[✔️] March 28, 2022 - Daily Global Warming News Digest
👀 Richard Pauli
richard at theclimate.vote
Mon Mar 28 09:54:49 EDT 2022
/*March 28, 2022*/
/[ Fire at the National Center for Atmospheric Research -- fire is
named NCAR ] /
*NCAR wildfire prompts evacuations near Boulder, Colorado*
March 27, 2022 NCAR wildfire prompts evacuations near Boulder, Colorado
The fire has burned 189 acres south of the Mesa Laboratory of the
National Center for Atmospheric Research, on the southwest side of the city
The NCAR Fire that started at about 2:08 Saturday afternoon on the
southwest edge of Boulder, Colorado initially required the evacuation of
19,000 people and 8,000 homes. By early Sunday morning the blaze had
slowed and the evacuation area had been reduced, affecting 1,629 people
and 699 housing units. The fire was mapped Sunday morning at 189 acres.
They are calling it 21 percent contained.
Regarding the status of the fire, Incident Commander Mike Smith of
Boulder Fire Rescue said Sunday morning, “I think right now we’re in a
good position. The wind speeds are nothing like they were during the
Marshall Fire, we’ve got a lot of good resources in place, we have full
structure protection groups as well as assets up on the hill. I think as
long as the weather does what it is supposed to do today and tomorrow
we’re gonna be in good shape.”
The fire came within 1,000 yards of homes on the southwest side of
Boulder, but no structures have been destroyed. The incident is near the
Mesa Laboratory of the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR).
The Marshall Fire, pushed by winds gusting at 60 to 100 mph, on December
30 spread rapidly as it destroyed more than 1,000 homes. Most were in
the city of Louisville and the town of Superior. It started about 4
miles southeast of the NCAR Fire.
Mr. Smith said there have been no injuries. The cause is under
investigation but the area of origin has been identified as being on the
northwest side of the fire in the Bear Canyon/Bear Creek area.
Resources available on the fire Sunday will include 110 personnel, 2
fixed wing air tankers, and one helicopter. Initially on Saturday over
200 firefighters from about 30 agencies responded.
The plan for today is to reinforce the fire line and “corral the fire up
into the rocks and snow”, Mr. Smith said. The evacuation areas will be
reevaluated today.
“Good planning, good prep, and a lot of good mitigation work are the
reasons why we had good success today,” said Incident Commander Mike
Smith. “The forecast today is for north and northwest winds which is a
little less favorable [than in an earlier prediction] but the wind
speeds are not that high, 15 maximum to 20. We have the plan in place to
create more evacuations [if necessary], our hope is that we don’t have
to do any of those.”
Some nearby water reservoirs were frozen and were not available for
firefighting helicopters as a source of water, according to
@mitchellbyars, a reporter with the Daily Camera.
The forecast for Monday in the fire area is for 80 degrees, very low
humidity dropping to 10 percent, and light winds ranging from 5 to 12
mph out of the southwest.
The intensity of this fire in a few places was pretty high, Mr. Smith
said, but for the most part it was a pretty low intensity fire. He was
also the Incident Commander on the Marshall Fire.
“Between aggressive initial attack and having the aviation assets, the
single engine air tankers being able to put some retardant down in
between the homes was a real benefit,” said Mr. Smith.
On the Marshall Fire strong winds prevented aircraft from dropping water
or retardant as homes were burning.
When asked by a reporter, “It’s been a long year — how are you feeling?”
Mr. Smith replied, “It’s March but it feels like it’s November. No,
we’re doing good. We’re nervous about the season coming up. When you
look at the long term forecast for the upcoming season I think this is
just a sign of the way things are going to go…We only have 365 fire days
a year,” he said with a smile.
https://wildfiretoday.com/2022/03/27/ncar-wildfire-prompts-evacuations-near-boulder-colorado/
/[ Higher education ] /
*Stanford transitions to 100 percent renewable electricity as second
solar plant goes online*
Stanford completes the university’s transition to 100 percent renewable
electricity as Solar Generating Station #2 begins commercial operation.
