[✔️] May 28, 2023- Global Warming News Digest | 423 PPM. AI gives tepid advice, Hansen warns faster heat, 2003 Exxon invests in disinformation.

[R.Pauli]

/*May*//*28, 2023*/

/[ Now, 423 PPM changes with seasons, but always trending UP ]
/***423.28**is t**he most important number of the climate crisis**
*Atmospheric CO2 in parts per million, 16 May 2023
Source: NOAA  Mauna Loa CO2/
/https://www.co2.earth/monthly-co2/
/

/
/

/
/

/[  While listening to the historic audio of the heroic Apollo 13 
mission, I composed a question to ask of AI Chat concerning our current 
human predicament. - I asked about a challenge - namely to act as we did 
with the Apollo 13 emergency --]
/

//*I asked the AI Bard at Google*/https://bard.google.com/ /*to:*

    "Evaluate the current human predicament of global warming risk and
    future climate change destabilization dangers as defined by IPCC
    Scenario A (Business-as-usual) then compare to the NASA transcript
    of the Apollo 13 emergency and then use 500 words to recommend
    emergency actions such that humans could survive this calamity."

*The AI answered: *

    The current human predicament of global warming risk and future
    climate change destabilization dangers is a serious one. The
    Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has stated that if
    we continue on our current path, we will see a global temperature
    rise of 2 degrees Celsius by the end of the century. This would have
    a devastating impact on our planet, leading to more extreme weather
    events, rising sea levels, and mass extinctions.

    The Apollo 13 emergency was a close call, but in the end, the
    astronauts were able to survive and return to Earth safely. The key
    to their success was teamwork and ingenuity. They were able to use
    the resources they had available to them to make repairs and get
    back home.

    In order to survive the climate crisis, we will need to use the same
    kind of teamwork and ingenuity. We will need to come together as a
    global community and find solutions that work for everyone. We will
    need to invest in renewable energy, reduce our reliance on fossil
    fuels, and adapt to the impacts of climate change that are already
    happening.

    It will not be easy, but it is possible. We have the technology and
    the resources to make a difference. All we need is the will to do it.

    *Here are some emergency actions that we can take to survive the
    climate crisis:**
    ***

        *-- Invest in renewable energy. Renewable energy is the key to a
        clean energy future. It is also a job creator and can help to
        reduce pollution.

        **-- Reduce our reliance on fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are the
        main source of greenhouse gas emissions. We need to find ways to
        reduce our reliance on them and switch to cleaner sources of energy.

        **-- Adapt to the impacts of climate change. Climate change is
        already having an impact on our planet. We need to invest in
        adaptation measures, such as building sea walls to protect
        coastal communities from rising sea levels.

        **-- Educate ourselves and others about climate change. The more
        people who understand the problem, the more likely we are to
        find solutions.

        **-- Take action. We need to take action to address climate
        change. We can do this by contacting our elected officials,
        supporting businesses that are taking action on climate change,
        and reducing our own carbon footprint.**
        * 

    ***The climate crisis is a serious problem, but it is not
    insurmountable. If we work together, we can find solutions and
    survive this calamity.*

https://bard.google.com



/[  Maybe wildfire smoke will reduce these impacts from cleaner air  ]/
*James Hansen Warns of a Short-Term Climate Shock Bringing 2 Degrees of 
Warming by 2050*
The famed researcher publicly released a preliminary version of a 
paper-in-progress with grim predictions of short- and long-term warming, 
but not all climate scientists agree with its conclusions.
By Bob Berwyn
May 26, 2023
A team of scientists led by former NASA climate researcher James Hansen, 
who formally raised the alarm about climate change to U.S. government 
leaders in his 1988 testimony to Congress, is working on a new study 
that warns of a possible short-term spike of planetary heating 2 degrees 
Celsius above pre-industrial levels by 2050.

In an irony of climate change, the scientists said the sudden surge of 
warming—especially since 2010—is driven mainly by steep reduction of 
climate-cooling sulfate aerosol particles in the past 10 to 20 years, as 
new regulations limited emissions from the biggest sources, including 
the burning of coal and heavy ship fuels.

