[✔️] November 14, 2022 - Global Warming News Digest

Mon Nov 14 06:43:58 EST 2022

/*November 14, 2022*/

/[ NPR reports on COP27 ]/
*What’s on the climate agenda as COP27 enters its final week*
PBS NewsHour
Nov 13, 2022
For 27 years, the United Nations has held annual gatherings of world 
leaders to discuss how to combat climate change. Yet progress towards 
the goal of stopping global warming has been elusive, and this year’s 
summit is happening against the backdrop of host country Egypt's record 
of human rights abuses. Sarah Kaplan, climate reporter for the 
Washington Post, joins Ali Rogin to discuss.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qz5wubexJ8I

/[ Young climate journalist with video show  ]/
*COP27 Week 1 Recap: Loss and damage funding, early warning system 
deployment plans*
Beckisphere Climate Corner
Nov 13, 2022
If you like the work I do, please consider joining the Beckisphere 
Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/beckisphere or buying me a cup of 
coffee at https://www.buymeacoffee.com/beckisphere. Remember to talk 
about the climate crisis every day and support your local news 
organizations!

Source list- 
https://heavenly-sceptre-002.notion.site/COP27-week-1-0acdb4cd349941568aa6c4c4cd97ed15
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTmSesa16Nk

/[ From the Economist - video opinion ]/
*COP27: who should pay for a warming planet?*
The Economist
Nov 9, 2022
Campaigners who believe world leaders are not doing enough to combat 
climate change are taking matters into their own hands—and suing 
governments and fossil-fuel companies. But can the climate catastrophe 
really be resolved in court?

    00:00 - A rapidly warming world
    01:25 - Climate effects in Peru
    03:54 - Climate adaptation funding
    05:17 - Peru farmer v RWE
    08:36 - Rise in climate litigation cases
    09:49 - Landmark win for the Torres Strait Islands
    12:58 - Is this the future for tackling climate change?

Read our special report on climate adaptation: https://econ.st/3zFbO2k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Okcu19z3_U

/[ Clips from a classic essay from great Harvard professor and her 
researcher ]/
*A Brief History of How Big Oil Outplayed Us All*
For a century, the fossil fuel industry has outmaneuvered regulators and 
the public to lock in its power and profits, at the world’s expense.
NAOMI ORESKES AND JEFF NESBIT DECEMBER 23, 2021
/Editor’s Note: This article is published as part of Covering Climate 
Now, a global collaboration of news outlets strengthening coverage of 
the climate story./

Despite countless investigations, lawsuits, social shaming, and 
regulations dating back decades, the oil and gas industry remains 
formidable. After all, it has made consuming its products seem like a 
human necessity. It has confused the public about climate science, 
bought the eternal gratitude of one of America’s two main political 
parties, and repeatedly out-maneuvered regulatory efforts. And it has 
done all this in part by thinking ahead and then acting ruthlessly. 
While the rest of us were playing checkers, its executives were playing 
three-dimensional chess.

Take this brief tour of the industry’s history, and then ask yourself: 
Is there any doubt that these companies are now plotting to keep the 
profits rolling in, even as mega-hurricanes and roaring wildfires scream 
the dangers of the climate emergency?

*The John D. Rockefeller Myth**
*Ida Tarbell is one of the most celebrated investigative journalists in 
American history. Long before Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein exposed 
the Watergate scandal, Tarbell’s reporting broke up the Standard Oil 
monopoly. In 19 articles that became a widely read book, History of the 
Standard Oil Company, published in 1904, she exposed its unsavory 
practices. In 1911, federal regulators used Tarbell’s findings to break 
Standard Oil into 33 much smaller companies.
David had slayed Goliath. The U.S. government had set a monopoly-busting 
standard for future generations. John D. Rockefeller, Standard Oil’s 
owner, lost. The good guys won — or so it seemed.

In fact, Rockefeller saw what was coming and ended up 
profiting — massively — from the breakup of his company. Rockefeller 
made sure to retain significant stock holdings in each of Standard Oil’s 
33 offspring and position them in different parts of the U.S. where they 
wouldn’t compete against one another. Collectively, the 33 offspring 
went on to make Rockefeller very, very rich. Indeed, it was the breakup 
of Standard Oil that tripled his wealth and made him the wealthiest man 
in the world. In 1916, five years after Standard Oil was broken up, 
Rockefeller became the world’s first billionaire.
*
**Say It Ain’t So, Dr. Seuss!*
One of the offspring of Standard Oil was Esso (S-O, spelled out), which 
later launched one of the most successful advertising campaigns in 
history. It did so by relying on the talents of a young cartoonist who 
millions would later adore under his pen name, Dr. Seuss. Decades before 
authoring the pro-environment parable The Lorax, Theodore Geisel helped 
Esso market “Flit,” a household spray gun that killed mosquitoes. What 
Americans weren’t told was that the pesticide DDT made up 5% of each 
blast of Flit.
When Esso put considerable creative resources behind the Flit campaign, 
they were looking years ahead to a time when they would also 
successfully market oil-based products. The campaign ran for 17 years in 
the 1940s and 1950s, at the time an unheard length of time for an ad 
campaign. It taught Esso and other Standard Oil companies how to sell 
derivative products (like plastic and pesticides) that made the company 
and the brand a household name in the minds of the public. In its day, 
“Quick, Henry, the Flit!” was as ubiquitous as “Got Milk?” is today.