BY CHELCEY ADAMI - - MARCH 24, 2022
Stanford’s second solar generating plant went online this month,
completing the university’s years-long transition to 100 percent
renewable electricity and marking a major milestone in its larger
journey to reach net zero carbon emissions on campus.
Stanford Solar Generating Station #2 (SSGS2), Stanford’s portion of a
larger solar and energy storage project called Slate, began commercial
operation in mid-March. (Image credit: Goldman Sachs Renewable Energy)
Stanford Solar Generating Station #2 (SSGS2), Stanford’s portion of a
larger solar and energy storage project called Slate, began commercial
operation in mid-March. The 63-megawatt solar photovoltaic plant sits on
approximately 420 acres in Central California, near Lemoore.
The station serves as the final component in the Stanford Energy System
Innovations (SESI), a complete redesign and transition of Stanford
University’s energy system from a 100 percent fossil fuel-based,
combined heat and power plant to grid-sourced electricity and a more
efficient electric heat recovery system.
“As this new solar plant comes online, Stanford will achieve the
important milestone of producing enough renewable electricity to exceed
what the university consumes,” said President Marc Tessier-Lavigne. “But
our work to achieve a more sustainable future is only beginning.
“As we make our operations greener, we’re also committed to advancing
global solutions through our mission of research and education,” he
added. “Our new school focused on climate and sustainability, which
opens its doors this fall, will serve as a focal point for these efforts.”
SSGS2 includes a 200-megawatt battery energy storage system that helps
create a better match between demand (such as nighttime use of
electricity) and resource (electricity generated during the daytime).
Excess energy generated from the plant will help sustainably support
California’s electric grid, said Aurora Winslade, director of Stanford’s
Office of Sustainability.
Recurrent Energy, a wholly owned subsidiary of Canadian Solar, developed
and operates the facility. Goldman Sachs Renewable Power purchased it
from Recurrent, which now serves as project manager.
Stanford is an “offtaker,” or buyer, of the facility’s energy, along
with Bay Area Rapid Transit, Silicon Valley Clean Energy, Central Coast
Community Energy and the Power and Water Resources Pooling Authority.
*
**Ambitious decarbonization*
In 2015, Stanford transitioned from powering the campus solely through
natural gas to a more efficient system of using grid-sourced electricity
and waste heat to heat and cool the campus – saving money, conserving
water, eliminating greenhouse gases and paving the way for a clean
energy future. To do so, the ground-breaking Central Energy Facility was
brought online, and Stanford’s on-campus natural gas-fired cogeneration
plant was decommissioned...
The 54-megawatt Stanford Solar Generating Station #1 in Rosamond,
California, came online in 2016.
Now that SSGS2 is also online, Stanford can work toward its goal to
power everything with clean electricity – from cooking operations in
dining halls to burners in labs – on the main campus, the Redwood City
campus and the Hopkins Marine Station in Pacific Grove.
The university’s sophisticated greenhouse gas reduction programs have
resulted in nearly 80 percent reduction from peak levels in 2011.
“Stanford is among the first universities in the world to do this
specific combination of heat recovery, large-scale thermal storage,
renewable electrification and optimization in the way that we are doing
it,” Winslade said. “That makes us one of the most advanced universities
in the world when it comes to operationalizing these kinds of ambitious
decarbonization greenhouse gas reduction and climate action targets.”
This model is also a good economic investment, saving money over the
long run, she added. The university forecasts a total net savings of
about $520 million in energy savings, when compared to 2011 costs.
“Both higher education institutions as well as other entities are
looking for ways to procure clean energy,” Winslade said. “This
demonstrates how it can be done at an affordable cost, to be able to
procure renewable energy in a long-term partnership and contribute to
the production of more clean energy into the grid.”
