<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<font size="+1"><i>August 21, 2017</i></font><br>
<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/why-the-sun-is-not-responsible-for-recent-climate-change">Solar
eclipse: Why the sun is not responsible for recent climate
change</a></b><br>
With a total solar eclipse sweeping across North America, everyone
is suddenly paying attention to the sun. One of the most common
sceptical arguments against human-caused climate change is that
changes in solar activity, rather than just CO2, is playing the
biggest role.<br>
At first glance, it seems to make intuitive sense: the sun is a
massive nuclear fusion reactor a million times larger than Earth, it
is responsible for almost all the energy reaching our planet, and in
the past few decades scientists have learned that solar activity
varies significantly over time. Indeed, changes in the distribution
of sunlight reaching the Earth clearly change the temperature
dramatically on a daily and annual timescale.<br>
However, since 1970 global temperatures have shot up by almost 0.7
C, while the amount of solar energy reaching the Earth has actually
declined. Similarly, the upper atmosphere is cooling while the lower
atmosphere warms, a clear fingerprint of warming from greenhouse
gases rather than the sun.<br>
This evidence suggests we can rule out a major solar influence on
recent warming.<br>
Satellites have been directly monitoring the amount of the sun's
energy reaching the Earth since the late 1970s. Before that,
researchers kept careful records of the number of "sunspots", dark
patches on the surface of the sun that are strongly related to solar
output....<br>
"If the warming at the surface was related to solar forcing, the
upper atmosphere would also be warming. But it hasn't been – it has
been cooling, exactly as predicted from the effects of CO2
increases."<br>
three lines of evidence show that solar variations are not driving
modern climate change, says <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.met.reading.ac.uk/%7Espate/about/">Dr Mike
Lockwood,</a> a <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.reading.ac.uk/">solar physicist at the University
of Reading.</a> <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/why-the-sun-is-not-responsible-for-recent-climate-change">https://www.carbonbrief.org/why-the-sun-is-not-responsible-for-recent-climate-change</a><br>
<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wK35UUA6ZnY">(video)
Greenland by Drone</a></b><br>
Climate Denial Crock of the Week<br>
Peter Sinclair August 20, 2017<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wK35UUA6ZnY">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wK35UUA6ZnY</a>
<br>
One new tool I took to the Greenland ice this summer - a drone.<br>
Game changer.<br>
<font size="-1" color="#666666"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://climatecrocks.com/2017/08/20/greenland-by-drone/">https://climatecrocks.com/2017/08/20/greenland-by-drone/</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.wnyc.org/story/on-the-media-2017-08-18">(Audio)
On the Media "Gutted"</a></b><br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.wnyc.org/story/otm-how-environment-got-political/">How
The Environment Got Political </a></b> <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.wnyc.org/story/otm-how-environment-got-political/">http://www.wnyc.org/story/otm-how-environment-got-political/</a><br>
GOP lawmakers deem the EPA a job killer that does nothing but burden
businesses with regulations. In the eyes of the American public, the
environment ranks low on the list of priorities the government
should address.<br>
But flash back to the late 1960s, and it's a very different story.
