[✔️] June 11, 2023- Global Warming News Digest | What changes? USAToday gives history, Montana govt in lawsuit from children, 2001 Bush blunder.

[Richard Pauli]

/*June*//*11, 2023*/

/[  BBC ponders  ]/
*Canada wildfires: Will they change how people think about climate change?*
By Richard Fisher
8th June 2023
With poor air quality and orange skies across the US east coast, some 
have speculated it could influence beliefs on climate change. Richard 
Fisher explores what the psychological research has to say.
In the 1500s, the artist Pieter Bruegel the Elder produced a painting 
about people's indifference to distant suffering. Called Landscape with 
the Fall of Icarus, a copy of the original that's now on display in 
Brussels shows a farmer ploughing his field in the foreground. It's only 
when you look carefully that you can see Icarus drowning in the sea in 
the distance, surrounded by melted feathers, his legs flailing in the air.
More than a decade ago, the psychologists Nira Liberman and Yaacov Trope 
used Bruegel's painting to introduce an idea in the journal Science that 
describes how time and distance shape people's attitudes – and 
specifically, their empathy towards others. They called it "construal 
level theory". The farmer is indifferent to the plight of Icarus, they 
argued, because he is far away. With geographical distance comes 
psychological distance.

It's an idea that holds particular relevance this week as the east coast 
of North America experiences low air quality and dystopian orange skies 
due to wildfires in Canada. Some on social media – notably quite a few 
Californians who have already faced such impacts – have speculated that 
the pollution may sharpen the realities of climate change for many east 
coasters. Could it change hearts and minds, they wonder, because the 
impacts are so close to home? Others pointed to the symbolism of the 
United Nations building in New York City, shrouded in smog.
How much truth is there to this? Do climate impacts that are "near" in 
time and space change people's attitudes towards mitigation and 
adaptation?..
According to construal level theory, people's awareness and willingness 
to act on climate change should, in principle, be influenced by how 
psychologically close they perceive its impacts to be. If they formerly 
believed climate change was mainly about melting ice caps, drought in 
the developing world or disappearing island nations – and all those are 
far away in space and time – then their concern should be lower. In 
2011, one psychologist referred to psychological distance as one of the 
"dragons of inaction" for preventing climate change.

This isn't necessarily callous behaviour, according to psychologists. In 
Bruegel's painting, the farmer has more immediate needs and priorities – 
perhaps he's intent on feeding his own family – so it's harder to notice 
and extend empathy towards Icarus's suffering in the ocean far away. 
People's circle of concern is often drawn near to them, meaning that 
they will care more about someone close to home, rather than on the 
opposite side of the world...
- -
However, on reviewing the literature up to 2020, the psychologist 
Roberta Maiella of G. d'Annunzio University of Chieti-Pescara in Italy 
and colleagues found that the reality was more complex and nuanced than 
first appears.

There is indeed evidence that proximity to climate impacts influences 
people's views. For example, in 2011 Alexa Spence of the University of 
Nottingham and colleagues surveyed UK residents exposed to coastal 
flooding, and found that they perceived greater uncertainty about the 
climate and more willingness to restrict energy use. And another study 
of participants in 24 countries showed that people with personal 
experience of climate change were more likely to do things like use less 
air conditioning in the summer.

However, not all studies have confirmed the correlation as strong, and 
the methodologies to study the effect differ. In one study where US 
participants were presented with the impact of climate change in the 
Maldives, researchers used cues that aimed to reduce people's 
psychological distance and make the remote island nation feel nearer. 
This included asking them to trace the distance from Ithaca in New York 
to the remote island nation on a map, and watch a video about how sea 
level rise was affecting Maldives citizens. People given these cues 
judged the Maldives to be spatially closer, but crucially, this didn't 
translate into increased support for climate change mitigation policies.

