<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<font size="+1"><i>May 22, 2017</i></font><br>
<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www">https://www</a>.<b>usatoday.com</b>/story/news/nation-now/2017/05/22/climate-change-predictions-can-scary-kids-what-can-you-say/335505001/</font><br>
<div class="esc-lead-snippet-wrapper" style="line-height: 1.2em;
padding-left: 1px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: arial,
sans-serif; font-size: 13.44px; font-style: normal;
font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal;
font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2;
text-align: left; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none;
white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255,
255); text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color:
initial;">
<h2 class="esc-lead-article-title" style="font-size: 18px;
line-height: 21px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; font-weight:
bold;"><a target="_blank" class="article
usg-AFQjCNGTxuk2UJrc6QNOZSBFoqsnLZrHEw
sig2-nQlVp9-RlkfD52MxJCyLcA did-4556660322804694849"
href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2017/05/22/climate-change-predictions-can-scary-kids-what-can-you-say/335505001/"
id="MAA4DEgAUABgAWoCdXM" style="color: rgb(17, 85, 204);
text-decoration: none;"><span class="titletext"
style="font-weight: bold;"><b style="font-weight: bold;">Climate
change</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>predictions
can be scary for kids. What can you say?</span></a> (USA
Today) <br>
</h2>
</div>
<blockquote>Predictions for a planet affected by climate change can
sound like they're ripped from a doomsday novel: stronger
hurricanes, intense heat waves, rising sea levels and the
disappearance of ice in the Arctic.<br>
And scientists have seen some of those changes already taking
place, according to NASA.<br>
Climate change - as well as other environmental issues like
deforestation and wildlife extinction - have the potential to be
scary for children. The implications of climate change can
contribute to stress, depression and anxiety for everyone, but
especially for kids, according to a study released this year by
the American Psychological Association, Climate for Health and
EcoAmerica.<br>
So how can parents approach these topics with their children?
Here's what experts had to say:<br>
<b>Encourage action</b><br>
When talking with your kids about climate change, communicating
"the sense that you can do something to improve a scary situation"
is key, <br>
"I think sometimes we can overwhelm them," she said. "We just
start throwing facts at them. They have to know there's some way
to help. Otherwise, they're going to feel overwhelmed."<br>
<b>Talk about animals</b><br>
Children's love of animals can be a natural gateway to both
talking more and learning more about environmental issues, Hoyos
said.<br>
<b>Be in nature</b><br>
If you want to talk about environmental issues with your kids, one
of the best places to start is by simply going outside.<br>
Parents need to get their kids outdoors, Pecco said, and they need
to go outside with them. Doing so allows both parents and kids to
"see they're also a part of the natural cycle and what we do
affects the environment," she said.<br>
<b>Examine your daily habits and learn from your kids</b><br>
The things you do every day can also be a natural segue into
conversations, Brown said. Asking kids whether they leave the
water running when they brush their teeth, for example, can lead
to discussions about conservation. For Hoyos, having an electric
car allowed her to explain to her kids that technology can be used
to cut down on carbon emissions.<br>
<b>Online resources for kids</b><br>
Here are some resources Brown, Hoyos and Pecco recommend for
parents wanting to help their kids learn more about climate change
and other environmental issues.<br>
<strong style="font-weight: 700;"><a
href="https://climatekids.nasa.gov/" style="color: rgb(25,
144, 229); text-decoration: none; outline: 0px;">NASA
ClimateKids</a></strong>: a website with games, activities and
more<br>
<strong style="font-weight: 700;"><a href="https://acespace.org/"
style="color: rgb(25, 144, 229); text-decoration: none;">Alliance
for Climate Education</a></strong>: the group's website, good
for older kids, has information about climate change and ways to
get involved<br>
<strong style="font-weight: 700;"><a
href="http://www.imatteryouth.org/" style="color: rgb(25, 144,
229); text-decoration: none;">imatteryouth.org</a></strong>: a
youth-driven campaign fighting climate change<br>
<strong style="font-weight: 700;"><a
href="http://wwf.panda.org/how_you_can_help/games/"
style="color: rgb(25, 144, 229); text-decoration: none;">World
Wildlife Fund</a></strong>: apps and games to help kids learn
more about conservation issues<br>
<a href="https://www.climate.gov/" style="color: rgb(25, 144,
229); text-decoration: none;"><strong style="font-weight: 700;">National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration</strong></a>: data,
videos and more<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www">https://www</a>.<b>bloomberg.com</b>/news/articles/2017-05-22/nato-lawmakers-warn-global-warming-will-trigger-food-shortages</font><br>
