[✔️] October 9, 2022 - Global Warming News - daily selection

[Richard Pauli]

/*October 9, 2022*/

/[ a pleasant view - flying the coast - see the erosion - 15 min video - ]/
*Watch: Pacifica Coastal Erosion Oct 1st 2022*
77,487 views  Oct 1, 2022  #FlyinCameras #Pacifica #CoastalErosion
Pacifica Coastal Erosion 10.1.22
In parts of the Bay Area, officials have already retreated from some 
parts of the coast, removing homes from cliffs that have eroded and 
areas that have flooded. San Francisco is taking steps to move the Great 
Highway away from Ocean Beach because erosion is eating away at the 
earth beneath it. Houses and apartments in Pacifica, south of the city, 
were declared uninhabitable as cliffs that supported them gave way to 
erosion./
/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlYzRoClIU0/
/

/
/

/
/

/[  Greta the Wise -- clips from her new book  -- text from the Guardian ] /
*Greta Thunberg on the climate delusion: ‘We’ve been greenwashed out of 
our senses. It’s time to stand our ground’*
A sand timer with most of the sand, which is coloured to look like Earth 
from space, in the bottom
Governments may say they’re doing all they can to halt the climate 
crisis. Don’t fall for it – then we might still have time to turn things 
around

Greta Thunberg
Sat 8 Oct 2022

Maybe it is the name that is the problem. Climate change. It doesn’t 
sound that bad. The word “change” resonates quite pleasantly in our 
restless world. No matter how fortunate we are, there is always room for 
the appealing possibility of improvement. Then there is the “climate” 
part. Again, it does not sound so bad. If you live in many of the 
high-emitting nations of the global north, the idea of a “changing 
climate” could well be interpreted as the very opposite of scary and 
dangerous. A changing world. A warming planet. What’s not to like?

Perhaps that is partly why so many people still think of climate change 
as a slow, linear and even rather harmless process. But the climate is 
not just changing. It is destabilising. It is breaking down. The 
delicately balanced natural patterns and cycles that are a vital part of 
the systems that sustain life on Earth are being disrupted, and the 
consequences could be catastrophic. Because there are negative tipping 
points, points of no return. And we do not know exactly when we might 
cross them. What we do know, however, is that they are getting awfully 
close, even the really big ones. Transformation often starts slowly, but 
then it begins to accelerate.

The German oceanographer and climatologist Stefan Rahmstorf writes: “We 
have enough ice on Earth to raise sea levels by 65 metres – about the 
height of a 20-storey building – and, at the end of the last ice age, 
sea levels rose by 120 metres as a result of about 5C of warming.” Taken 
together, these figures give us a perspective on the powers we are 
dealing with. Sea-level rise will not remain a question of centimetres 
for very long.

The Greenland ice sheet is melting, as are the “doomsday glaciers” of 
west Antarctica. Recent reports have stated that the tipping points for 
these two events have already been passed. Other reports say they are 
imminent. That means we might already have inflicted so much built-in 
warming that the melting process can no longer be stopped, or that we 
are very close to that point. Either way, we must do everything in our 
power to stop the process because, once that invisible line has been 
crossed, there might be no going back. We can slow it down, but once the 
snowball has been set in motion it will just keep going.

“This is the new normal” is a phrase we often hear when the rapid 
changes in our daily weather patterns – wildfires, hurricanes, 
heatwaves, floods, storms, droughts and so on – are being discussed. 
These weather events aren’t just increasing in frequency, they are 
becoming more and more extreme. The weather seems to be on steroids, and 
natural disasters increasingly appear less and less natural. But this is 
not the “new normal”. What we are seeing now is only the very beginning 
of a changing climate, caused by human emissions of greenhouse gases. 
Until now, Earth’s natural systems have been acting as a shock absorber, 
smoothing out the dramatic transformations that are taking place. But 
the planetary resilience that has been so vital to us will not last for 
ever, and the evidence seems to suggest more and more clearly that we 
are entering a new era of more dramatic change.