People's prior political affiliation may also matter. One 2020 study of 
Californians’ response to nearby wildfires suggested that close exposure 
to damage fostered support for pro-environmental policies in Democratic 
areas, but not Republican ones...
- -
So will the awful air and darkened skies in New York City and other east 
coast cities influence people's attitudes there? Perhaps for some – but 
there are clearly other effects at play that influence beliefs.

There do seem to be ways to reduce psychological distance over climate 
change through effective communication. For instance, there's a 
well-known trick that charities often use called the "identifiable 
victim effect". When people are presented with a single human being 
facing the effects of climate change, this can foster greater empathy. 
In one study by psychologists Sabine Pahl at the University of Plymouth 
and Judith Bauer at the University of Erlangen in Germany, people were 
told a detailed story about a woman living in the future facing the 
impact of climate change. The pair told people how she'd burn her skin 
outside in the Sun, or get a rash after swimming in a polluted sea. 
Compared with those who had been given more "fact-focused" information 
about future warming, people who heard the woman's story were more 
likely to spend time reading about climate change afterwards.

In sum, psychological distance is shaped by more than geography alone. 
But the evidence suggests that when climate change comes to people's 
neighbourhoods, it's likely to influence how many see it.

/  Richard Fisher is a senior journalist for BBC Future and the author 
of The Long View: Why We Need to Change How the World Sees Time./
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20230608-canada-wildfires-will-they-change-climate-attitudes-on-us-east-coast



/[  Excellent report from USA Today June 10, 2023 ] /
*Climate change warnings started in the late 1800s. Here's what humanity 
knew and when.*
Dinah Voyles Pulver
USA TODAY
Political misinformation continues to swirl around the climate change 
discussion like a thick fog rolling in off the rising ocean. But a host 
of government documents and reports by researchers and historians lay a 
clear trail of what scientists and government officials knew and when.

Scientists had already figured out by the late 1800s that a greenhouse 
effect works to keep the planet warm, and that the carbon dioxide 
produced by burning coal could enhance that effect. By the 1970s, 
researchers were measuring those emissions in the atmosphere and warning 
Earth’s temperature could warm between 0.5 and 5 degrees Celsius by the 
mid-21st century.

Fifty years later, the vast majority of scientists agreed the global 
average temperature was already one degree Celsius higher than it had 
been in the late 1800s and had been rising at a rate of .2 degrees 
Celsius every decade since the 1970s.

*Some people continue to wrongly characterize climate change as a new fad*
Despite the long history of scientific and military documents that 
chronicle warming temperatures, rising sea levels and more extreme 
weather around the world, people often repeat misconceptions and share 
inaccurate information.

In one of the latest examples, presidential contender Ron DeSantis, 
governor of one of the states most vulnerable to climate change, brought 
up warming during a May 24 FOX News interview with Trey Gowdy.

When Gowdy asked about the U.S. military, DeSantis replied:
- - “You talk about things like global warming that they’re somehow 
concerned about, and that’s not the military I served in.”

But the military, including the Navy, has been worried about climate 
change for decades.

“DeSantis is wrong,” says Peter Gleick, a co-founder and senior fellow 
at the Pacific Institute, who has studied the U.S. military’s climate 
change research for more than 30 years.

Navy officials talked about the impacts of climate change more than 15 
years before DeSantis joined the Navy in 2004.

       -- “We are all aware of possible threats posed by global climate
    change,” retired Navy Admiral James Watkins told members of Congress
    in February 1989, after being nominated by President George H.W.
    Bush to serve as Secretary of Energy.
       -- By 2001, Navy submarines had documented a “striking” thinning
    of new Arctic Ocean ice.
       -- The Navy conducted a two-day symposium in 2001 to evaluate
    potential operations needed in an ice-diminished Arctic.
       -- The Navy issued its “Climate Change Road Map” in 2010, the
    year DeSantis left active duty. It stated: “Climate change is a
    national security challenge with strategic implications for the Navy.”

*What we knew and when about climate change*
For more than 150 years, scientists have built on the work of others 
before them to identify the role of carbon dioxide emissions in warming 
the Earth.