<div class="esc-lead-snippet-wrapper" style="line-height: 1.2em;
padding-left: 1px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: arial,
sans-serif; font-size: 13.44px; font-style: normal;
font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal;
font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2;
text-align: left; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none;
white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255,
255); text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color:
initial;">
<h2 class="esc-lead-article-title" style="font-size: 16px;
line-height: 18px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; font-weight:
bold;"><a target="_blank" class="article
usg-AFQjCNGGlKEVGDQFHqFsPle8b_rP9O9doA
sig2-KC0CaDwnkBDNpxSgoij7Nw did-8725502922363291882"
href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-05-22/nato-lawmakers-warn-global-warming-will-trigger-food-shortages"
id="MAA4C0gAUABgAWoCdXM" style="color: rgb(17, 85, 204);
text-decoration: underline;"><span class="titletext"
style="font-weight: bold;">NATO Lawmakers Warn<b
style="font-weight: bold;"> Global Warming</b><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Will Trigger Food
Shortages</span></a></h2>
</div>
<blockquote>Lawmakers from nations in the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization are warning that global warming will lead to mass
migration and conflict in the Middle East and Africa, another
reason President Donald Trump should stay in the Paris climate
deal <br>
Climate change will lead to "dire" food and water shortages in the
region, according to a draft report presented Monday to the NATO
Parliamentary Assembly.<br>
Acting as the "ultimate threat multiplier" after decades of
resource mismanagement in the region, extreme weather and rising
seas would likely lead to volatile food prices and increased
competition,<br>
Trump, who will attend his first meeting with leaders of the Group
of Seven Countries this week, has threatened to pull the U.S. out
of the Paris Accord, end climate financing and is reviewing the
Clean Power Plan -- a key policy for cutting pollution introduced
by his predecessor Barack Obama. He's postponed a decision and
it's now expected by the end of May.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www">http://www</a>.<b>climatecentral.org</b>/news/climate-change-could-slash-staple-crops-21460<br>
<div class="esc-lead-article-title-wrapper" style="margin: 0px 32px
1px 0px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: arial, sans-serif;
font-size: 13.44px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures:
normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal;
letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-indent:
0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2;
word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;
background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration-style:
initial; text-decoration-color: initial;">
<h2 class="esc-lead-article-title" style="font-size: 18px;
line-height: 21px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; font-weight:
bold;"><a target="_blank" class="article
usg-AFQjCNFljuNybPnwLqd93XlYLOSnRFJUcw
sig2-c4V7Kzgson444NeLXt-Txw did--1334228550590567782"
href="http://www.climatecentral.org/news/climate-change-could-slash-staple-crops-21460"
id="MAA4DEgFUABgAWoCdXM" style="color: rgb(17, 85, 204);
text-decoration: underline;"><span class="titletext"
style="font-weight: bold;">Climate Change Could Slash Staple
Crops | Climate Central</span></a></h2>
</div>
<blockquote>Climate change, and its impacts on extreme weather and
temperature swings, is projected to reduce global production of
corn, wheat, rice and soybeans by 23 percent in the 2050s,
according to a new analysis.<br>
The study, which examined price and production of those four major
crops from 1961 to 2013, also warns that by the 2030s output could
be cut by 9 percent. <br>
The findings come as researchers and world leaders continue to
warn that food security will become an increasingly difficult
problem to tackle in the face of rising temperatures and weather
extremes, combining with increasing populations, and volatile food
prices. <br>
The negative impacts of climate change to farming were pretty much
across the board in the new analysis. There were small production
gains projected for Russia, Turkey and Ukraine in the 2030s, but
by the 2050s, the models "are negative and more pronounced for all
countries," the researchers wrote in the study published this
month in the <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s41885-017-0005-2">journal
Economics of Disasters and Climate Change</a>. <br>
...Haile's study is one of two major studies this month reporting
big impacts to major crops in the future. Just this week <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.ucdavis.edu/news/climate-change-will-cut-cereal-yields-model-predicts">UC
Davis researchers released a study in the Environmental Research
Letters</a> journal reporting that by the end of the century
climate change is likely to cause France's winter wheat yields to
decrease 21 percent, winter barley yields to decrease by 17