At the time, the public (and even many scientists) didn’t appreciate the 
deadly nature of DDT. That didn’t come until the 1962 publication of 
Rachel Carson’s book Silent Spring. But accepting that DDT was deadly 
was hard, in part because of the genius of Geisel, whose wacky 
characters — strikingly similar to the figures who would later populate 
Dr. Seuss books — energetically extolled Flit’s alleged benefits.

Geisel later said the experience “taught me conciseness and how to 
marry pictures with words.” The Flit ad campaign was incredibly smart 
and clever marketing. It taught the industry how to sell a dangerous and 
unnecessary product as if it were something useful and even fun. Years 
later, ExxonMobil would take that cleverness to new heights in its 
advertorials. They weren’t about clever characters. But they were 
awfully clever, containing few, if any, outright lies, but a whole lot 
of half-truths and misrepresentations. It was clever enough to convince 
the New York Times to run them without labeling them as the 
advertisements that they, in fact, were. Their climate “advertorials” 
appeared in the op-ed page of the New York Times and were part of what 
scholars have called “the longest, regular (weekly) use of media to 
influence public and elite opinion in contemporary America.”

*Controlling Climate Science*
Big Oil also saw climate change coming. As abundant investigative 
reporting and academic studies have documented, the companies’ own 
scientists were telling their executives in the 1970s that burning more 
oil and other fossil fuels would overheat the planet. (Other scientists 
had been saying so since the 1960s.) The companies responded by lying 
about the danger of their products, blunting public awareness, and 
lobbying against government action. The result is today’s climate 
emergency.

Less well-known is how oil and gas companies didn’t just lie about their 
own research. They also mounted a stealth campaign to monitor and 
influence what the rest of the scientific community learned and said 
about climate change.
The companies embedded scientists in universities and made sure they 
were present at important conferences. They nominated them to be 
contributors to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the UN 
body whose assessments from 1990 onward defined what the press, public, 
and policymakers thought was true about climate science. While the IPCC 
reports, which rely on consensus science, were sound, Big Oil’s 
scientific participation gave them an insider’s view of the road ahead. 
More ominously, they introduced the art of questioning the consensus 
science in forums where every word is parsed.

The industry was employing a strategy pioneered by tobacco companies, 
but with a twist. Beginning in the 1950s, the tobacco industry 
cultivated a sotto voce network of scientists at scores of American 
universities and medical schools, whose work it funded. Some of these 
scientists were actively engaged in research to discredit the idea that 
cigarette smoking was a health risk, but most of it was more subtle; the 
industry supported research on causes of cancer and heart disease other 
than tobacco, such as radon, asbestos, and diet. It was a form of 
misdirection, designed to deflect our attention away from the harms of 
tobacco and onto other things. The scheme worked for a while, but when 
it was exposed in the 1990s, in part through lawsuits, the bad publicity 
largely killed it. What self-respecting scientist would take tobacco 
industry money after that?

The oil and gas industry learned from that mistake and decided that, 
instead of working surreptitiously, it would work in the open. And 
rather than work primarily with individual scientists whose work might 
be of use, it would seek to influence the direction of the scientific 
community as a whole. The industry’s internal scientists continued to do 
research and publish peer-reviewed articles, but the industry also 
openly funded university collaborations and other researchers. From the 
late 1970s through the 1980s, Exxon was known both as a climate research 
pioneer, and as a generous patron of university science, supporting 
student research and fellowships at many major universities. Its 
scientists also worked alongside senior colleagues at NASA, the 
Department of Energy, and other key institutions, and funded breakfasts, 
luncheons, and other activities at scientific meetings. Those efforts 
had the net effect of creating goodwill and bonds of loyalty. It’s been 
effective.

The industry’s scientists may have been operating in good faith, but 
their work helped delay public recognition of the scientific consensus 
that climate change was unequivocally man-made, happening now, and very 
dangerous. The industry’s extensive presence in the field also gave it 
early access to cutting edge research it used to its advantage. Exxon, 
for example, designed oil platforms to accommodate more rapid sea level 
rise, even as the company publicly denied that climate change was occurring.

