[✔️] April 5, 2024 Global Warming News | Hurricane predictions, Accelerated heat, Methane mess, Fed interferes, Oreskes, Quadruple, 2002 Bush-bash

Fri Apr 5 11:35:44 EDT 2024

/*April 5*//*, 2024*/

/[ every year, a prediction ]/
*Forecasters predict an extremely active 2024 Atlantic hurricane season*
Colorado State University’s hurricane forecasting team is calling for a 
near-record active season with 23 named storms, 11 hurricanes, and five 
major hurricanes.
by JEFF MASTERS
APRIL 4, 2024
An extremely active Atlantic hurricane season is likely in 2024, the 
Colorado State University (CSU) hurricane forecasting team says in its 
latest seasonal forecast, issued April 4. Led by Dr. Phil Klotzbach, 
with co-authors Dr. Michael Bell, Alexander DesRosiers, and Levi 
Silvers, the CSU team is calling for 23 named storms, 11 hurricanes, 
five major hurricanes, and an Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) of 210 
(171% of average). In comparison, the long-term averages for the period 
1991-2020 were 14.4 named storms, 7.2 hurricanes, 3.2 major hurricanes, 
and an ACE of 123.

https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2024/04/forecasters-predict-an-extremely-active-2024-atlantic-hurricane-season/

/[ realclimate.org is the most scientifically trusted site on the 
Internet ]/
*Much ado about acceleration*
4 APR 2024
BY GAVIN
There has been a lot of commentary about perceived disagreements among 
climate scientists about whether climate change is, or will soon, 
accelerate. As with most punditry, there is less here than it might seem.

Last year, Jim Hansen and colleagues published a long paper that 
included a figure suggesting that they expected that global temperature 
trends from 2011 to increase above the recent linear trends...
- -
In my recent Nature commentary, I pointed out the difficulties 
explaining quantitatively why 2023 was so warm. Without further clarity 
on that, deciding whether we have yet seen an acceleration or not is a 
bit ambiguous.
Another view of the future is given by the results of climate models. 
We’ve discussed some of the issues with the latest CMIP6 round of 
simulations many times in recent years, nonetheless, by screening the 
model ensemble based on the likely range of climate sensitivity, we can 
create projections that align closely with assessed projections from the 
last IPCC report. These projections are the basis of our updated 
comparisons of CMIP6 models to observations, and specifically this graph:
It is worth remembering what the CMIP6 projections are based on. These 
simulations used historical GHG concentrations and aerosol emissions to 
2014, and a mid-range scenario (SSP2-4.5) thereafter, which has 
continued increases of CO2 and CH4 as well as forecast decreases in 
aerosol emissions. The screening uses the likely range of 1.8 to 2.2ºC 
of transient climate response, roughly equivalent to to a screening uses 
equilibrium climate sensitivity of 2.5 to 4ºC for a doubling of CO2 
(Hausfather et al, 2022).

The question naturally arises as to who is correct, Hansen et al or the 
models?

We can assess this by extending our graph to 2050, and plotting Hansen 
et al’s projected range on top:
https://www.realclimate.org/images/cmip6_plus_hansen-2048x1315.jpg
Remarkably, the Hansen et al projections are basically indistinguishable 
from what the mean of the TCR-screened CMIP6 models are projecting. Or, 
to put it another way, everybody is (or should be) expecting an 
acceleration of climate warming (in the absence of dramatic cuts in GHG 
emissions) (CarbonBrief has a similar analysis), even if we might differ 
on whether it is yet detectable.

Update (4/4): I was prodded to provide a histogram focused on the trends 
in the ensembles. Happy to oblige (note that this is only one run per 
model):
https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2024/04/much-ado-about-acceleration/

/[  fundamental civility: clean up your mess.  Especially leaking methane ]/
*In Colorado - Oil Oligarchs Offload Orphan Wells on Taxpayers*
greenmanbucket
Apr 4, 2024
Lawsuit filed against lawless oil scammers who leave behind toxic junk 
and unplugged wells.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gQ9bbdUzm4

https://youtu.be/0gQ9bbdUzm4?si=f6EDdTZ1cOQnb2Fx

/[   How is this wise for investors?  ]/
*The Fed Blocks Stricter Global ESG Rules for Banks*
By Tsvetana Paraskova - writer for Oilprice.com
  Apr 03, 2024
The US Federal Reserve has blocked an attempt led by the European 
Central Bank (ECB) to make climate risks a pillar of global rules for 
banks and require them to report their strategies on meeting climate 
commitments, sources with knowledge of the matter have told Bloomberg.