“Any politician today that denies the reality of climate change is 
either grossly ignorant of more than a century of science or is 
deliberately misleading the public for political reasons,” Gleick said.
- -
*Concerns about coal burning crop up early*
*1300s* – King Edward of England bans coal burning, blaming it for 
thick, black smoke choking the air in London.

*1700s* – Coal-powered factories begin appearing in Great Britain as the 
first Industrial Revolution begins in Europe.

*1861* – Irish physicist John Tyndall writes that water vapor and gasses 
such as carbon dioxide create the Earth’s greenhouse effect, trapping 
the Sun’s heat and keeping the planet warm.
*
**1896 *–Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius publishes a study that shows 
he “knows that increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will raise 
temperatures, and acknowledges that burning fossil fuels are a source of 
carbon dioxide, but stops just short of explicitly predicting man-made 
global warming,” said Robert Rohde, lead scientist for Berkeley Earth. 
Arrhenius connected the dots in his later work.

U.S. geologist Thomas Chamberlin at the University of Chicago, who 
studied glaciers in the Arctic, also writes about carbon dioxide’s role 
in regulating the Earth’s temperature.

*1912* – A New Zealand newspaper warns burning coal could eventually 
change the climate. The piece was based on a Popular Mechanics magazine 
article published earlier that year that mentioned the work of Arrhenius...

*Climate change conversation continues as research advances*
The era from the 1950s to the 1970s ushers in more scientific progress 
and data collection.

*1958* – Scientist C. David Keeling with the Scripps Institution of 
Oceanography begins direct measurements of carbon dioxide in the 
atmosphere at the Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii. In the 65 years since 
then, carbon dioxide concentrations have climbed from 315.98 parts per 
million to 423.78, a 34% increase.

*1970 *– Meteorologist George S. Benton at Johns Hopkins University 
writes "Carbon Dioxide and its Role in Climate Change" for the 
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. He says:

    - - A 10% increase in carbon dioxide should result in an average
    temperature increase of about .3 degrees Celsius.
    - - Some local temperatures have warmed as much as 3-4 degrees Celsius.

*1974 *– The Central Intelligence Agency publishes the report “A Study 
of Climatological Research as it Pertains to Intelligence Problems.” The 
agency notes detrimental global climatic change and calls for more 
federally funded research, saying: “It is increasingly evident that the 
intelligence community must understand the magnitude of international 
threats which occur as a function of climatic change.”

*1975* – Geochemist Wallace Broecker of Columbia University's 
Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory publishes a study titled: 
"Climatic Change: Are We on the Brink of a Pronounced Global Warming?"

*Research advances open information floodgates during Carter 
Administration *
By the late 1970s, the phrase “climate change” began regularly appearing 
in academic research papers, government reports and even newspaper stories.

After President Jimmy Carter’s election in 1976, several key 
developments occur, including a panel he commissioned to look at 
concentrations of carbon dioxide and a study for the Department of Energy.

*1977* – In a July letter to Carter, his science adviser, geophysicist 
Frank Press, notes:

    - - Fossil fuel combustion has increased “at an exponential rate”
    over 100 years
    -- Carbon dioxide is 12% above the pre-industrial revolution level
    and could grow 1.5 to 2 times that level within 60 years, increasing
    warning anywhere from 0.5-5 degrees Celsius
    -- Rapid increase could be “catastrophic”

*1978* – In one of the earliest references to climate change in the news 
media, Newsweek publishes a story by Peter Gwynne and Sharon Begley, 
during a tough winter, with heavy rain and mudslides in California.

The authors asked if the Earth is moving into a period of colder weather 
and climatologists said climate change isn’t temporary weather but what 
happens over decades.
“A growing number of meteorologists think that, rather than cooling, the 
atmosphere is actually warming up,” the story stated. “And if the world 
is getting warmer, the main reason is a rise in the atmosphere’s level 
of carbon dioxide.”