*Don’t Call It Methane, It’s “**Natural” Gas*
Methane is an even more powerful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, yet 
it has received far less attention. One reason is that the oil and gas 
industry has positioned methane— which marketing experts cleverly 
labeled “natural gas” — as the future of the energy economy. The 
industry promotes methane gas as a “clean” fuel that’s needed to bridge 
the transition from today’s carbon economy to tomorrow’s renewable 
energy era. Some go further and see gas as a permanent part of the 
energy landscape: BP’s plan is renewables plus gas for the foreseeable 
future, and the company and other oil majors frequently invoke “low 
carbon” instead of “no carbon.”

Except that methane gas isn’t clean. It’s about 80 times more potent at 
trapping heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide is.

As recently as a decade ago, many scientists and environmentalists 
viewed “natural gas” as a climate hero. The oil and gas industry’s ad 
guys encouraged this view by portraying gas as a coal killer. The 
American Petroleum Institute paid millions to run its first-ever Super 
Bowl ad in 2017, portraying gas as an engine of innovation that powers 
the American way of life. Between 2008 and 2019, API spent more than 
$750 million on public relations, advertising, and communications (for 
both oil and gas interests), an analysis by the Climate Investigations 
Center found. Today, most Americans view gas as clean, even though 
science shows that we can’t meet our climate goals without quickly 
transitioning away from it. The bottom line is that we can’t solve a 
problem caused by fossil fuels with more fossil fuels. But the industry 
has made a lot of us think otherwise.

There’s little chance the oil and gas industry can defeat renewable 
energy in the long term. Wind, solar, and geothermal, which are clean 
and cost-competitive, will eventually dominate energy markets. 
Researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, GridLab, and 
Energy Innovation have found that the U.S. can achieve 90% clean 
electricity by the year 2035 with no new gas and at no additional cost 
to consumers. But the oil and gas industry doesn’t need to win the fight 
in the long term. It just needs to win right now so it can keep 
developing oil and gas fields that will be in use for decades to come. 
To do that, it just has to keep doing what it has done for the past 25 
years: win today, fight again tomorrow.

*A Spider’s Web of Pipelines*
Here’s a final example of how the oil and gas industry plans for the 
next war even as its adversaries are still fighting the last one. Almost 
no one outside of a few law firms, trade groups, and congressional staff 
in Washington, DC, knows what the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 
is or does. But the oil and gas industry knows and it moved quickly 
after Donald Trump became president to lay the groundwork for decades of 
future fossil fuel dependency.

FERC has long been a rubber stamp for the oil and gas industry. The 
industry proposes gas pipelines, and FERC approves them. When FERC 
approves a pipeline, that approval grants the pipeline eminent domain, 
which in effect makes the pipeline all but impossible to stop.

Once pipelines are in the system, companies can start to build them. 
This strategy could allow the oil and gas industry to lock in fossil 
fuel dependency for the rest of the century.
Eminent domain gives a company the legal right to build a pipeline 
through landowners’ properties, and there is nothing they or state or 
county officials can do about it. A couple of states have successfully, 
though temporarily, blocked pipelines by invoking federal statutes such 
as the Clean Water Act. But if those state cases reach the current 
Supreme Court, the three justices Trump appointed — Neil Gorsuch, Brett 
Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney-Barrett — are almost certain to rule in the 
industry’s favor.

Oil and gas industry executives seized upon Trump’s arrival in the White 
House. In the opening days of his administration, independent 
researchers listened in on public trade gatherings of the executives, 
who talked about “flooding the zone” at FERC. The industry planned to 
submit not just one or two but nearly a dozen interstate gas pipeline 
requests. Plotted on a map, the projected pipelines covered so much of 
the U.S. that they resembled a spider’s web.

Once pipelines are in the system, companies can start to build them, and 
utility commissioners in every corner of America see this gas 
“infrastructure” as a fait accompli. And pipelines are built to last 
decades. In fact, if properly maintained, a pipeline can last forever in 
principle. This strategy could allow the oil and gas industry to lock in 
fossil fuel dependency for the rest of the century.

In hindsight, it’s clear that oil and gas industry leaders used outright 
climate denial when it suited their corporate and political interests 
throughout the 1990s. But now that outright denial is no longer 
credible, they’ve pivoted from denial to delay. Industry PR and 
marketing efforts have shifted massive resources to a central message 
that, yes, climate change is real, but that the necessary changes will 
require more research and decades to implement, and above all, more 
fossil fuels. Climate delay is the new climate denial.