percent and spring barley to decrease by about to 33 percent.<br>
from: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.dailyclimate.org/tdc-newsroom/2017/may/climate-change-could-cut-into-major-crop">http://www.dailyclimate.org/tdc-newsroom/2017/may/climate-change-could-cut-into-major-crop</a><br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://link">https://link</a>.<b>springer.com</b>/article/10.1007/s41885-017-0005-2</font><br>
<font color="#000066"><b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s41885-017-0005-2">Impact
of Climate Change, Weather Extremes, and Price Risk on Global
Food Supply</a></b></font><br>
<blockquote>Weather extremes also exacerbate the year-to-year
fluctuations of food availability, and thus may further increase
price volatility with its adverse impacts on production and poor
consumers. Combating climate change using both mitigation and
adaptation technologies is therefore crucial for global production
and hence food security.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www">http://www</a>.<b>ucdavis.edu</b>/news/climate-change-will-cut-cereal-yields-model-predicts<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.ucdavis.edu/news/climate-change-will-cut-cereal-yields-model-predicts">Climate
Change Will Cut Cereal Yields, Model Predicts </a></b><br>
<blockquote>Technological Advances Could Offset Those Losses<br>
Key predictions:<br>
Based on the historical weather and yield data, the new model
predicted that by the end of the century:<br>
- Yields are projected to decrease by 21 percent for winter wheat,
17.3 percent for winter barley and 33.6 percent for spring barley
under the most severe warming scenario.<br>
- The negative impacts of increased heat during climate warming
won't be offset by a decrease in extreme cold temperatures during
winter.<br>
- Possible increases in rainfall would help mitigate the effects
of heat stress but would not be sufficient to offset the negative
impacts of warming temperatures.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www">https://www</a>.<b>theguardian.com</b>/environment/2017/may/22/new-coalmines-will-worsen-poverty-and-escalate-climate-change-report-finds</font><br>
<div class="esc-lead-article-title-wrapper" style="margin: 0px 32px
1px 0px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: arial, sans-serif;
font-size: 13.44px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures:
normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal;
letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-indent:
0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2;
word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;
background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration-style:
initial; text-decoration-color: initial;">
<h2 class="esc-lead-article-title" style="font-size: 16px;
line-height: 18px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; font-weight:
bold;"><a target="_blank" class="article
usg-AFQjCNFFWWoOMzQyFDI6mlGsz_gFxjmlTQ
sig2-3gmClXbT1Scdkvjn5iJcTQ did-2237478838958067267"
href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/may/22/new-coalmines-will-worsen-poverty-and-escalate-climate-change-report-finds"
id="MAA4DEgAUABgAWoCdXM" style="color: rgb(17, 85, 204);
text-decoration: underline;"><span class="titletext"
style="font-weight: bold;">New coal mines will worsen
poverty and escalate<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><b
style="font-weight: bold;">climate change</b>, report
finds</span></a></h2>
</div>
The Oxfam report, <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.oxfam.org.au/what-we-do/food-and-climate/this-is-climate-in-action/coal-and-poverty/">More
Coal Equals More Poverty</a>, says the climate change impacts of
coal-fired power will disproportionately affect the world's poor and
- with most of the energy-poor households in developing countries
beyond the reach of electricity ...<br>
Subsidising coal-fired power plants is "clinging to the technologies
of the past", the Oxfam report says.<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www">https://www</a>.<b>oxfam.org.au</b>/what-we-do/food-and-climate/this-is-climate-in-action/coal-and-poverty/<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.oxfam.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/More-Coal-Equals-More-Poverty.pdf">Coal
and poverty: More coal = more poverty</a></b><br>
<blockquote>The real, human cost of burning more coal is measured in
public health catastrophes and life-shattering humanitarian
disasters.<br>
The catastrophic damage caused by coal and climate change has
become a matter of survival for families living in the world's
poorest communities. Burning coal remains the single biggest
contributor to climate pollution. More intense droughts, floods
and tropical cyclones are destroying people's homes and leaving
many families facing food and water shortages. And the world's
poorest people are being hit hardest. In East Africa, almost 11
million people are dangerously hungry due to a catastrophic
drought that has been compounded by climate change.<br>
Climate change, fuelled by dirty coal pollution, could drive a
staggering 122 million more people into extreme poverty by 2030.