*July 1980 –* The Global 2000 Study Report to the President, written by 
a team co-led by Martha Garrett and Gerald Barney, moves the 
conversation about environmental challenges fully into American 
politics. Among its findings:

- Even a 1 degree Celsius rise would make the earth’s climate warmer 
than in 1,000 years
- A carbon dioxide-induced temperature rise is expected to be 3 or 4 
times greater at the poles than in the middle latitudes. (Today, federal 
officials say the Arctic is warming more than twice as fast as anywhere 
else in the world and at an even greater pace in some locations and at 
some times of the year.)
*December 1980 – *The probable outcome of the concentration of CO2 in 
the atmosphere is “beyond human experience,” reports a sweeping study by 
the American Association for the Advancement of Science for the Energy 
Department. The report states, that CO2-triggered climate change could:

- - Cause floods and droughts, leading to malnutrition and famine.
- - "Pit nation against nation and group against group.''

Roger Revelle, former president of the American Association for the 
Advancement of Science, says if carbon dioxide levels doubled by 
mid-21st century, average global temperatures would increase by 5 
degrees Fahrenheit, the Associated Press reports.

*1988 *– James Hansen, with NASA’s Goddard Space Institute, and George 
Woodwell, director of the Woods Hole Research Center, tell members of 
the U.S. Senate’s Energy and Natural Resources committee that carbon 
dioxide levels in the atmosphere are rising and responsible for 
increases in global average temperature and warming at higher latitudes.

*1989* – The National Academy of Sciences — now led by Press, Carter's 
former science adviser — sends a letter to President-elect George H.W. 
Bush, urging him to place the threat of increasing global temperatures 
high on his agenda and to seek alternatives to coal, oil and other 
pollutants that fuel global warming.

Gleick publishes a study that notes widespread attention to concerns 
about how climate change and other environmental problems could affect 
international security and recommends responses to minimize adverse 
consequences.
*1990 *– The U.S. Navy War College presents a report to the Select 
Senate Committee on Intelligence, “Global Climate Change: Implications 
for the United States.” in what Gleick says is the first explicit 
acknowledgement of the potential threat of climate change to national 
security.

*1991* – The Bush administration’s National Security Strategy of the 
United States mentions the climate peril twice, saying environmental 
concerns such as climate change and deforestation were “already 
contributing to political conflict.”

*1997 *– Members of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate 
Change adopt the Kyoto Protocol in Kyoto, Japan in December. It receives 
84 signatures over the next 15 months.

*1998 *– The federal government declassifies data gathered by Navy 
submarines on Arctic sea ice thickness, information deemed essential to 
examining how global climate change affects ice cover.

*1999* –  As the millennium closes, researchers Michael Mann, Raymond 
Bradley and Malcolm Hughes reconstruct historical temperatures and 
suggest warming in the latter half of the century is unlike anything in 
at least 1,000 years. It became widely known as the hockey stick theory, 
for the line that shows the abrupt increase in later years.

*A new century*
*2002* – The National Academies of Science releases the report: “Abrupt 
Climate Change, Inevitable Surprises.”

*2003* – Abrupt climate change could pose “specific consequences to the 
US military,” writes retired Navy Rear Admiral Richard Pittenger and 
oceanographer Robert Gagosian in a piece for Defense Horizons. They say 
it “seems a useful exercise to contemplate the military ramifications of 
potential, abrupt climate changes."

*2009* – U.S. Navy creates a Climate Change Task Force to recommend 
actions the Navy should take in response to sudden changes in the Arctic 
marine environment. Rear Admiral David Titley, who led the task force, 
later said counter arguments presented during the research “fell apart 
in the face of overwhelming evidence.”