Nearly every major oil and gas company now claims that they accept the 
science and that they support sensible climate policies. But their 
actions speak louder than words. It’s clear that the future they want is 
one that still uses fossil fuels abundantly — regardless of what the 
science says. Whether it is selling deadly pesticides or deadly fossil 
fuels, they will do what it takes to keep their products on the market. 
Now that we’re in a race to a clean energy future, it’s time to 
recognize that they simply can’t be trusted as partners in that race. 
We’ve been fooled too many times.
https://inthesetimes.com/article/oil-gas-industry-strategy-advertising-seuss-pipeline-climate-change-science

/[ Discussion with Prof Kevin Anderson - from the Oil Machine ]/
*After THE OIL MACHINE: Kevin Anderson*
Sonja Henrici Creates
Oct 31, 2022
The issues raised in the film THE OIL MACHINE have become even more 
urgent with recent upheavals in energy security, the cost of living, and 
our climate. At the same time, the UK government is rushing to offer 100 
new licences for North Sea oil and gas exploration. One year on from the 
COP26 climate conference in Glasgow, we’re now going back to the film’s 
contributors to ask them how recent global events have shaped the 
ongoing debate about oil.

Here's our catch-up with Kevin Anderson, a professor of energy and 
climate change, and now also a co-founder of Climate Uncensored.

See our events and get involved at https://www.theoilmachine.org
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYk9Do01mT0

/[ this film produced by the IPCC ]/
*Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation & Vulnerability - Full video*
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
Read the report: 
https://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assessment-report-working-group-ii/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDRxfuEvqGg

/[ Earth Stories video channel documentaries ]/
*Earth Stories - Climate Change Documentaries*
Description
Our planet is an extraordinary place teeming with life, wonder and 
beauty. Earth Stories takes a look at the world through this lens, 
bringing you the best documentaries and factual series showcasing the 
place we all call home; its scale, its majesty, and the precarious 
balance that we risk tipping forever with global warming.
Subscribe for incredible documentaries all about the place we call home, 
Earth.
Earth Stories is part of the Little Dot Studios Network
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCg82Mk_bTfGbFqxFY_CENVA

/[ great lecture on the economics of oil and the wars of this world -- 
video from Sept 2022 ]/
*Keynote – Peter Zeihan - 2022*
The ECC Association
767,623 views  Sep 23, 2022
Presented Sept. 8, 2022 at the 54th Annual ECC PerspECCtive Conference 
in San Antonio, Texas. “Energy at the End of the World”. Peter Zeihan is 
a geopolitical strategist whose irreverent approach transforms topics 
that are normally dense and heavy into accessible, relevant takeaways 
for audiences of all types. Peter combines an expert understanding of 
demography, economics, energy, politics, technology, and security to 
help clients best prepare for an uncertain future.

Peter’s fourth book, "The End of the World is Just the Beginning: 
Mapping the Collapse of Globalization" was released in June 2022.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UA-jOLF2T4c

- -

/[ another one from Peter Zeihan - more succinct video ]/
*The Eurasian Hordelands | Peter Zeihan*
Geopolitics Now
Nov 12, 2022
Excerpt from the Linkages Conference on October 21, 2022.
Northern Manitoba and the World.
Presented by University College of the North, Manitoba Chamber of 
Commerce and Look North

Maps are from The End of the World is Just the Beginning
See the maps, sign up to Peter’s Newsletter and order the book 
here…https://zeihan.com/

This channel is not run by Peter Zeihan. He has a very active channel here…
@Zeihan on Geopolitics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQAb6XCXiPw

/[The news archive - looking back]/
/*November 14, 2012*/
November 14, 2012: At a post-election press conference, President Obama 
declares:

"I think the American people right now have been so focused, and will 
continue to be focused on our economy and jobs and growth, that if the 
message is somehow we’re going to ignore jobs and growth simply to 
address climate change, I don’t think anybody is going to go for that.  
I won’t go for that. If, on the other hand, we can shape an agenda that 
says we can create jobs, advance growth, and make a serious dent in 
climate change and be an international leader, I think that’s something 
that the American people would support."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlF6ikIbjGU

=======================================
*Mass media is lacking, here are a few daily summariesof global warming 
news - email delivered*

=========================================================
**Inside Climate News*
Newsletters
We deliver climate news to your inbox like nobody else. Every day or 
once a week, our original stories and digest of the web’s top headlines 
deliver the full story, for free.
https://insideclimatenews.org/
---------------------------------------
**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
==================================
*T*he 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  at https://www.dailyclimate.org/originals/

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

/Archive of Daily Global Warming News 
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/20221114/9e70f47d/attachment.htm>