[✔️] January 29, 2023- Global Warming News Digest - climate models - lying is not free speech - collapse-o-rama

[Richard Pauli]

/*January  29, 2023*/

/[ atmospheric river in the sky - increasing - video 9 mins ]/
*Weather Extremes Are Devastating California*
VICE News
57,472 views  Jan 28, 2023  #VICENews #News
California’s recent floods led to more deaths than the last two wildfire 
seasons combined, and they’re only a preview of the state’s extreme 
weather future.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpkbhXRS0s0



[ Polycrisis is a new word ]
*Are we headed toward a “polycrisis”? The buzzword of the moment, 
explained.*
The concept of “polycrisis” was everywhere in Davos. But is it saying 
anything meaningful?
By Daniel Drezner
Jan 28, 2023
The future will not be crisis-free by any stretch of the imagination — 
but the notion of a polycrisis might do more harm than good in 
attempting to get a grip on the systemic risks that threaten humanity.

The history of the idea of the polycrisis
As with many buzzwords foretelling despair, the origins of polycrisis 
can be blamed on the French.

In their 1999 book Homeland Earth: A Manifesto for the New Millennium, 
French complexity theorist Edgar Morin and his co-author Anne Brigitte 
Kern warned of the “complex intersolidarity of problems, antagonisms, 
crises, uncontrollable processes, and the general crisis of the planet.” 
Other academics began using the term in a similar way. European 
Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker adopted the term to 
characterize the cluster of negative shocks triggered by the 2008 
financial crisis.

So far, so redundant — none of these initial references really seem to 
mean much beyond “A Big, Bad Catastrophe.” Tooze’s initial column and 
Substack post, however, referenced the work of political scientists 
Michael Lawrence, Scott Janzwood, and Thomas Homer-Dixon. They work at 
the Cascade Institute, a Canadian research center focusing on emergent 
and systemic risks. In a 2022 working paper, they provide the fullest 
etymology of “polycrisis” and what they mean by it.

So what the hell is a polycrisis? The quick-and-dirty answer is that 
it’s the concatenation of shocks that generate crises that trigger 
crises in other systems that, in turn, worsen the initial crises, making 
the combined effect far, far worse than the sum of its parts.

The longer answer requires some familiarity with how complex systems 
work. Complex systems can range from a nuclear power plant to Earth’s 
ecosystem. In tightly wound and complex systems, not even experts can be 
entirely sure how the inner workings of the system will respond to 
stresses and shocks. Those who study systemic and catastrophic risks 
have long been aware that crises in these systems are often endogenous — 
i.e., they often bubble up from within the system’s inscrutable internal 
workings...
- -
*How real is the polycrisis?*
Take a second now and consider all the shocks that have buffeted you, 
dear reader, in the past few years alone.

There is the largest land war in Europe in recent memory, a devastating 
pandemic, the surge in refugee flows, high inflation, fragile global 
governance, and the leading democracies turning inward as they face 
populist challenges at home. It seems easy — and enervating — to believe 
that the polycrisis is upon us.

The thing about the previous paragraph is that it does not just describe 
the current moment; it also captures the global situation almost exactly 
a century ago. The First World War devastated Europe. The war also 
helped to facilitate the spread of the influenza pandemic through troop 
movements and information censorship. The costs of both the war and the 
pandemic badly weakened the postwar order, leading to spikes in 
hyperinflation, illiberal ideologies, and democracies that turned 
inward. All of that transpired during the start of the Roaring ’20s; the 
world turned much darker a decade later...
- -
Another weird, fortuitous interaction has been the one between climate 
change and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. As Europe aided Ukraine and 
resisted Russia’s blatant, illegal actions, Russia retaliated by cutting 
off energy exports. Many were concerned that Russia’s counter-sanctions 
would make this winter extremely hard and expensive for Europe.

Climate change may have provided a weird geopolitical assist to Europe, 
however. The warming climate is likely connected to Europe’s extremely 
temperate fall and winter. That, in turn, has required less electricity 
for heating, leaving the continent with plenty of energy reserves to 
last the winter. Russia’s ability to wreak havoc on the European economy 
has been circumscribed.