By 2010, the task force releases an “Arctic Roadmap” and a Navy Climate 
Change roadmap. Among the statements:

    - - Arctic is warming twice as fast as the rest of the globe.
    --  “The current scientific consensus indicates the Arctic may
    experience nearly ice free summers sometime in the 2030's.”
    --  Climate change is "affecting military installations and access
    to natural resources worldwide.”
    --  2015 – An Inside Climate News investigation reports Exxon and
    Exxon Mobil Corp. accurately predicted human caused global warming
    between 1977 and 2003 but "suppressed the information"

*2019 *– A Department of Defense report during the administration of 
President Donald Trump says dozens of bases are experiencing climate 
change challenges, including rising sea levels, thawing permafrost, 
drought and wildfires.

*2021 *– Department of Defense risk analysis warns “to keep the nation 
secure, we must tackle the existential threat of climate change. The 
unprecedented scale of wildfires, floods, droughts, typhoons, and other 
extreme weather events of recent months and years have damaged our 
installations and bases, constrained force readiness and operations, and 
contributed to instability around the world.”

*In June 2023*, Titley, the retired rear admiral who led the Navy's 
2009-10 task force, told USA TODAY the military is "always interested in 
changes (political, economic, demographic, agricultural, engineering, 
technology, etc) that will impact war fighting, readiness, and the 
capabilities of both ourselves and any potential adversaries."

When people asked him why the military would be interested in climate 
change, Titley said he responded with his own question. “Why wouldn’t we 
be if it impacting warfighting and readiness? It would be negligent and 
a disservice of our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines not to think 
through the changes that will be caused by a changing climate."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2023/06/10/timeline-of-climate-change-what-humanity-knew-and-when/70273996007/



/[ first to go to trial,  June 12  ] /
*Youth Are Suing Montana for Failing to Protect Their Future From 
Climate Chaos*
The lawsuit is based on Montana’s state constitution, which enshrines 
the right to a clean and healthful environment.

By Marjorie Cohn, TRUTHOUT
Published June 10, 2023

In a case that could have far-reaching implications for the struggle 
against the climate crisis, the trial in a lawsuit brought by a group of 
youth plaintiffs will begin in Montana on June 12. Besides being the 
first such case about climate change to go to trial, Held v. Montana 
involves the specific impacts the climate crisis has on young people.

This trial is a bellwether for other cases throughout the United States. 
Mat dos Santos, general counsel for Our Children’s Trust, which 
represents the youth plaintiffs, said that the lawsuit “is not just 
about Montana. It’s really about the climate here in the United States 
and around the world.” If this suit is successful, it would be a 
“watershed moment” that could lead to a “cascade of legal victories 
around the country,” dos Santos added, and would likely have global 
implications.

In 2020, 16 youths who were then between 2 and 18 years of age filed a 
complaint against the State of Montana, its governor and other state 
officials. The youth plaintiffs, as they are referred to in the case, 
maintain that they have been and will continue to be harmed by the 
dangerous effects of fossil fuels and the climate crisis.

Their 104-page complaint alleges, “Children are uniquely vulnerable to 
the consequences of the climate crisis, which harms Youth Plaintiffs’ 
physical and psychological health and safety, interferes with family and 
cultural foundations and integrity, and causes economic deprivations.” 
The crisis is “degrading and depleting Montana’s unique and precious 
environment and natural resources, which the Youth Plaintiffs depend on 
for their safety and survival.” The complaint adds that youth are 
“disproportionately harmed” and face “life-long hardships” as a result 
of climate change.

Montana, which has the nation’s largest coal reserves, has warmed more 
than most of the contiguous states in the U.S. because northern 
latitudes heat faster, the complaint says. Due to the warming climate, 
Montana’s snowpack has been decreasing and is likely to continue 
decreasing with rising temperatures. Wildfires — which impact 
ecosystems, property and livelihoods — are expected to get significantly 
worse unless immediate steps are taken to limit global heating.

https://truthout.org/articles/youth-are-suing-montana-for-failing-to-protect-their-future-from-climate-chaos/ 


- -

[ Clips from the fairly readable filed complaint - 
http://climatecasechart.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/case-documents/2020/20200313_docket-CDV-2020-307_complaint.pdf 
]