*
**Life on Earth*
This decarbonization journey is part of how Stanford is addressing the
urgency of climate and sustainability challenges and working toward
creating a future where humans and nature thrive, said Lincoln Bleveans,
executive director of sustainability and energy management, who spoke at
the ribbon-cutting ceremony for SSGS2 on March 15.
“We are focused on real-world change, both to make Stanford itself as
sustainable as possible and to inspire other campuses, cities and
businesses around the world with a proven, cost-effective
decarbonization model,” he said. “We are a ‘living lab’ for
sustainability solutions.”
There have been more than 5,000 tours of Stanford’s Central Energy
facility as interested parties learn more about how to implement the
technology; visitors have included tribal nation leaders, the U.S.
military, dignitaries from other countries and leaders in higher education.
“Through our research and operations, Stanford is working to address the
most urgent issue of our times: sustaining life on Earth,” said Provost
Persis Drell. “We have long-standing expertise in environmental studies
and continue to increase our investments in sustainability research and
education. We also strive to live our values by running our campus as
cleanly and efficiently as possible.”
Before the addition of SSGS2, Stanford was already a top-ten purchaser
of renewable energy in U.S. higher education.
Going forward, Stanford plans to complete its electrification of the
remaining campus shuttle buses and campus vehicles; conversion of
hospitals to hot water and electrification of hot water processes; and
electrification of natural gas and steam appliances and heating.
To reach net-zero carbon emissions, every member of the Stanford
community will ultimately need to participate as the university tackles
Scope 3 emissions, which include things like air travel, commuting and
the purchase of goods such as pens, paper and bags, Winslade said. The
university aims to eliminate Scope 3 emissions by 2050.
https://news.stanford.edu/report/2022/03/24/stanford-transitions-100-percent-renewable-electricity-second-solar-plant-goes-online/
/[ Only a few months ago, feels like ages... ] /
*Top climate scientists are sceptical that nations will rein in global
warming*
A Nature survey reveals that many authors of the latest IPCC
climate-science report are anxious about the future and expect to see
catastrophic changes in their lifetimes.
Jeff Tollefson -- 1 November 2021
- -
“Right now, governments are just at the stage of providing green
promises, but so far we have not seen any actions to curb greenhouse-gas
emissions,” says Mouhamadou Bamba Sylla, an IPCC author and climate
modeller at the African Institute for Mathematical Sciences in Kigali,
Rwanda. Sylla says his home country of Senegal has gone through all the
motions and developed adaptation plans for a warming climate, but is
anything changing on the ground? “I don’t think so,” he says.
*Climate anxiety*
The scientists surveyed by Nature are part of the IPCC working group
charged with assessing the causes and extent of climate change. Their
latest report, approved by 195 governments in August, concluded that
fossil-fuel emissions are driving unprecedented planetary changes,
threatening both people and the ecosystems that humans rely on for food
and other resources. “Unless there are immediate, rapid and large-scale
reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, limiting warming to close to
1.5 °C or even 2° C will be beyond reach,” the IPCC said. But in
announcing the report, IPCC scientists stressed that these goals could
still be achieved...
- -
The Dixie wildfire in California this year was the second-largest in
state history, and was fuelled by high temperatures and drought. Credit:
Eric Thayer/Bloomberg/Getty
As a leading climate scientist, Paola Arias doesn’t need to look far to
see the world changing. Shifting rain patterns threaten water supplies
in her home city of Medellín, Colombia, while rising sea levels endanger
the country’s coastline. She isn’t confident that international leaders
will slow global warming or that her own government can handle the
expected fallout, such as mass migrations and civil unrest over rising
inequality. With such an uncertain future, she thought hard several
years ago about whether to have children.