None of this is to say that systemic crises cannot exacerbate each 
other. Just because a polycrisis has not happened yet does not mean one 
is not on the horizon. Just as one buys insurance to guard against 
low-probability, high-impact outcomes, policymakers and elements of 
civil society need to guard against worst-case scenarios.

As a term of art, however, “polycrisis” distracts more than it adds. It 
mostly seems like a device to make people care about the Really Bad 
Things that climate change can do, without turning people off by warning 
them yet again about the hazards of climate change.

Daniel W. Drezner is a professor of international politics at the 
Fletcher School and is the author of Drezner’s World.
https://www.vox.com/23572710/polycrisis-davos-history-climate-russia-ukraine-inflation
/[ 90 min Video -- Listening to this conversation is like sitting at at 
bar. I feel alone, but hearing talk helps face our predicament.  Who has 
a collapse community? /  ]
*Climate Change Trauma: You Are Not Alone*
Environmental Coffeehouse
3.02K subscribers
Streamed live 1-27-2023  #climatecrisis #collapse
Tonight join Jennifer Hynes & Eliot Jacobson for a discussion related to 
the following article.
https://www.coloradoboulevard.net/climate-change-trauma-youre-not-alone/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmiOhtkUpMI
- -
[ important observation in text ]
*Climate Change Trauma: You’re Not Alone!*
THOM HAWKINS
JANUARY 24, 2023
Anxiety and trauma have become common effects of living and surviving in 
our rapidly overheating and intensely polluted globe. Scientists tell us 
over and over that we are well on our way to unthinkable consequences in 
the very near future. In fact, many people have already experienced such 
horrific events. If you are feeling battered by climate change, you 
definitely are not alone.
By Thom Hawkins
A UC, San Diego team has just published a new study documenting the 
lingering PTSD-like symptoms of climate disaster.

Such trauma is more widespread than expected and can seriously disable 
cognitive function. Victims might not be fully aware of the impacts. You 
don’t have to live through a disaster to become disruptively anxious 
about global heating and erratic, extreme weather. It’s very hard to ignore.

Most of us are not in positions to do enough to make a major difference 
in the climate tragedy besetting us all. That being said, many experts 
tell us that the healthiest strategy is to be proactive on five fronts:

 1. Stay informed on the science and news reports from reliable sources
    so you don’t get blindsided.
 2. Practice caring for the earth through gardening, hiking, camping or
    any beneficial activity in pristine nature. Appreciate the beauty
    nature still has to offer. Live as sustainably as possible.
 3. Prepare for the worst: stock food and water, tools, first aid, etc.
    Make your home as resistant as possible to fire, flooding, weather
    extremes and power outages. Have a portable solar panel with
    rechargeable battery to run fans, coolers and lights. Get a solar
    cooker.
 4. Keep large, solid blocks of ice in your freezer along with frozen food.
 5. Consider carefully how you want to behave when disaster strikes,
    because it will, very soon.
 6. Meet regularly with equally concerned friends, relatives and
    neighbors to share information from the first four strategies.
    Tell family and friends often how much you love them.

Finally, lower your expectations that technology will find “solutions” 
to control warming. The record is none too good so far, so why add 
disappointment to the suffering we’re all in for? Escape is not a 
realistic goal. Acceptance is.
https://www.coloradoboulevard.net/climate-change-trauma-youre-not-alone/



/[ Climate models let us infer risk and uncertainty - audio 1:28 ]/
*On the abuse (and proper use) of climate models*
A conversation with Erica Thompson about her new book "Escape From Model 
Land."

JAN 27 Everyone who's followed climate change for any length of time is 
familiar with the central role that complex mathematical models play in 
climate science and politics. Models give us predictions about how much 
the Earth's atmosphere will warm and how much it will cost to prevent or 
adapt to that warming.

[ listen link ] 
https://api.substack.com/feed/podcast/193024/private/bc96fdaa-2ce1-4b71-8707-bb5f1dd458ce.rss

British researcher Erica Thompson has been thinking about the uses and 
misuse of mathematical modeling for years, and she has just come out 
with an absorbing and thought-provoking new book on the subject called 
Escape from Model Land: How Mathematical Models Can Lead Us Astray and 
What We Can Do About It.