    2. The Youth Plaintiffs to this proceeding are children and youth in
    Montana, between the
    ages of two (2) and eighteen (18), who have been and will continue
    to be harmed by the
    dangerous impacts of fossil fuels and the climate crisis. Children
    are uniquely vulnerable
    to the consequences of the climate crisis, which harms Youth
    Plaintiffs’ physical and
    psychological health and safety, interferes with family and cultural
    foundations and
    integrity, and causes economic deprivations...
    - -
    8. Although Defendants know that Youth Plaintiffs are living under
    dangerous climatic
    conditions that create an unreasonable risk of harm, they continue
    to act affirmatively to
    exacerbate the climate crisis. Youth Plaintiffs, most of whom cannot
    vote, therefore seek
    this Court’s judgment and redress...
    - -
    10. Here too, because Defendants have used their governmental
    authority to create a state
    energy system that causes unparalleled harms to Montana’s children
    and youth, it is
    incumbent on the courts to bring that system into constitutional
    compliance...
    - -
    18. Rikki’s family hunts deer and elk on the ranch, which they
    freeze and eat throughout the
    year. Due to rising temperatures and drought conditions, elk range
    and herd behaviors have
    changed and it has become more difficult for Rikki’s family to hunt
    deer and elk on the
    ranch...
    - -
    22. Lander and Badge are also avid fishermen and catch cutthroat
    trout, rainbow trout, bull
    trout, and other fish in Montana. Their ability to fish is adversely
    impacted as the climate
    crisis causes abnormally low instream water levels and high water
    temperatures, which
    harm fish and decrease their population...
    - -
    27. Plaintiff Sariel S. is 17 years old and lives on the Flathead
    Indian Reservation. Sariel is a
    member of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes. Sariel’s
    family and community
    have a deep connection to the natural world, and have a body of
    knowledge about the
    environment closely tied to the seasons, locations, and environment.
    This body of
    knowledge, as well as cultural practices and traditions, are passed
    on by Elders and family
    to Sariel so that her generation and future generations can continue
    her community’s
    spiritual, cultural, and familial traditions and ways of life...
    - -
    30. There has been an increase in wildfires on the Flathead
    Reservation where Sariel lives, and
    she is forced to remain indoors when the smoke is concentrated in
    the area to preserve her
    overall health and safety...
    - -
    36. Increased smoke in the summer has impacted Kian’s ability to
    play soccer, fish, hike, camp,
    and otherwise recreate outside, activities which are central to his
    health and foundational
    to his family. The smoke makes Kian feel sick, and he is forced to
    seek refuge inside.
    During the summer of 2017, his family had to cancel a camping trip
    because the smoke
    conditions were so oppressive and dangerous...
    - -
    40. In the summer, when Georgi trains for Nordic skiing and winter
    competition, the wildfire
    smoke limits her ability to train outdoors, which is important for
    the sport. Practices in the
    summer have been cancelled or curtailed due to smoke from wildfires
    in Montana. The
    smoke makes it so Georgi cannot fully breathe or train at a high
    intensity level; she is
    increasingly worried about the long-term effects that the exposure
    to heavy smoke while
    training has on her health and respiratory system. In or around
    August 2017, while training
    in Canmore, Alberta, Canada, Georgi had to wear a mask to protect
    herself from the ash
    that fell from the sky...
    - -
    45. Witnessing climate change impacts occur around her is
    devastating emotionally to Grace
    and she is anxious about her future and fearful that her generation
    may not survive the
    climate crisis. Grace has doubts about whether she would want to
    have her own children
    given her anxieties about the future...
    - -
    61. Olivia is profoundly impacted by the climate crisis emotionally
    and psychologically. She
    experiences bouts of depression when she thinks about the dire
    projections of the future,
    and doubts whether society and civilization will even exist. Olivia
    values her family and