Some members of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS), which 
includes central banks and bank supervisors from around the world, have 
been pushing for making climate risks and ESG commitments the center of 
new rules for banks everywhere in the world.
Members of the Fed, however, have expressed in closed-door meetings 
concerns about such rules because they believe the committee might be 
overreaching with this particular supervision, according to some of 
Bloomberg’s sources. The Fed officials also feel they have a narrow 
mandate in this area to regulate climate risk disclosures from the Wall 
Street banks, the sources added.

Although the Basel Committee cannot enforce its banking system standards 
on jurisdictions, it could set a global baseline, from which the single 
countries develop their own rules and procedures.

The Fed’s resistance to the Europe-led climate risk disclosures 
highlights the rift between the two sides of the Atlantic in the ESG 
push, with Europe committed to implementing tougher rules.

European banks should integrate environmental, social, and governance 
risks in their regular risk management framework, the European Banking 
Authority (EBA) said in January in draft guidelines on the management of 
ESG risks.

The European authority published a consultation paper on its draft 
proposals for banks as it launched a public consultation that will run 
until April 18, 2024.

According to the EBA, climate change, environmental degradation, social 
issues, and other ESG factors pose “considerable challenges for the 
economy that impact the financial sector.”
https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/The-Fed-Blocks-Stricter-Global-ESG-Rules-for-Banks.html

/[ Revered Harvard scholar - video interview 39 mins  - best summary ]/
*Climate is a Justice Issue | Naomi Oreskes*
Planet: Critical
Jan 17, 2024
Neoliberalism is the disease which keeps on killing.

But did you know the neoliberal economic gospel we live under today is a 
deliberate misinterpretation of the original theory?

In her new book, The Big Myth: How American Business Taught Us to Loathe 
Government and Love the Free Market, historian of science Naomi Oreskes 
shows how a group of American plutocrats distorted the the conservative 
teachings of Friedrich van Hayek’s theory of neoliberalism in order to 
plunder the world’s resource, unleash the markets, and undermine federal 
power.

She joins me today to give a incisive and brutal summary of why our 
world is in crisis, detailing the criminal avarice of these plutocrats; 
how institutions, lobbyists and corporations continue to undermine 
democracy; and why a renewable world threatens the powers that be. This 
phenomenal explanation shows why the climate crisis is not a scientific 
problem, but a political, economic and social issue, with Naomi 
revealing tactics civilians used throughout history against the 
destructive elite.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZk4Xjn6tEY

/[ so says the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists  ]/
*World set to quadruple oil and gas production by 2030, led by new US 
projects*
By Oliver Milman | April 4, 2024The world’s fossil-fuel producers are on 
track to nearly quadruple the amount of extracted oil and gas from newly 
approved projects by the end of this decade, with the US leading the way 
in a surge of activity that threatens to blow apart agreed climate 
goals, a new report has found.

There can be no new oil and gas infrastructure if the planet is to avoid 
careering past 1.5C (2.7F) of global heating, above pre-industrial 
times, the International Energy Agency (IEA) has previously stated. 
Breaching this warming threshold, agreed to by governments in the Paris 
climate agreement, will see ever worsening effects such as heatwaves, 
floods, drought and more, scientists have warned.

But since the IEA’s declaration in 2021, countries and major fossil fuel 
companies have forged ahead with a glut of new oil and gas activity. At 
least 20bn barrels of oil equivalent of new oil and gas has been 
discovered for future drilling since this point, according to the new 
report by Global Energy Monitor, a San Francisco-based NGO.

Last year, at least 20 oil and gas fields were readied and approved for 
extraction following discovery, sanctioning the removal of 8bn barrels 
of oil equivalent. By the end of this decade, the report found, the 
fossil-fuel industry aims to sanction nearly four times this amount – 
31bn barrels of oil equivalent – across 64 additional new oil and gas 
fields.

The US, which has produced more crude oil than any country has ever done 
in history for the past six years in a row, led the way in new oil and 
gas projects in 2022 and 2023, the report found. Guyana was second, with 
countries in the Americas accounting for 40% of all new oil sanctioned 
in the past two years.

The failure to even slightly slow down the hunt for new oil and gas 
risks a fatal blow to already slender hopes of the world remaining below 
1.5C, a limit that scientists expect will be surpassed within a decade.