More than anything, it is an extended plea for epistemological humility 
— a proper appreciation of the intrinsic limitations of modeling, the 
deep uncertainties that can never be eliminated, and the ineradicable 
role of human judgment in interpreting model results and applying them 
to the real world.

As Volts listeners know, my favorite kind of book takes a set of my 
vague intuitions and theories and lays them out in a cogent, 
well-researched argument. One does love having one's priors confirmed! I 
wrote critiques of climate modeling at Vox and even way back at Grist — 
it's been a persistent interest of mine — but Thompson's book lays out a 
full, rich account of what models can and can't help us do, and how we 
can put them to better use.

I was thrilled to talk with her about some of her critiques of models 
and how they apply to climate modeling, among many other things. This is 
a long one! But a good one, I think. Settle in.
https://www.volts.wtf/p/on-the-abuse-and-proper-use-of-climate?utm_source=podcast-email%2Csubstack&publication_id=193024&post_id=96794630&utm_medium=email#details

- -

/[ her book is new and interesting ]/
*Escape from Model Land: How Mathematical Models Can Lead Us Astray and 
What We Can Do About It Kindle Edition*
by Erica Thompson
Why mathematical models are so often wrong, and how we can make better 
decisions by accepting their limits

Whether we are worried about the spread of COVID-19 or making a 
corporate budget, we depend on mathematical models to help us understand 
the world around us every day. But models aren’t a mirror of reality. In 
fact, they are fantasies, where everything works out perfectly, every 
time. And relying on them too heavily can hurt us.

In Escape from Model Land, statistician Erica Thompson illuminates the 
hidden dangers of models. She demonstrates how models reflect the 
biases, perspectives, and expectations of their creators. Thompson shows 
us why understanding the limits of models is vital to using them well. A 
deeper meditation on the role of mathematics, this is an essential book 
for helping us avoid either confusing the map with the territory or 
throwing away the map completely, instead pointing to more nuanced ways 
to Escape from Model Land.
https://www.amazon.com/Escape-Model-Land-Mathematical-Models-ebook/dp/B09X5BK7RK

- -

/
//[ Climate Economics - Univ of Chicago - is this just simple inequity? ]/
*Study Finds Reducing Energy Use Increases Mortality*
In a case study where residents were encouraged to reduce their 
residential energy use, including the use of air conditioners, the 
mortality rate increased.
MISSION
To confront the global energy challenge by ensuring Energy Markets 
provide access to reliable, affordable energy needed for growth, while 
limiting emissions that cause Climate Change and damages to the 
Environment...
https://epic.uchicago.edu/



/[ Opinion --- No legal protection for telling a lie.  pretty important ]/
*False Advertising Isn't First Amendment-Protected Free Speech, Lawyer 
Explains in New Paper*
Climate Denier Roundup
Community
Friday January 27, 2023 ·

Whenever anyone dares to suggest that disinformation is bad, one of the 
most common knee-jerk reactions is to cry, 'The First Amendment protects 
freedom of speech!'

  But the fossil fuel industry's false advertising isn't protected by 
the First Amendment, and you don't have to take our word for it.

"Corporations should not be able to use the First Amendment as a 
get-out-of-jail-free card," Katherine Horner, New York County Supreme 
Court attorney, told ExxonKnews. Horner recently published a paper in 
the Environmental Law Reporter (hosted free on Horner's LinkedIn) that 
examines Big Oil's free speech defense, and she did not find it convincing!

Horner explains that, just like the tobacco companies before them, who 
"were made to account for their actions following the disclosure of 
internal documents chronicling the scheme to deceive the public," fossil 
fuel companies "have followed suit, arguing their public statements are 
protected by the First Amendment's freedom of speech and right to 
petition clauses."

Horner’s richly cited, 35-page paper "seeks to determine whether their 
argument holds any water" and finds that for the most part, it does not.