Climate change has become a crisis sooner than expected. So many of the 
researchers I’ve spoken to have said that they were shocked to witness 
how quickly it is escalating. But since science is very cautious when it 
comes to making predictions, maybe this should not come as a big 
surprise. One result of this, however, is that very few people actually 
knew how to react when the signs started becoming obvious in recent 
years. And fewer still had planned how to communicate what is happening. 
It seems like the vast majority of people were preparing for a 
different, less urgent scenario. A crisis that would take place many 
decades into the future. And yet here we are. The climate and ecological 
crisis is not happening in some faraway future. It’s happening right 
here and right now.

f everyone lived like we do in Sweden, we would need the resources of 
4.2 planet Earths to sustain us. And the climate targets set in the 
Paris agreement would be but a very distant memory – a threshold that we 
would have crossed many, many years ago. The fact that 3 billion people 
use less energy, on an annual per capita basis, than a standard American 
refrigerator gives you an idea of how far away from global equity and 
climate justice we currently are.

The climate crisis is not something that “we” have created. The 
worldview that largely dominates the perspective from Stockholm, Berlin, 
London, Madrid, New York, Toronto, Los Angeles, Sydney or Auckland is 
not so prevalent in Mumbai, Ngerulmud, Manila, Nairobi, Lagos, Lima or 
Santiago. People from the parts of the world that are most responsible 
for this crisis must realise that other perspectives do exist and that 
they have to start listening to them. Because when it comes to the 
climate and ecological crisis – just like most other issues – many 
people living in rich economies still act as if they rule the world. By 
using up the remains of our carbon budgets – the maximum amount of CO2 
we can collectively emit to give the world a 67% chance of staying below 
1.5C of global temperature rise – the global north is stealing the 
future as well as the present. It is stealing not only from its own 
children but, above all, from those who live in the most affected parts 
of the world, many of whom are yet to build much of the most basic 
modern infrastructure that others take for granted. And still this 
deeply immoral theft does not even exist in the discourse of the 
so-called developed world.

Saving the world is voluntary. You could certainly argue against that 
statement from a moral point of view, but the fact remains: there are no 
laws or restrictions in place that will force anyone to take the 
necessary steps towards safeguarding our future living conditions on 
planet Earth. This is troublesome from many perspectives, not least 
because – as much as I hate to admit it – Beyoncé was wrong. It is not 
girls who run the world. It is run by politicians, corporations and 
financial interests – mainly represented by white, privileged, 
middle-aged, straight cis men. And it turns out most of them are 
terribly ill suited for the job. This may not come as a big surprise. 
After all, the purpose of a company is not to save the world – it is to 
make a profit. Or, rather, it is to make as much profit as it possibly 
can in order to keep shareholders and market interests happy.

This leaves us with our political leaders. They do have great 
opportunities to improve things, but it turns out that saving the world 
is not their main priority, either.

Approaching the issues of the climate and ecological crisis inevitably 
involves confronting numerous uncomfortable questions. Taking on the 
role of being the one who tells the unpleasant truth, and thereby 
risking one’s popularity, is clearly not on any politician’s wishlist. 
So they try to stay clear of the subject until they absolutely cannot 
avoid it any longer – then they turn to communication tactics and PR to 
make it seem as if real action is being taken, when in fact the exact 
opposite is happening.

It gives me no pleasure whatsoever to keep calling out the bullshit of 
our so-called leaders. I want to believe that people are good. But there 
really seems to be no end to these cynical games. If your objective as a 
politician truly is to act on the climate crisis, then surely your first 
step would be to gather accurate figures for our actual emissions to get 
a complete overview of the problem, and from there start looking at real 
solutions? That would also give you a rough idea of the changes needed, 
the scale of them and how quickly they need to be put in place. This, 
however, has not been done – or even suggested – by any world leader. 
Or, to my knowledge, by any one single politician.