The draft paper has not been peer-reviewed, but Hansen, director of the 
Climate Science Awareness And Solutions center at Columbia University’s 
Earth Institute, posted it publicly on May 19 on a scientific discussion 
website, again drawing public attention to the potential for a shock of 
short-term warming that could devastate global food production and 
ecosystems.

Hansen’s previous warning about the potential for short-term heating due 
to emissions reductions was in 2021, when he said the drop in sulfate 
aerosol pollution could double the rate of global warming during the 
next 25 years. In his monthly climate bulletin he explained that sulfate 
aerosols, cause microscopic water droplets in the atmosphere to 
multiply, which brightens clouds to reflect heat away from the Earth. 
The reduced amount of sulfates in the atmosphere allows more heat from 
the sun to warm ocean and land surfaces.

In the discussion draft of the new paper, the authors predict the rate 
of warming will double from the observed 0.18 degrees Celsius per decade 
from 1970 to 2010, to at least 0.27 degrees Celsius per decade since 2010.

“Under the current geopolitical approach to GHG emissions, global 
warming will likely pierce the 1.5°C ceiling in the 2020s and 2°C before 
2050,” the authors wrote. “Impacts on people and nature will accelerate 
as global warming pumps up hydrologic extremes.” The “enormity of the 
consequences,” they added, requires trying to reverse global warming and 
cool the Earth down to the relatively stable range of the past 12,000 
years, before carbon dioxide pollution disrupted the climate.
The concentrations of climate-cooling sulfate aerosols have decreased 
most sharply over oceans in the past 20 years because of 
pollution-cutting rules imposed on shipping. And the new warning in 
Hansen’s paper comes at a time when the average ocean surface 
temperature has soared and stayed well above previous record levels.

That fact is not lost on Leon Simons, a co-author of the draft paper, 
who recently wrote on Twitter: “North Atlantic is on fire,” and went on 
to explain the ocean warming with a graph showing how the overheated 
area overlaps with key shipping lanes where aerosol emissions have declined.

The rapid drop of aerosols is increasing Earth’s energy imbalance so 
quickly that an acceleration of warming is inevitable, said Simons, a 
climate researcher and board member of the Club of Rome, a 
Switzerland-based nonprofit sustainability think tank known for 
publishing the The Limits to Growth report in 1972, as well as a 50-year 
followup report last year.

In effect, sulfate aerosol particles shielded the planet’s surface from 
some of the sun’s heat for decades, and cutting them is removing the 
shield, leading to a rapid warmup. Other research showing that sulfate 
aerosols have also masked global precipitation increases driven by  
greenhouse gases warming the atmosphere.

Like Hansen, Simons said he’s agreed to not directly discuss the paper’s 
findings. But he said the publicly posted draft “includes observational 
evidence for the increased rate of warming,” adding that it “seems 
rather obvious” that the net heating effect of greenhouse gases on the 
atmosphere “can result in 2 degrees Celsius of warming...
- -
Hansen said the research team won’t answer questions directly about the 
study until it has been peer reviewed. “If I do an interview before it 
is accepted (and published), it seems to give the self-appointed 
‘experts’ an excuse to blackball our paper,” he said.

But in a May 25 update on his Columbia University website, he responded 
to some of the initial reactions to the draft study by writing,“There’s 
no time to get involved in Twitter wars.”

He emphasized that he thinks the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate 
Change is downplaying some of global warming’s most imminent risks and 
he elaborated on the “blackball” comment by referring to a peer-reviewed 
and published 2016 paper that he said the Intergovernmental Panel on 
Climate Change ignored.

That paper found that the current rate of greenhouse gas emissions would 
lead crucial climate-regulating Atlantic Ocean currents to shut down, 
and sea level to rise several meters within 50 to 150 years.

“As yet, little has changed to get us off that path,” he wrote. “You 
would not know that from the communications of the United Nations COPs 
(Conferences of the Parties) and their scientific advisory body, the 
IPCC.” The IPCC’s modeling approach is useful, he said, but he warned 
that some of its projections seem to assume that “a miracle will occur,” 
so those models need to be checked against the real world.