“My answer was no,” says Arias, a researcher at the University of
Antioquia in Medellín, who was one of the 234 scientists who wrote a
climate-science report published by the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) in August (see go.nature.com/3pjupro). That
assessment, which makes clear that the world is running out of time to
avoid the most severe impacts of climate change, will figure prominently
in climate negotiations over the next two weeks at the COP26 meeting in
Glasgow, UK.
Many other leading climate researchers share Arias’s concerns about the
future. Nature conducted an anonymous survey of the 233 living IPCC
authors last month and received responses from 92 scientists — about 40%
of the group. Their answers suggest strong scepticism that governments
will markedly slow the pace of global warming, despite political
promises made by international leaders as part of the 2015 Paris climate
agreement.
Six in ten of the respondents said that they expect the world to warm by
at least 3 °C by the end of the century, compared with what conditions
were like before the Industrial Revolution. That is far beyond the Paris
agreement’s goal to limit warming to 1.5–2 °C...
- -
Most of the survey’s respondents — 88% — said they think global warming
constitutes a ‘crisis’, and nearly as many said they expect to see
catastrophic impacts of climate change in their lifetimes. Just under
half said that global warming has caused them to reconsider major life
decisions, such as where to live and whether to have children. More than
60% said that they experience anxiety, grief or other distress because
of concerns over climate change.
Pie chart showing 88% of respondents think the world is experiencing a
climate crisis.
Source: Nature analysis
For Arias, who frequently sees the impacts of political instability out
of her office window as immigrants from strife-torn Venezuela wander the
streets seeking food and shelter, the choice about children came
naturally. She says many friends and colleagues have arrived at the same
conclusion. “I’m not saying that that is a decision that everyone should
make,” she says, “but it’s not something I am struggling with much any
more.”...
- -
The pessimism expressed by some IPCC panellists underscores the vast
gulf between hopes and expectations for the climate summit that began
this week in Glasgow. In advance of the meeting, the United States, the
European Union, China and others have announced new plans to curb
greenhouse-gas emissions, although scientific analyses suggest those
plans still fall well short of the Paris goals. Over the next two weeks,
countries will formalize — and perhaps even strengthen — those
commitments. But making them a reality will require as-yet-unprecedented
political mobilization at the national level once leaders return home...
- -
“Right now, governments are just at the stage of providing green
promises, but so far we have not seen any actions to curb greenhouse-gas
emissions,” says Mouhamadou Bamba Sylla, an IPCC author and climate
modeller at the African Institute for Mathematical Sciences in Kigali,
Rwanda. Sylla says his home country of Senegal has gone through all the
motions and developed adaptation plans for a warming climate, but is
anything changing on the ground? “I don’t think so,” he says.
*Climate anxiety*
The scientists surveyed by Nature are part of the IPCC working group
charged with assessing the causes and extent of climate change. Their
latest report, approved by 195 governments in August, concluded that
fossil-fuel emissions are driving unprecedented planetary changes,
threatening both people and the ecosystems that humans rely on for food
and other resources. “Unless there are immediate, rapid and large-scale
reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, limiting warming to close to
1.5 °C or even 2° C will be beyond reach,” the IPCC said. But in
announcing the report, IPCC scientists stressed that these goals could
still be achieved...
- -
A separate report from the United Nations Environment Programme last
week projected that the climate commitments already announced by nations
would put the world on a path towards 2.7 °C of warming by the end of
the century (see go.nature.com/3vphvtu). Other projections raise the
possibility of even more reductions. The Climate Action Tracker, a
consortium of scientific and academic organizations, estimates that
warming would be limited to 2.4 °C if countries follow through on their
latest pledges under the Paris agreement. One of the goals of the
climate negotiations is to prompt more-ambitious steps for limiting
greenhouse-gas emissions, but most respondents to the Nature survey
seemed to be pessimistic about future policies and the amount of warming
(see Supplementary information for survey data tables).
https://media.nature.com/original/magazine-assets/d41586-021-02990-w/19817644
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02990-w
- -
/[ See some data ]/
*Nature survey of IPCC authors: data tables*
Nature e-mailed a survey in September 2021 to the 233* authors and
review editors listed in the
Working Group I Sixth Assessment Report by the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change (IPCC; see
https://go.nature.com/3nfvpz2). Respondents’ answers are anonymous; some
people opted to share
their names and e-mails for potential follow-up with Nature reporters.