    would like to have and raise children of her own, but she questions
    whether this is even an
    option in a world devastated by the climate crisis. She fears that
    if she has children they,
    or their children, would suffer or starve. Imagining the future that
    she will inherit, or that
    her children would live in, and the current suffering that the
    climate crisis is already causing
    her and others is a heavy burden for her to carry, and Olivia feels
    heartbroken and
    desperate...
    - -
    62. Plaintiffs Jeffrey K. and Nathaniel (“Nate”) K. live in Montana
    City, Montana. Jeffrey is
    six years old and Nate is two years old. Jeffrey has a pulmonary
    sequestration. As a result,
    Jeffrey is uniquely susceptible to respiratory complications, such
    as infections. Nate also
    has respiratory issues and, at the age of two, is sick frequently.
    Nate has gone to the
    emergency room twice due to difficulty breathing. Both Jeffrey and
    Nate, given their
    unique lung and health conditions, are especially vulnerable to poor
    air quality, such as
    smoke-filled air caused by wildfires. Climate disruption is
    increasing the length and
    severity of Montana’s wildfire season which poses a threat to
    Jeffrey and Nate’s health,
    especially given their young age and respiratory health conditions..
    - -
    69. Despite Claire’s work to raise money to install solar panels on
    her school, Montana law
    limits the size of solar panel arrays. Consequently, Claire’s school
    is forced to continue to
    buy energy instead of using the cheaper energy generated by solar
    panels on site. As a
    result, her school has fewer financial resources to spend on
    programs, teachers, and
    facilities and, therefore, Claire’s educational opportunities have
    been diminished by
    Montana’s efforts to hinder large-scale solar arrays and instead,
    promote fossil fuels as an
    energy source...
    - -
    72. Ruby and Lilian pick wild chokecherries, and use the berries to
    make syrup. They also pick
    wild huckleberries, raspberries, Oregon grapes, and other wild
    fruits. They pick the berries
    before Crow Fair; however, recently they have experienced abnormal
    weather conditions
    and the berries and other fruits are not ripe. The increase in
    wildfires in Montana has
    restricted access to certain areas where they used to pick berries...
    - -
    108. Notwithstanding their longstanding knowledge of the dangers
    that climate
    disruption and GHG emissions pose, more particularly described
    below, Defendants have
    developed and implemented a State Energy Policy in Montana for
    decades, which involves
    systemic authorization, permitting, encouragement, and facilitation
    of activities promoting
    fossil fuels and resulting in dangerous levels of GHG emissions,
    without regard to climate
    change impacts or the fundamental rights of Youth Plaintiffs and
    future generations of
    Montanans. Mont. Code Ann. § 90-4-1001(c)-(g), State Energy Policy.
    Moreover, pursuant
    to the Climate Change Exception to MEPA, Mont. Code Ann. §
    75-1-201(2)(a),
    Defendants have deliberately ignored the dangerous impacts of the
    climate crisis...
    - -
    d. Defendant PSC affirmatively acts to promote public utilities
    reliant on fossil fuels
    and against the public safety in the face of dangerous climatic changes.
    e. Defendants engage in a systemic pattern and practice of issuing
    permits, licenses,
    and leases that result in GHG emissions without considering how the
    additional
    GHG emissions will contribute to the climate crisis.
    f. Defendants authorize four private coal plants to operate in the
    state, and these coal
    plants are responsible for 30% of Montana’s energy production.
    g. Defendants continue to permit surface coal mining and reclamation
    in Montana,
    which results in substantial GHG emissions. Defendant DEQ approved
    the AM4
    expansion of the Rosebud Strip Mine in December 2015. Defendant DEQ
    issued a
    permit to expand the coal mining operation and reclamation plan at
    Bull Mountain
    Mine in July 2016.
    33 Pursuant to the Climate Change Exception to MEPA, DEQ
    refused to analyze how these decisions would aggravate the impacts
    of climate
    change..
    - -
    p. Defendants continue to certify and authorize four petroleum
    refineries—
    Exxon/Mobil, Phillips 66, CHS Laurel, and Calumet Refining—in the