It comes as major oil and gas companies miss or water down their own 
targets to cut planet-heating emissions. At a recent industry conference 
in Texas, the boss of Saudi Aramco, the world’s largest oil company, 
said people “should abandon the fantasy” of phasing out oil and gas.

“Despite the constant and clear warnings that no new oil and gas fields 
are compatible with 1.5C, the industry continues to discover and 
sanction new projects,” said Scott Zimmerman, project manager of the 
global oil and gas extraction tracker at Global Energy Monitor. “It’s 
disappointing. It shows a lack of supply-side commitment to climate goals.”

Already operating oil and gas infrastructure will be enough to push the 
world beyond 1.5C and the extra activity planned will only further raise 
the global temperature. A total of 45 projects have been fully 
sanctioned, with 16 billion barrels of oil equivalent, since the 2021 
IEA report, according to the new report, which is almost certainly an 
undercount of coming emissions as it doesn’t include “unconventional” 
extraction, such as fracking.

While the US has maintained its heavyweight status in oil and gas with 
the new discoveries, fresh areas of the globe are now being focused on 
by fossil fuel producers for new production, with South America and 
Africa becoming hotspots for upcoming projects.

Of the 22 countries with significant oil and gas discoveries in the past 
two years, four – Cyprus, Guyana, Namibia and Zimbabwe – accounted for 
more than a third of discoveries, despite having produced little or no 
oil and gas until recently.

The Shahini gas field in Iran – reportedly containing 623bn cubic meters 
of gas – is the largest single discovery of the past two years, followed 
by TotalEnergies’ Venus project in Namibia. The Kodiak project in 
Alaska, overseen by Pantheon Resources, is the third largest new 
potential oil and gas field.

“Oil and gas producers have given all kinds of reasons for continuing to 
discover and develop new fields, but none of these hold water,” said 
Zimmerman. “The science is clear: no new oil and gas fields, or the 
planet gets pushed past what it can handle.”

https://thebulletin.org/2024/04/world-set-to-quadruple-oil-and-gas-production-by-2030-led-by-new-us-projects/

https://www.climatedesk.org/

/[The news archive -  ]/
/*April 5, 2002 */
April 5, 2002: New York Times columnist Paul Krugman denounces White 
House press secretary Ari Fleischer's "...use of a press conference on 
the crisis in the Middle East to shill, once again, for the Bush energy 
plan," observing:

    "Even if the United States weren't dependent on imported oil, the
    Middle East would still be a strategically crucial region, and the
    Israeli-Palestinian conflict would still be a world nightmare.

    "But to the extent that oil independence would help -- and it would,
    a bit, by reducing the leverage of Persian Gulf producers -- the
    Bush administration has long since forfeited the moral high ground.
    It has done so by vigorously opposing any serious efforts at
    conservation, which would have to be the centerpiece of any real
    plan to reduce oil imports.

    "There are many ways to make this case; here are two more. Even at
    its peak, a decade or so after drilling began, oil production from
    the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would reduce imports by no more
    than would a 3-mile-per-gallon increase in fuel efficiency --
    something easily achievable, were it not for opposition from special
    interest groups. Indeed, the Kerry-McCain fuel efficiency standards,
    which the administration opposed, would have saved three times as
    much oil as ANWR might produce. Or put it this way: Total world oil
    production is about 75 million barrels per day, of which the United
    States consumes almost 20; ANWR would produce, at maximum, a bit
    more than 1 million.

    "Yet a few months ago, Republican activists ran ads with
    side-by-side photos of Tom Daschle and Saddam Hussein, declaring
    that both men oppose drilling in ANWR -- and Dick Cheney, when
    asked, stood behind those ads. Administration critics could, with
    rather more justification, run ads with side-by-side photos of
    George W. Bush and Saddam Hussein, declaring that both men oppose
    increased fuel efficiency standards. (Actually, I'm not aware that
    Iraq's ruler has expressed an opinion on either issue.) Of course,
    if such ads did run, there would be enormous outrage. After all,
    turnabout wouldn't be fair play because, well, just because."

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/05/opinion/at-long-last.html

/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./

/Archive of Daily Global Warming News 
https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/

Privacy and Security: *This mailing is text-only -- and carries no 
images or attachments which may originate from remote servers. Text-only 
messages 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/20240405/812c1742/attachment.htm>