines "they may present a higher risk 
to the Australian community", the ACMA said.

The crackdown adds another element to the ruling conservative 
government's assertion that it has taken a big stick approach to tech 
giants, as it faces an election that is due by May that most polls 
suggest it will lose.

Fletcher said the new powers for the regulator would be introduced to 
parliament in late 2022, meaning it would likely be up to the current 
opposition Labor party to shepherd them through if the government loses 
the election.

A spokesperson for Labor's shadow communications minister, Michelle 
Rowland, told Reuters the opposition supported the expanded powers but 
the government had taken too long to introduce them since they were 
recommended in 2019.

DIGI, an Australian industry body representing Facebook, Alphabet's 
(GOOGL.O) Google, Twitter and video site TikTok, said it supported the 
recommendations and noted it had already set up a system to process 
complaints about misinformation.
https://www.reuters.com/technology/australia-make-big-tech-hand-over-misinformation-data-2022-03-21/



/[  Classic lecture from 2014 is still an excellent introduction -- the 
only update is that CO2 levels now are nearly 420 ppm ] /
*Getting Serious About Climate Change - Charles David Keeling Annual 
Lecture*
Jun 30, 2014
University of California Television (UCTV)
The 2014 Keeling Lecture features UCSD School of International Relations 
and Pacific Studies Professor David Victor, an internationally 
recognized leader in research on energy and climate change policy. He is 
the Director of the school’s new Laboratory on International Law and 
Regulation, and author of numerous books including his most recent, 
“Global Warming Gridlock: Creating More Effective Strategies for 
Protecting the Planet.” [7/2014] [Show ID: 27846]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERqGMQsihm4



/[The news archive - looking back]/
*March 22, 2016*
The New York Times reports:
"The nations of the world agreed years ago to try to limit global 
warming to a level they hoped would prove somewhat tolerable. But a 
group of leading climate scientists warned on Tuesday that permitting a 
warming of that magnitude would actually be highly dangerous.

"The likely consequences would include killer storms stronger than any 
in modern times, the disintegration of large parts of the polar ice 
sheets, and a rise of the sea sufficient to begin drowning the world’s 
coastal cities before the end of this century, the scientists declared.

"'We’re in danger of handing young people a situation that’s out of 
their control,' said James E. Hansen, the retired NASA climate scientist 
who led the new research. The findings were released Tuesday morning by 
a European science journal, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics."

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/23/science/global-warming-sea-level-carbon-dioxide-emissions.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JP-cRqCQRc8&feature=youtu.be

  - -

More information from 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.