There is no space for new coal.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://news.wbfo.org/post/people-are-still-marching-save-climate-less-hope">http://news.wbfo.org/post/people-are-still-marching-save-climate-less-hope</a><br>
<font size="+1"><b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://news.wbfo.org/post/people-are-still-marching-save-climate-less-hope">People
are still marching to save the climate, but with less hope</a></b></font>
WBFO Living on Earth<br>
<blockquote>Hundreds of thousands of people worldwide rallied for
the People's Climate March on April 29, but the mood was bleaker
than the First People's Climate March in New York City in 2014.<br>
In September 2014, nearly half a million people crammed the
avenues of New York for the first march to urge nations of the
world to take bold action on global warming. It was the eve of the
UN Climate Summit and PRI's Living on Earth team was there. At the
intersection of 46th Street and Sixth Avenue the atmosphere was
joyful, almost like a carnival parade.<br>
But now, in 2017, the level of ambition to tackle the threat of
global warming - or even to accept scientific consensus about it -
seems to have evaporated in Washington. A year after some 200
countries signed the landmark Paris climate agreement, the Trump
administration has indicated it might pull the US out of the
accord.<br>
It was partly disappointment at new administration policies, and
an increasing sense of the dangers of inaction that brought
thousands back onto the streets in 370 communities in the US and
across the world for another People's Climate March on April 29.<br>
"We are here because there is no planet B. There's no backup plan
if we ruin this Earth that we have," said Rev. Mariama
White-Hammond at the rally in Boston. "No matter how many
divisions there are across lines of race, religion, class, gender
expression, immigration status - no matter how many divisions - we
are bound together on this, one planet."<br>
Health workers, vegans, faith groups, teachers, students and
activists for employment and climate justice joined worried
citizens to rally for an end to fossil fuels and to raise the
alarm about climate-related hazards that affect Boston and many
coastal cities. There were fiery speeches and music, but overall a
bleaker mood than the First People's Climate March.<br>
"That [first] march was just incredible. It was such an upswell of
energy for the climate movement," said one marcher. "Now, there's
more of a fear that things won't be heard, even though we're
speaking. But there's more of a need even now, I think, than in
2014. There's more of a sense that we're up against something
really big."<br>
Living On Earth original audio: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.loe.org/shows/segments.html?programID=17-P13-00018&segmentID=3">http://www.loe.org/shows/segments.html?programID=17-P13-00018&segmentID=3</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.loe.org/shows/segments.html?programID=17-P13-00018&segmentID=3">Marching
for the Climate, Before and In Trump's Era</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://loe.org/audio/stream.m3u?file=/content/2017-05-05/loe_170505_b1_Paris%20Climate%20march.mp3">Stream
</a>/<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.loe.org/content/2017-05-05/loe_170505_b1_Paris%20Climate%20march.mp3">Download</a>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/may/21/experts-reject-bjorn-lomborg-centres-view-that-2c-warming-target-not-worth-it">https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/may/21/experts-reject-bjorn-lomborg-centres-view-that-2c-warming-target-not-worth-it</a><br>
<font size="+1"><b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/may/21/experts-reject-bjorn-lomborg-centres-view-that-2c-warming-target-not-worth-it">Experts
reject Bjørn Lomborg's view on 2C warming target</a></b></font><br>
<blockquote>Lomborg's Copenhagen Consensus Centre says investment in
keeping temperature rises below 2C would return less than $1 for
every $1 spent<br>
Experts have challenged a claim by Bjørn Lomborg's Copenhagen
Consensus Centre that holding global temperature rises to 2C is a
poor investment.<br>
In 2015 the education department abandoned plans for Lomborg to
set up an Australian Consensus Centre, but gave the Copenhagen
centre $640,000 to support its Smarter UN Post-2015 Development
Goals project.<br>
The project assessed dozens of development goals and found
investment in keeping global temperature rises below 2C would
return less than $1 for every $1 spent, which it rated "poor"
compared with other possible investments.<br>
The claim was based on a 2014 assessment paper by Isabel Galiana.
The finding on the 2C limit was one of the project's most
controversial, and has been cited in the political debate about
whether such targets are worthwhile, as concerns are raised that
president Donald Trump will lead the United States out of the
Paris agreement.<br>
The report said the 2C target was "relatively ineffective or there
is large uncertainty in the benefit-cost ratio" because it was
"extremely costly due to a lack of low-carbon energy sources".<br>
But academics have now said Galiana's assessment underestimated
the harm caused if atmospheric carbon dioxide exceeded 450 parts
per million, and has been superseded by advances in renewable
energy technology and the Paris climate agreement.<br>
And Galiana herself has conceded "the paper does not explicitly
undertake a benefit/cost analysis of keeping climate change to two
degrees" and that a 2C target might be justified if "tipping
points" of accelerated environmental damage were considered.<br>
</blockquote>
<span style="padding:0px 6px 0px 0px"></span><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://futurism.com/no-legitimate-arguments-against-human-caused-climate-change/">https://futurism.com/no-legitimate-arguments-against-human-caused-climate-change/</a><br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://futurism.com/no-legitimate-arguments-against-human-caused-climate-change/">There