It's not just that incorrect statements aren't protected speech, though. 
To justify government intervention, the Supreme Court precedent is that 
the speech must also present a "legally cognizable harm," like in cases 
of fraud or defamation. Clearly, climate disinformation rises to that 
level of harm.

Horner traces the history of the Supreme Court's commercial speech 
decisions, outlining the various legal tests for whether or not 
commercial speech is protected by the First Amendment, and applies these 
tests to the fossil fuel industry's communications.

She ultimately determines that most of Big Oil's public communications 
on climate consist of false advertisements that aren't protected by the 
First Amendment. (The exception is "speech specifically directed to 
legislative or executive action," because companies are still allowed to 
petition the government.)

But corporate advertisements "should be classified as false and 
misleading commercial speech that does not warrant First Amendment 
protection" and they "should not be rewarded for the skill with which 
they distort the truth and disguise their deceit."

We couldn't have said it better ourselves (and over the years, we've 
certainly tried)!
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/1/27/2149575/-False-Advertising-Isn-t-First-Amendment-Protected-Free-Speech-Lawyer-Explains-in-New-Paper

- -

/[ here's the academic paper ]/
*Does the First Amendment Protect Fossil Fuel Companies’ Public Speech?*
January 2023
Citation: 53
Katherine G. Horner

    Numerous cities, states, and counties have sued fossil fuel
    companies, with claims based on evidence found in the companies’ own
    internal documents and statements. These companies have argued their
    public statements are protected by the First Amendment’s freedom of
    speech and right to petition clauses. This Article describes the
    current litigation, discusses the companies’ statements disseminated
    through various sources, and summarizes U.S. Supreme Court precedent
    and caselaw on commercial speech. It analyzes (1) whether the fossil
    fuel companies’ statements should be classified as commercial
    speech, (2) whether they constitute false and misleading commercial
    speech, and (3) whether their statements merit First Amendment
    protection. It concludes that some categories of statements may be
    found not to rise to the level of protected speech.

Katherine G. Horner has a J.D. from Brooklyn Law School and an LL.M. in 
environmental law from the Elisabeth Haub School of Law at Pace 
University, and currently works as a court attorney in Supreme Court, 
New York County.
https://www.elr.info/articles/elr-articles/does-first-amendment-protect-fossil-fuel-companies-public-speech


/[The news archive - looking back]/
/*January 29, 2006*/
January 29, 2006: The New York Times reports on the extensive effort by 
the George W. Bush administration to muzzle NASA scientist James Hansen. 
(The controversy would also be covered by Air America's "EcoTalk with 
Betsy Rosenberg" and the CBS program "60 Minutes.")

    *Climate Expert Says NASA Tried to Silence Him*
    By Andrew C. Revkin
    Jan. 29, 2006

    The top climate scientist at NASA says the Bush administration has
    tried to stop him from speaking out since he gave a lecture last
    month calling for prompt reductions in emissions of greenhouse gases
    linked to global warming.

    The scientist, James E. Hansen, longtime director of the agency's
    Goddard Institute for Space Studies, said in an interview that
    officials at NASA headquarters had ordered the public affairs staff
    to review his coming lectures, papers, postings on the Goddard Web
    site and requests for interviews from journalists.

    Dr. Hansen said he would ignore the restrictions. "They feel their
    job is to be this censor of information going out to the public," he
    said.

    Dean Acosta, deputy assistant administrator for public affairs at
    the space agency, said there was no effort to silence Dr. Hansen.
    "That's not the way we operate here at NASA," Mr. Acosta said. "We
    promote openness and we speak with the facts."

    He said the restrictions on Dr. Hansen applied to all National
    Aeronautics and Space Administration personnel. He added that
    government scientists were free to discuss scientific findings, but
    that policy statements should be left to policy makers and appointed
    spokesmen.

    Mr. Acosta said other reasons for requiring press officers to review
    interview requests were to have an orderly flow of information out
    of a sprawling agency and to avoid surprises. "This is not about any
    individual or any issue like global warming," he said. "It's about
    coordination."