    State of
    Montana. In 2016, these refineries exported 66.5 million barrels of
    crude oil. The
    four refineries combined released 2.0 million metric tons of CO2e in
    2018.
    39
    Pursuant to the Climate Change Exception to MEPA, Defendants have
    failed to
    disclose to the public the health or climate consequences of these
    decisions.
    q. Defendants have explicitly adopted and endorsed fuel and fuel tax
    requirements for
    vehicles, commercial carriers, and aviation that lock in dangerous
    levels of GHG
    emissions from the transportation sector.40
    r. Defendants have exempted certain facilities that burn fossil
    fuels from present and
    future compliance with GHG emission standards..
    - -
    178. The psychological harms from the climate crisis are acute and
    chronic and they
    accrue from impacts such as heat waves, drought conditions,
    wildfires, air pollution,
    violent storms, the loss of wildlife, watching glaciers melt, and
    the loss of familial and
    cultural foundations and traditions. Many children, including Youth
    Plaintiffs Olivia and
    Grace, experience psychological impacts and are distressed from day
    to day conditions,
    anxious about the climate crisis, and are unable to alleviate their
    concerns.143 Youth
    Plaintiffs are acutely aware that the window to avoid locking in
    irreversible climate change
    impacts is closing. As climate disruption transforms communities,
    Youth Plaintiffs and
    children are likely to experience a feeling that they are losing a
    place that is important to
    them, which is a phenomenon called solastalgia.144 Solastalgia
    describes the gripping sense
    of existential loss when treasured places are irreparably damaged or
    destroyed as a result
    of human carelessness or willful disregard for them, and can cause
    profound distress.145
    This captures the way Youth Plaintiff Badge feels when knowing that
    the area he was
    named after is being damaged and degraded due to climate disruption.
    179. The psychological health effects include elevated levels of
    anxiety, depression,
    post-traumatic stress disorder, increased incidences of suicide,
    substance abuse, social
    disruptions like increased violence, and a distressing sense of
    loss. The psychological
    harms caused by the climate crisis can result in a lifetime of
    hardships for children...
    - -
    199. State government officials continue to be aware of the perils
    of runaway climate
    change. Governor Bullock recently issued an executive order creating
    a Montana Climate
    Solutions Council (“Council’) to prepare the state for the impacts
    of climate change.170
    According to the executive order, “[c]limate change poses a serious
    threat to Montana’s
    natural resources, public health, communities, and economy.”
    However, the executive
    order neither directs any state agencies to actually reduce GHG
    emissions, nor does it direct
    the Council to tailor its plan to the best available climate
    science. Moreover, the executive
    order explicitly states that the Council should consider ways to
    safeguard existing energy
    assets (which are primarily fossil fuel based). There is no
    indication that the executive order
    will actually lead to any reduction in Montana’s GHG emissions,
    which is further
    supported by the fact that the Council should cease to exist by
    August 1, 2020...
    - -
    COUNT III—INDIVIDUAL DIGNITY AND EQUAL PROTECTION
    (Mont. Const. Art. II, § 4, § 15)
    227. Youth Plaintiffs hereby reallege all paragraphs above as if set
    forth fully herein.
    228. The dignity clause of Article II, Section 4 commands that, “The
    dignity of the
    human being is inviolable. No person shall be denied the equal
    protection of the laws.”...
    - -
    (more)

http://climatecasechart.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/case-documents/2020/20200313_docket-CDV-2020-307_complaint.pdf 




/[The news archive - looking back at Bush events....]/
/*June 11, 2001*/
June 11, 2001: In a Rose Garden speech on climate change, President 
George W. Bush repeatedly attacks the Kyoto Protocol.

http://c-spanvideo.org/program/GlobalClimateChang
http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/06/20010611-2.html 




=======================================
*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/20230611/52cf6e24/attachment.htm>