Journalist Alexandra Urisman Otto describes how she started 
investigating Swedish climate policies and found that only a third of 
our actual emissions of greenhouse gases were included in our climate 
targets and the official national statistics. The rest were either 
outsourced or hidden in the loopholes of international climate 
accounting frameworks. So whenever the climate crisis is debated in my 
“progressive” home country, we conveniently leave out two-thirds of the 
problem. An investigation by the Washington Post in November 2021 has 
shown that this phenomenon is far from unique to Sweden. Though the 
figures vary from case to case, this process and the overall mentality 
of constantly trying to sweep things under the carpet and blame others 
is the international norm.

So when our politicians say that we must solve the climate crisis, we 
should all ask them which climate crisis they are referring to. Is it 
the crisis that contains all our emissions or the one that contains only 
a part of them? When politicians go a step further and accuse the 
climate movement of not offering any solutions to our problems, we 
should ask them what problems they are talking about. Is it the problem 
that is caused by all our emissions or just by the ones they didn’t 
manage to outsource or hide in the statistics? Because these are 
completely different issues.

If your objective as a politician is to act on the climate crisis, 
surely your first step would be to gather accurate emissions figures
It will take many things for us to start facing this emergency – but, 
above all, it will take honesty, integrity and courage. The longer we 
wait to start taking the action needed to stay in line with our 
international targets, the harder and more costly it will get to reach 
them. The inaction of today and yesterday must be compensated for in the 
time that lies ahead.

For us to have even a small chance of avoiding setting off irreversible 
chain reactions far beyond human control, we need drastic, immediate, 
far-reaching emission cuts at the source. When your bathtub is about to 
overflow, you don’t go looking for buckets or start covering the floor 
with towels – you start by turning off the tap, as soon as you possibly 
can. Leaving the water running means ignoring or denying the problem, 
delaying doing anything to resolve it and downplaying its consequences.

Our politicians do not need to wait for anyone else in order to start 
taking action. Nor do they need conferences, treaties, international 
agreements or outside pressure. They could start right away. They also 
have – and have had for a long time – endless opportunities to speak up 
and send a clear message about the fact that we must fundamentally 
change our societies. And yet, with very few exceptions, they actively 
choose not to. This is a moral decision that will not only cost them 
dearly in the future, it will put the entire living planet at risk.


According to the United Nations’ emissions gap report, the world’s 
planned fossil fuel production by the year 2030 will be more than twice 
the amount that would be consistent with keeping to the 1.5c target. 
This is science’s way of telling us that we can no longer reach our 
targets without a system change. because meeting our targets would 
literally require tearing up contracts, valid deals and agreements on an 
unimaginable scale. This should, of course, be dominating every hour of 
our everyday news feed, every political discussion, every business 
meeting and every inch of our daily lives. But that is not what is 
happening.

The media and our political leaders have the opportunity to take drastic 
and immediate action, and still they choose not to. Perhaps it is 
because they are still in denial. Maybe it is because they do not care. 
Maybe it is because they are unaware. Maybe it is because they are more 
scared of the solutions than of the problem itself. Maybe it is because 
they are afraid of causing social unrest. Maybe they are afraid of 
losing their popularity. Maybe they simply did not go into politics or 
journalism to uproot a system they believe in – a system they have spent 
their lives defending. Or maybe the reason for their inaction is a 
mixture of all these things.

We cannot live sustainably within today’s economic system. Yet that is 
what we are constantly being told we can do. We can buy sustainable 
cars, travel on sustainable motorways, powered by sustainable petroleum. 
We can eat sustainable meat and drink sustainable soft drinks out of 
sustainable plastic bottles. We can buy sustainable fast fashion and fly 
on sustainable aeroplanes using sustainable fuels. And, of course, we 
are going to meet our short- and long-term sustainable climate targets, 
too, without making the slightest effort.