    Dr. Hansen strongly disagreed with this characterization, saying
    such procedures had already prevented the public from fully grasping
    recent findings about climate change that point to risks ahead.

    "Communicating with the public seems to be essential," he said,
    "because public concern is probably the only thing capable of
    overcoming the special interests that have obfuscated the topic."

    Dr. Hansen, 63, a physicist who joined the space agency in 1967,
    directs efforts to simulate the global climate on computers at the
    Goddard Institute in Morningside Heights in Manhattan.

    Since 1988, he has been issuing public warnings about the long-term
    threat from heat-trapping emissions, dominated by carbon dioxide,
    that are an unavoidable byproduct of burning coal, oil and other
    fossil fuels. He has had run-ins with politicians or their
    appointees in various administrations, including budget watchers in
    the first Bush administration and Vice President Al Gore.

    In 2001, Dr. Hansen was invited twice to brief Vice President Dick
    Cheney and other cabinet members on climate change. White House
    officials were interested in his findings showing that cleaning up
    soot, which also warms the atmosphere, was an effective and far
    easier first step than curbing carbon dioxide.

    He fell out of favor with the White House in 2004 after giving a
    speech at the University of Iowa before the presidential election,
    in which he complained that government climate scientists were being
    muzzled and said he planned to vote for Senator John Kerry.

    But Dr. Hansen said that nothing in 30 years equaled the push made
    since early December to keep him from publicly discussing what he
    says are clear-cut dangers from further delay in curbing carbon dioxide.

    In several interviews with The New York Times in recent days, Dr.
    Hansen said it would be irresponsible not to speak out, particularly
    because NASA's mission statement includes the phrase "to understand
    and protect our home planet."

    He said he was particularly incensed that the directives had come
    through telephone conversations and not through formal channels,
    leaving no significant trails of documents.

    Dr. Hansen's supervisor, Franco Einaudi, said there had been no
    official "order or pressure to say shut Jim up." But Dr. Einaudi
    added, "That doesn't mean I like this kind of pressure being applied."

    The fresh efforts to quiet him, Dr. Hansen said, began in a series
    of calls after a lecture he gave on Dec. 6 at the annual meeting of
    the American Geophysical Union in San Francisco. In the talk, he
    said that significant emission cuts could be achieved with existing
    technologies, particularly in the case of motor vehicles, and that
    without leadership by the United States, climate change would
    eventually leave the earth "a different planet."

    The administration's policy is to use voluntary measures to slow,
    but not reverse, the growth of emissions.

    After that speech and the release of data by Dr. Hansen on Dec. 15
    showing that 2005 was probably the warmest year in at least a
    century, officials at the headquarters of the space agency
    repeatedly phoned public affairs officers, who relayed the warning
    to Dr. Hansen that there would be "dire consequences" if such
    statements continued, those officers and Dr. Hansen said in interviews.

    Among the restrictions, according to Dr. Hansen and an internal
    draft memorandum he provided to The Times, was that his supervisors
    could stand in for him in any news media interviews.

    Mr. Acosta said the calls and meetings with Goddard press officers
    were not to introduce restrictions, but to review existing rules. He
    said Dr. Hansen had continued to speak frequently with the news media.

    But Dr. Hansen and some of his colleagues said interviews were
    canceled as a result.

    In one call, George Deutsch, a recently appointed public affairs
    officer at NASA headquarters, rejected a request from a producer at
    National Public Radio to interview Dr. Hansen, said Leslie McCarthy,
    a public affairs officer responsible for the Goddard Institute.

    Citing handwritten notes taken during the conversation, Ms. McCarthy
    said Mr. Deutsch called N.P.R. "the most liberal" media outlet in
    the country. She said that in that call and others, Mr. Deutsch said
    his job was "to make the president look good" and that as a White
    House appointee that might be Mr. Deutsch's priority.

    But she added: "I'm a career civil servant and Jim Hansen is a
    scientist. That's not our job. That's not our mission. The inference
    was that Hansen was disloyal."

    Normally, Ms. McCarthy would not be free to describe such
    conversations to the news media, but she agreed to an interview
    after Mr. Acosta, at NASA headquarters, told The Times that she
    would not face any retribution for doing so.