Are No Legitimate Arguments Against Human-Caused Climate Change</a></b><br>
<blockquote>David Rose, Bret Stephens, and Donald Trump's climate
change denial heat up a debate that is constantly raging. Despite
their comments, it is more important than ever to fight climate
change.<br>
David Rose's claim in The Daily Mail that "we now know that [there
is a climate change hiatus] for a fact" is based on "the bravery
of a whistleblower" who purportedly revealed that the data from a
2015 NOAA Study is flawed due to it being adjusted upwards.<br>
This claim is debunked in two ways. Firstly, this manipulation is
reasonable due to the history of the methods used to measure sea
temperatures. Up until fairly recently, ships have been used to
measure water temperatures, but their results are skewed by the
engine room warming the water. The reason for the adjustment was
so that the new and superior data taken from buoys and floats
could be compared to the figures gathered from these ships.<br>
Secondly, John Abraham pointed out in The Guardian that Rose's
whistleblower never worked on data, and highlighted that Rose did
not mention that the study had been independently verified.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://youtu.be/hnyX32nkYBs">https://youtu.be/hnyX32nkYBs</a><br>
<i><b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://youtu.be/hnyX32nkYBs">(video) Recent Ocean
Warming has been Underestimated</a></b></i><br>
<font size="-1"><i>In a paper published in Science Advances, we
used data from buoys, satellites, and Argo floats to construct
separate instrumentally homogenous sea surface temperature
records of the past two decades. We compared them to the old
NOAA ERSSTv3b record, the new ERSSTv4 record, the Hadley
Centre's HadSST3 record, and the Japanese COBE-SST record. We
found a strong and significant cool bias in the old NOAA
record, and a more modest (but still significant) cool bias in
the Hadley and Japanese records compared to buoy, satellite,
and Argo float data. The new NOAA record agrees quite well
with these instrumentally homogenous records. This suggests
that the new NOAA record is likely the most accurate sea
surface temperature record in recent years, and should help
resolve some of the criticism that accompanied the original
NOAA study.</i></font><br>
Donald Trump has insisted throughout his campaign that climate
change is not caused by humans, and more specifically that CO2
does not cause global warming, a claim which has been bolstered by
Scott Pruitt, Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency, since he arrived in the White House.<br>
This has also been disproved by numerous studies and a deluge of
research, as is shown by the composite of figures on
skepticalscience.com (a website that is highly worth looking
through on other climate change related topics):<br>
The response to Bret Stephens's article was vitriolic but it was
logical, justified, and supported by facts. While we must fight in
the same arena, it is crucial that we use weapons other than
undermining truth, manipulating the public through disinformation,
and cherry-picking facts. A group of climate scientists responded
perfectly by penning an <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.climatefactsfirst.org/">open letter</a> in
response, which culminated with the line "it must be made clear
that there are facts that are not subject to opinion." These facts
must be made known.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<font size="+1"><b><a
href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/may/20/oil-company-records-exxon-co2-emission-reduction-patents"
moz-do-not-send="true">This Day in Climate History May 22,
2016</a> - from D.R. Tucker</b></font><br>
<blockquote> MSNBC's Joy Reid and The Guardian's Suzanne Goldenberg
cover the<br>
controversy over ExxonMobil's decades-long refusal to acknowledge
the<br>
existence of human-caused climate change.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc-news/watch/when-did-the-oil-industry-know-about-climate-change-690590275515">http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc-news/watch/when-did-the-oil-industry-know-about-climate-change-690590275515</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/may/20/oil-company-records-exxon-co2-emission-reduction-patents">https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/may/20/oil-company-records-exxon-co2-emission-reduction-patents</a><br>
</blockquote>
<font size="+1"><i><br>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
</i></font><font size="+1"><i> </i></font><font
size="+1"><i> safely forward this email.</i></font>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><small>. </small><small><b>** Privacy and Security: </b>
This is a text-only mailing. It carries no graphics nor
images which may originate from remote servers. </small><small>
Text-only messages provide greater privacy to the receiver and
sender. </small><small> </small><br>
<small> By regulation, the .VOTE top-level domain must be used
for democratic and election purposes and cannot be used for
commercial purposes. </small><br>
<small>To subscribe, email: <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:contact@theclimate.vote">contact@theclimate.vote</a>
with subject: subscribe, To Unsubscribe, subject:
unsubscribe</small><br>
<small> Also you</small><font size="-1"> may
subscribe/unsubscribe at <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/theclimate.vote">https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/theclimate.vote</a></font><small>
</small><br>
<small> </small><small>Links and headlines assembled and
curated by Richard Pauli</small><small> for <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://TheClimate.Vote">http://TheClimate.Vote</a>
delivering succinct information for citizens and responsible
governments of all levels.</small><small> L</small><small>ist
membership is confidential and records are scrupulously
restricted to this mailing list. <br>
</small></blockquote>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>