Our so-called leaders still think they can bargain with physics and 
negotiate with nature. They speak to flowers in the language of economics
“How?” you might ask. How can that be possible when we don’t yet have 
any technical solutions that can fix this crisis alone, and the option 
of stopping doing things is unacceptable from our current economic 
standpoint? What are we going to do? Well, the answer is the same as 
always: we will cheat. We will use all those loopholes and all the 
creative accounting that we have conjured up in our climate frameworks 
since the very first conference of the parties, the 1995 Cop1 in Berlin. 
We will outsource our emissions along with our factories, we will use 
baseline manipulation and start counting our emission reductions when it 
suits us best. We will burn trees, forests and biomass, as those have 
been excluded from the official statistics. We will lock decades of 
emissions into fossil gas infrastructure and call it green natural gas. 
And then we will offset the rest with vague afforestation projects – 
trees that might be lost to disease or fire – while we simultaneously 
cut down the last of our old-growth forests at a much higher speed.

Don’t get me wrong. Planting the right trees in the right soil is a 
great thing to do. It eventually sequesters carbon dioxide from the 
atmosphere and we should do it wherever it is suitable for the soil and 
suitable for the people living there who care for that land. But 
afforestation should not be confused with offsetting or climate 
compensation, because that is something completely different. You see, 
the main problem is that we already have at least 40 years of carbon 
dioxide emissions to “compensate” for. It is all up there, in the 
atmosphere, and that is where it will stay, probably for many centuries 
to come. This historic CO2 is what we should be focusing on when we are 
using our present – very limited – ways of removing CO2 from the 
atmosphere, in various projects such as planting trees. But offsetting, 
as we have conceived it, is not meant to do that. It was never created 
for us to clean up our mess. Far too often it has been used as an excuse 
for us to continue emitting CO2, maintain business as usual and 
meanwhile send a signal that we have a solution and therefore we do not 
have to change.

Words matter, and they are being used against us. These are lies. 
Dangerous lies that will cause further, disastrous delay. Predictions by 
the UN conclude that our CO2 emissions are expected to rise by another 
16% by 2030. The time we have left to avoid creating increasing climate 
catastrophes in many places around the world is rapidly running out.

We are currently on track to have a world that is 3.2C hotter by the end 
of the century – and that’s if countries fulfil all the policies they 
have in place, policies that are often based on flawed and 
under-reported numbers. But in many cases they are nowhere near doing 
even that. We are “seemingly light years away from reaching our climate 
action targets”, to quote UN secretary general António Guterres in the 
autumn of 2021. And there is also the matter of our previous track 
record of failure when it comes to delivering on all those non-binding 
pledges and promises. Let’s just say it is not so impressive or convincing.

Even if we carried out all of our climate action plans, we’d still be in 
trouble. Net zero by 2050 is simply too little, too late. There is just 
too much at stake for us to place our destiny in the hands of 
undeveloped technologies. We need real zero. And we need honesty. At the 
very least, we need our leaders to start including all our actual 
emissions in our targets, statistics and policies. Before they do that, 
any mention of vague, future goals is nothing but a distracting waste of 
time. They say that we should not let the perfect be the enemy of the 
good. But what exactly do we do when the “good” not only fails to keep 
us safe but is also so far away from what is needed that it can only be 
described as comedy material. Very dark comedy, but still.


They say we must be able to compromise. As if the Paris agreement were 
not already the world’s biggest compromise. A compromise that has 
already locked in unimaginable amounts of suffering for the most 
affected people and areas. I say: “No more.” I say: “Stand your ground.” 
Our so-called leaders still think they can bargain with physics and 
negotiate with the laws of nature. They speak to flowers and forests in 
the language of US dollars and short-term economics. They hold up their 
quarterly income reports to impress the wild animals. They read 
stock-market analysis to the waves of the ocean, like fools.

We are approaching a precipice. And I would strongly suggest that those 
of us who have not yet been greenwashed out of our senses stand our 
ground. Do not let them drag us another inch closer to the edge. Not one 
inch. Right here, right now, is where we draw the line.