    Mr. Acosta, Mr. Deutsch's supervisor, said that when Mr. Deutsch was
    asked about the conversations, he flatly denied saying anything of
    the sort. Mr. Deutsch referred all interview requests to Mr. Acosta.

    Ms. McCarthy, when told of the response, said: "Why am I going to go
    out of my way to make this up and back up Jim Hansen? I don't have a
    dog in this race. And what does Hansen have to gain?"

    Mr. Acosta said that for the moment he had no way of judging who was
    telling the truth. Several colleagues of both Ms. McCarthy and Dr.
    Hansen said Ms. McCarthy's statements were consistent with what she
    told them when the conversations occurred.

    "He's not trying to create a war over this," said Larry D. Travis,
    an astronomer who is Dr. Hansen's deputy at Goddard, "but really
    feels very strongly that this is an obligation we have as federal
    scientists, to inform the public."

    Dr. Travis said he walked into Ms. McCarthy's office in mid-December
    at the end of one of the calls from Mr. Deutsch demanding that Dr.
    Hansen be better controlled.

    In an interview on Friday, Ralph J. Cicerone, an atmospheric chemist
    and the president of the National Academy of Sciences, the nation's
    leading independent scientific body, praised Dr. Hansen's scientific
    contributions and said he had always seemed to describe his public
    statements clearly as his personal views.

    "He really is one of the most productive and creative scientists in
    the world," Dr. Cicerone said. "I've heard Hansen speak many times
    and I've read many of his papers, starting in the late 70's. Every
    single time, in writing or when I've heard him speak, he's always
    clear that he's speaking for himself, not for NASA or the
    administration, whichever administration it's been."

    The fight between Dr. Hansen and administration officials echoes
    other recent disputes. At climate laboratories of the National
    Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, for example, many scientists
    who routinely took calls from reporters five years ago can now do so
    only if the interview is approved by administration officials in
    Washington, and then only if a public affairs officer is present or
    on the phone.

    Where scientists' points of view on climate policy align with those
    of the administration, however, there are few signs of restrictions
    on extracurricular lectures or writing.

    One example is Indur M. Goklany, assistant director of science and
    technology policy in the policy office of the Interior Department.
    For years, Dr. Goklany, an electrical engineer by training, has
    written in papers and books that it may be better not to force cuts
    in greenhouse gases because the added prosperity from unfettered
    economic activity would allow countries to exploit benefits of
    warming and adapt to problems.

    In an e-mail exchange on Friday, Dr. Goklany said that in the
    Clinton administration he was shifted to nonclimate-related work,
    but added that he had never had to stop his outside writing, as long
    as he identified the views as his own.

    "One reason why I still continue to do the extracurricular stuff,"
    he wrote, "is because one doesn't have to get clearance for what I
    plan on saying or writing."

https://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/29/science/earth/climate-expert-says-nasa-tried-to-silence-him.html?unlocked_article_code=xZukUgSmOfO_9CSFgf4nGy17yBgx2t_Q-pIbocR1eaIabGb0prfz9KFEVEp08nvNnN1-_-1T-DUmyObediZiG-ioIeD-LpjCsRTRkqmJZ51xRxtBNhv6xZAUQsP1mxO7fLHYdLrKccdJrCCxVNg8bFydUQhjW43ncrz96ZyDaJWcs3WB2j5-X42sGSMgNa29QxJ6Q6tsAACEQ1nMzAl5QAmoGQmRh0HKLly_6-2IftpWmE4K5ha-SPGNoMf1Pa_dYNrAy3VjXoMMAThtBmp4x_2XoA3qHM7imX6wGnlwnCmaJ8nuZBtg6jZB_pWFcIluWKiajrVoDSBmWZbMOeR__lDC8ETN5zWtez2vknl1xpPX5gX5oppuPXRljayk&smid=share-url

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/29/science/earth/29climate.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1& 




=======================================
*Mass media is lacking, many daily summariesdeliver global warming news 
- a few are 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 personal 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/20230129/ff7442c4/attachment.htm>