“Our research is focused on real world data and comparison with models, 
with the hope of gaining insights about how the climate system works and 
where the real world is headed,” he wrote. The “miracle” that limits 
warming to less than 2 degrees Celsius in the most hopeful IPCC 
scenarios is based on an “assumption of negative emissions via power 
plants that burn biofuels, capturing and sequestering the CO2.”

Focusing attention on the paper before it’s reviewed is “mainly to start 
the scientific discussion and get input from the broader scientific 
community,” Simons added. “Such a broad paper benefits from this, as the 
reviewers might be more specialized. With Jim [Hansen], there will of 
course automatically be media attention, but that’s not the goal. People 
need to know about the acceleration of warming.”

If the average global temperature warms 2 degrees above pre-industrial 
times by 2050, it means that temperatures over land will likely increase 
double that amount, by 4 degrees Celsius, because land surfaces have 
less heat capacity than the oceans, where some of the heat goes deep 
down and isn’t immediately expressed as a rise of surface temperature.

This year’s IPCC 6th Assessment Report  shows that level of warming 
rapidly increases the odds of massive, widespread droughts that could 
wipe out food production in key global crop areas at the same time, as 
well as severe water shortages and fierce heat waves that would displace 
millions of people. The combined physical and social impacts would 
destabilize some regions and possibly stir up conflicts over food and 
water supplies.

The draft discussion paper posted by Hansen also explores how much 
warming is locked into the system for thousands of years to come by 
current atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations. Those long-term 
consequences are overlooked in climate policy discussions that don’t 
look beyond 2100, climate scientists Zeke Hausfather and Andrew Dessler 
wrote on May 22, in a discussion of the new paper.

“Considering that Jim Hansen’s predictions have often proven correct, 
it’s important that we pay close attention to what he’s saying,” 
Hausfather and Dessler wrote. ..
- -
“Humanity is the first species able to … measure and analyze the 
incoming and outgoing energy; how the balance is changing and what 
happens with the accumulating energy,” he said. “Understanding this is a 
crucial first step in order to act effectively. I believe that with a 
more thorough understanding of our planet, humanity could become a 
beneficial force to life on Earth,  if we acquire the collective will to 
do so.”
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/26052023/james-hansen-climate-change-2-degrees-2050/



/[The news archive - looking back]/
/*May 28, 2003 */
May 28, 2003: The New York Times reports on ExxonMobil's crucial role in 
the climate-denial industry.

    *Exxon Backs Groups That Question Global Warming*
    By Jennifer 8. Lee
    May 28, 2003
    Exxon Mobil has publicly softened its stance toward global warming
    over the last year, with a pledge of $10 million in annual donations
    for 10 years to Stanford University for climate research.

    At the same time, the company, the world's largest oil and gas
    concern, has increased donations to Washington-based policy groups
    that, like Exxon itself, question the human role in global warming
    and argue that proposed government policies to limit carbon dioxide
    emissions associated with global warming are too heavy handed.

    Exxon now gives more than $1 million a year to such organizations,
    which include the Competitive Enterprise Institute, Frontiers of
    Freedom, the George C. Marshall Institute, the American Council for
    Capital Formation Center for Policy Research and the American
    Legislative Exchange Council.

    The organizations are modest in size but have been outspoken in the
    global warming debate. Exxon has become the single-largest corporate
    donor to some of the groups, accounting for more than 10 percent of
    their annual budgets. While a few of the groups say they also
    receive some money from other oil companies, it is only a small
    fraction of what they receive from Exxon Mobil.

    ''We want to support organizations that are trying to broaden the
    debate on an issue that is so important to all of us,'' said Tom
    Cirigliano, a spokesman for Exxon. ''There is this whole issue that
    no one should question the science of global climate change that is
    ludicrous. That's the kind of dark-ages thinking that gets you in a
    lot of trouble.'' He also noted, ''These are not single-agenda groups.''

    The organizations emphasize that while their views align with
    Exxon's, the company's money does not influence their policy
    conclusions. Indeed, the organizations say they have been sought out
    in part because of their credibility. ''They've determined that we
    are effective at what we do,'' said George C. Landrith, president of
    Frontiers of Freedom, a conservative group that maintains that human
    activities are not responsible for global warming. He says Exxon
    essentially takes the attitude, ''We like to make it possible to do
    more of that.''