  This is an edited extract from The Climate Book created by Greta 
Thunberg and published on 27 October by Allen Lane (£25). To support the 
Guardian and Observer, buy your copy from guardianbookshop.com. Delivery 
charges may apply
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/08/greta-thunberg-climate-delusion-greenwashed-out-of-our-senses


/[ Air Force announcement ]/
*Department of the Air Force rolls out plan addressing climate change*
Oct. 5, 2022
Secretary of the Air Force Public Affairs
WASHINGTON (AFNS) --  he Department of the Air Force released its 
Climate Action Plan Oct. 4, which defines how it will preserve 
operational capability, increase resiliency, and do its part to help 
mitigate future climate impacts through specific and measurable 
objectives and key results. It lays out its enterprise-wide approach to 
ensuring policies, technology innovation, and evolving operations remain 
relevant in a changing climate.

“Make no mistake – the department’s mission remains to fly, fight, and 
win, anytime and anywhere. We are focused on modernization and improving 
our operational posture relative to our pacing challenge: China. We 
remain ready to respond and achieve air and space dominance when and 
where the nation needs us,” said Secretary of the Air Force Frank 
Kendall. “Our mission remains unchanged, but we recognize that the world 
is facing ongoing and accelerating climate change and we must be 
prepared to respond, fight, and win in this constantly changing world.”

The plan outlines three major priorities that ensure the Department of 
the Air Force maintains the ability to operate under a changing climate, 
preserves operational capability, protects its systems, and contributes 
toward enhancing climate change mitigation.

1. Maintain air and space dominance in the face of climate risks: Invest 
in climate-ready and resilient infrastructure and facilities so our 
installations are better able to project air and space combat power.

2. Make climate informed decisions: Develop a climate-informed 
workforce, integrate security implications of climate change into 
Department strategy, planning, training, and operations, and incorporate 
climate considerations into Department requirements, acquisition, 
logistics, supply chain processes, and wargaming.

3. Optimize energy use and pursue alternative energy sources: Expand 
operational capability and power projection to support operations 
globally while simultaneously reducing greenhouse gas emissions and 
adopting cost-competitive alternative energy sources.

The department will provide updates as necessary to address new 
policies, technology innovation and evolving missions that answer 
emerging climate concerns.
https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3178524/department-of-the-air-force-rolls-out-plan-addressing-climate-change/



/[ 3 Podcasts so far ]/
*The Big Burn: How To Survive the Age of Wildfires*
As the world enters a new age of wildfires, science reporter Jacob 
Margolis dives deep into personal stories that illuminate the history of 
how we got here, why we keep screwing things up, and what we can do to 
survive and maybe even thrive while the world around us burns.
Episodes --
*About the Show*
It’s easy to feel like we’re in a dark timeline. Waking up to smoke and 
flames, staring down a future of burned homes, lost forests, and orange 
skies. Over the past decade, California has been hit by nine out of ten 
of its largest fires on record. And even if you don't live in the state, 
you’re likely impacted by the fire crisis. A combination of climate 
change and poor policy decisions got us here.

So, is there anything we can do about this new age of devastating 
wildfires? Science reporter Jacob Margolis goes on a journey to figure 
out how we got here, why we keep screwing things up, and what we can do 
to survive and even thrive while the world around us burns. From LAist 
Studios, the creators of The Big One, this next installment of The Big 
Disaster series will provide you with a wildfire survival guide that 
includes not just tangible safety tips — but hope for our future.

Support for this podcast is made possible by Gordon and Dona Crawford, 
who believe that quality journalism makes Los Angeles a better place to 
live, the Strelow Family, and by the Corporation for Public 
Broadcasting, a private corporation funded by the American people.
https://laist.com/podcasts/the-big-burn



/[The news archive - looking back at early mention of carbon capitalism ]/
/*October 9, 1996*/
October 9, 1996: Vice President Al Gore and former Representative Jack 
Kemp discuss the environment in the Vice Presidential debate, with Kemp 
bizarrely accusing Gore of promoting "fear of the climate" and embracing 
an "anti-capitalistic mentality," while Gore defends the Clinton 
administration's first-term environmental accomplishments.