Ninety-two people responded,
but some did not answer all questions
*Do you think that climate scientists should engage in advocacy on this
issue?*
No 17 19%
Yes 73 81%
Total Responses 90
*Do you engage in advocacy related to climate change?*
No 31 34%
Yes 60 66%
Total Responses 91
If yes, which kind of advocacy activities do you engage in? (You may
select multiple options.)
Promote science through speeches, publication or videos 59 98%
Contact lawmakers or government officials to advocate specific climate
policies 24 40%
Sign letters or petitions calling for action 26 43%
Participate in demonstrations 15 25%
Other 13 22%
(Percentages out of the 60 people who answered yes to the previous
question.)
*Do you experience anxiety, grief or other distress because of concerns
over climate change?*
No 36 39%
Yes, frequently 19 21%
Yes, infrequently 37 40%
Total responses 92
https://media.nature.com/original/magazine-assets/d41586-021-02990-w/19817644
- -
/[ See a list of IPCC contributors ]/
*Working Group I contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6-WG1)*
https://apps.ipcc.ch/report/authors/report.authors.php?q=35&p=
[ Hunziker conversation - video ]
*The real state of our Biosphere with Robert Hunziker*
Sep 22, 2021
The Nicky Rew Podcast
302 subscribers
Robert Hunziker has an MA in economic history from DePaul University,
awarded membership in Pi Gamma Mu International Academic Honor Society
in Social Sciences is a freelance writer and environmental journalist
who has over 200 articles published, including several translated into
foreign languages, appearing in over 50 journals, magazines, and sites
worldwide. He has been interviewed on numerous FM radio programs, as
well as television.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90JYH_zCIKI
/[ Netflix wants your subscription... and see the movie ]/
*Could ‘Don’t Look Up’ Have Ended Differently?*
“No comet,” say 14 climate experts who’ve penned more hopeful finales to
the film.
By Henry Goldblatt
March 17, 2022
/Warning: This article contains spoilers for the ending ...t./
Toward the end of Don’t Look Up, things aren’t looking so good for Ole
Mother Earth. A comet has pummeled her pretty badly, and her inhabitants
aren’t faring any better: In a post-credits scene, President Orlean’s
son, Jason (Jonah Hill), is seemingly the only survivor. Director Adam
McKay says the cataclysmic conclusion “was supposed to gradually take us
from our ridiculous entertainment-, political- and distraction-driven
society into the cascading light of reality. That reality of course
being the comet’s inevitable impact.” Viewers and critics alike drew
parallels to the climate crisis.
But did the movie have to end in catastrophe for citizens to learn some
much-needed lessons? That’s a question that intrigued McKay. So, with
his encouragement, we solicited alternate — and more optimistic —
endings from an international array of climate experts and legends (see:
Jane Goodall) whose specialties range from meteorology to community
activism. “I love the idea of climate leaders, activists and scientists
showing us how we can, in fact, create a different ending,” McKay says.
“We are not a passive audience to this climate crisis. We can act. We
can make choices.”
Here are their cheerier suggestions — ones that will reaffirm your faith
in humanity...
(see details) - -
https://www.netflix.com/tudum/articles/could-dont-look-up-have-ended-differently
/[The news archive - looking back]/
*March 28, 2001*
President George W. Bush says his administration will not honor the
Kyoto Protocol.
http://archives.nbclearn.com/portal/site/k-12/flatview?cuecard=238
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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/attachments/20220328/04bf7cd4/attachment.htm>
More information about the TheClimate.Vote
mailing list