    Frontiers of Freedom, which has about a $700,000 annual budget,
    received $230,000 from Exxon in 2002, up from $40,000 in 2001,
    according to Exxon documents. But Mr. Landrith said the growth was
    not as sharp as it appears because the money is actually spread over
    three years.

    The increase corresponds with a rising level of public debate since
    the United States withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol, some of the
    groups said. After President Bush rejected the protocol, a treaty
    requiring nations to limit emissions of heat-trapping gases, many
    corporations shifted their attention to Washington, where the debate
    has centered on proposals for domestic curbs on the emissions.

    ''Firefighters' budgets go up when fires go up,'' said Fred L.
    Smith, the head of the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Myron
    Ebell, an analyst from the institute, spoke at last year's Exxon
    shareholders' meeting, where he criticized a renewable energy
    resolution proposed by a group of shareholders.

    Exxon's backing of third-party groups is a marked contrast to its
    more public role in the Global Climate Coalition, an industry group
    formed in 1989 to challenge the science around global warming. The
    group eventually disbanded when oil and auto companies started to
    withdraw. As companies were left to walk their own path, Exxon
    shifted money toward independent policy groups.

    ''Now it's come down to a few of these groups to be the good foot
    soldiers of the corporate community on climate change,'' said Kert
    Davies, a research director for Greenpeace, which has tried to
    organize an international boycott of Exxon.

    Exxon's publicly disclosed documents reveal that donations to many
    of these organizations increased by more than 50 percent from 2000
    to 2002. And money to the American Legislative Exchange Council, a
    conservative group that works with state legislators, has almost
    tripled, as the policy debate has moved to the state level.

    The gifts are minuscule compared with the $100 million, 10-year
    scientific grant to Stanford, which is establishing a research
    center that will focus on technologies that could provide energy
    without adding to greenhouse gases linked by scientists to global
    warming. Nevertheless, the donations in the tens of thousands or
    hundreds of thousands of dollars are significant for groups with
    budgets ranging from $700,000 to $4 million.

    Critics say that Exxon and these groups continue to muddle the
    debate even as scientific consensus has emerged, and as much of the
    industry has taken a more conciliatory stance toward the reality of
    global warming. As Exxon has become isolated from its peers, it has
    faced increasing pressure from shareholders and environmentalists.
    BP, Shell and ChevronTexaco have developed strategies that
    incorporate renewable energy, carbon trading and emissions reductions.

    Among the initiatives that Exxon's money has helped is the Center
    for Science and Public Policy. The two-month-old center is a one-man
    operation that brings scientists to Capitol Hill on two issues:
    global warming and the health effects of mercury.

    ''We don't lobby, we educate,'' said Bob Ferguson, head of the
    center, who spent 24 years working as a Republican Congressional
    staff member. ''We try to be nonpolitical and nonpartisan and
    nonideological.''
    https://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/28/business/exxon-backs-groups-that-question-global-warming.html?unlocked_article_code=bZmkBCXTn0eta5-q4FMQbIrOmjMddHIHwMFbJGk1qGBGZH9YPmXK_BIJd5FtWH1CRg5XDHq6sxaDr4TRdXLtncLihv7Ii36vQ15OYVEebj_ASNBGPyTFT7CkO_7WIR3MYrCSUPOqx59LDxQ-S873_ErNlLal0WMg5OSD1ITg3t2MqNm4SmuA9cSwtffBjTNFYy_BBmt19Xbn74YCfh_y-pe6hB9u8zPwuTlhxSsYKobq_wbhjoTMohrT1sDJ46X_ThYO6sShrsdhI43OsterHkf4rszkm1TvmbOCEUhifa3FnPPWpbq2du1Jq6ajronMiWBJoqpPwMAwEtUEYT5z-mlgnQCasUULIbso9pB07L7-F0y5mrh60qug&smid=url-share

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/28/business/exxon-backs-groups-that-question-global-warming.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/

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

/ to explore the archive 
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/20230528/f7f3574a/attachment.htm>