(60:13--70:50)

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/74250-1

    *Jack French Kemp*
    Jim, Al has to hear one more time. Every time in this century we've
    lowered the tax rates across-the-board on employment, on saving,
    investment, and risk-taking in this economy, revenues went up, not
    down. Now, if the purpose of the tax code is to raise revenue. We
    ought to think, as John F. Kennedy did, about lowering the rates. We
    can't go to zero. They can't go too low, because there's not enough
    revenue, but President Clinton apologized in Houston for saying,
    whoops, I raised your taxes and they're too high. President Bush
    apologized for raising taxes. Bob Dole knows that the rates have to
    come down across-the-board and then we'll get to the most important
    part, to repeal this code and go to a new system for the 21st Century.

    01:00:13
    *Jim Lehrer*
    Mr. Vice President, some Democrats have charged that the environment
    would be in jeopardy if Mr. Kemp and Senator Dole are elected. Do
    you share that fear?

    01:00:25
    *Al Gore Jr.*
    I certainly do. In citing John F. Kennedy's tax cut in the 1960s, I
    want to also remind you that, Mr. Kemp, pointed out in the past, Bob
    Dole was in the Congress then. He was one of those who voted against
    John F. Kennedy's tax cut. The environment faces dire threats from
    the kind of legislation that Senator Dole and Speaker Newt Gingrich
    tried to pass by shutting down the government and attempting to
    force President Clinton to accept it. They invited the lobbyists for
    the biggest polluters in America to come into the Congress and
    literally rewrite the Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act.
    President Clinton stopped them dead in their tracks. We have a
    positive agenda on the environment because we believe very deeply
    that it's about our children and our future. Clean air and clean
    water, cleaning up toxic waste sites, when millions of children live
    within one mile of them. That's important. We have a plan to clean
    up two-thirds of the toxic waste sites in America over the next four
    years. We've already cleaned up more in the last three years than
    the previous two administrations did in 12. The President just set
    aside the Utah National Monument. He is protecting the Everglades
    here in Florida. Bob Dole is opposed to that plan. President Bill
    Clinton will protect our environment and prevent the kind of attacks
    on it that we saw in the last Congress and are included in the
    Republican platform.

    01:02:12
    *Jack French Kemp*
    And so will Bob Dole. I mean, Al, get real. Franklin Roosevelt said
    in 1932 that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. The only
    thing, Jim, they have to offer is fear. Fear of the environment,
    fear of the climate, fear of Medicare, fear of Newt, fear of
    Republicans, fear of Bob, and probably fear of cutting tax rates.
    They ain't seen nothing yet. Look, we recognize that this country
    has to live in balance with our environment. Every one of us who
    have children and grandchildren recognize how we have to reach a
    balance. It is not jobs versus our environment. Both are important.
    This is the most overregulated, overly litigated economy in our
    nation's history. And to call a businessman or woman who sits down
    and has a chance to express his or her interest in how to make these
    laws work and call them a polluter is just outrageous. It is typical
    of the anti-capitalistic mentality of this administration. That will
    change, because we believe in democratic capitalism for everybody.

    01:03:28
    *Al Gore Jr.*
    There are lots of jobs to be created in cleaning up the environment.
    All around the world we're seeing problems that people want to solve
    because they love their children. They want them to be able to drink
    clean water and breathe clean air. They don't want them to live next
    to toxic waste sites. When the United States of America takes the
    lead in protecting the environment, we do right by our children, and
    we also create new business opportunities, new jobs, new sources of
    prosperity for the United States of America, and we're going about
    it in a common sense way.

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/74250-1


=======================================
*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/20221009/044c5606/attachment.htm>