The environment was a bipartisan issue, and a Republican president
created the EPA in 1970 in response to public pressure. So how did
we get here? How did the environment go from universal concern to
political battleground - with the EPA caught in the crossfire? <br>
With the help of Richard Andrews, professor emeritus of
environmental policy at UNC Chapel Hill, and William Ruckelshaus,
EPA administrator under presidents Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan,
Brooke considers the tumultuous history of the EPA, its evolving
relationship with the public, and its uncertain future.<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.wnyc.org/story/otm-caused-by-climate-change"><b>How
To Answer "Is This Caused By Climate Change?"</b></a> <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.wnyc.org/story/otm-caused-by-climate-change">http://www.wnyc.org/story/otm-caused-by-climate-change</a><br>
The scientific field of "extreme weather attribution" offers answers
that journalists have long avoided. <br>
Journalistic ethics have long tabooed rushing to judgement about the
cause of this tornado or that flash flood. But now, with
mathematical rigor and clarity, scientists in the field of "extreme
weather attribution" can make such connections in some cases.<br>
Heidi Cullen, chief scientist at Climate Central, believes the media
are failing to contextualize current weather coverage - similar to
misleading reporting leading up to the financial crisis. She speaks
with Bob about how journalists can embrace this form of science and
more precise language to better explain global warming's role in
extreme weather events.<br>
<font size="-1" color="#666666"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.wnyc.org/story/on-the-media-2017-08-18">http://www.wnyc.org/story/on-the-media-2017-08-18</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
<b><a
href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/08/20/the-trump-administration-just-disbanded-a-federal-advisory-committee-on-climate-change/?utm_term=.cf37d2b5afdc">Trump
disbands federal advisory committee on global warming </a></b><br>
"We're going to be running huge risks here and possibly end up
hurting the next generation's economic prospects"<br>
By Juliet Eilperin 20 August 2017<br>
$ (The Washington Post) - The Trump administration has decided to
disband the federal advisory panel for the National Climate
Assessment, a group aimed at helping policymakers and private-sector
officials incorporate the government's climate analysis into
long-term planning.<br>
The charter for the 15-person Advisory Committee for the Sustained
National Climate Assessment - which includes academics as well as
local officials and corporate representatives - expires Sunday. On
Friday, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's acting
administrator, Ben Friedman, informed the committee's chair that the
agency would not renew the panel.<br>
The National Climate Assessment is supposed to be issued every four
years but has come out only three times since passage of the 1990
law calling for such analysis. The next one, due for release in
2018, already has become a contentious issue for the Trump
administration.<br>
Administration officials are currently reviewing a scientific report
that is key to the final document. Known as the Climate Science
Special Report, it was produced by scientists from 13 different
federal agencies and estimates that human activities were
responsible for an increase in global temperatures of 1.1 to 1.3
degrees Fahrenheit from 1951 to 2010.<br>
The committee was established to help translate findings from the
National Climate Assessment into concrete guidance for both public
and private-sector officials. Its members have been writing a report
to inform federal officials on the data sets and approaches that
would best be included, and chair Richard Moss said in an interview
Saturday that ending the group's work was shortsighted.<br>
"It doesn't seem to be the best course of action," said Moss, an
adjunct professor in the University of Maryland's Department of
Geographical Sciences, and he warned of consequences for the
decisions that state and local authorities must make on a range of
issues from building road projects to maintaining adequate
hydropower supplies. "We're going to be running huge risks here and
possibly end up hurting the next generation's economic prospects."<br>
But NOAA communications director Julie Roberts said in an email
Saturday that "this action does not impact the completion of the
Fourth National Climate Assessment, which remains a key priority."<br>
<font size="-1" color="#666666"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/08/20/the-trump-administration-just-disbanded-a-federal-advisory-committee-on-climate-change/?utm_term=.cf37d2b5afdc">https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/08/20/the-trump-administration-just-disbanded-a-federal-advisory-committee-on-climate-change/?utm_term=.cf37d2b5afdc</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.desmogblog.com/2017/08/19/curbing-climate-change-why-its-so-hard-act-time">Curbing
Climate Change: Why It's so Hard to Act in Time</a></b><br>
..Today the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is
just over 400 parts per million, rising by about 3 ppm yearly. Given
the political, technological and economic time lags that we face,
it's likely that we will hit at least 450-500 ppm before we can
seriously curtail our carbon emissions. The last time Earth's
atmosphere contained this much carbon dioxide was several million
years ago, during the Pliocene era. Global temperatures were much
higher than 2°C above today's average, and global sea level was at
least 6 meters (nearly 20 feet) higher.<br>
We haven't seen comparable temperature or sea level increases so far
because of time lags in Earth's climate response. It takes a while
for our elevated carbon dioxide levels to trigger impacts on this
scale. Given the various time lags that are in play, it is quite
possible that we have already exceeded the 2°C rise over
preindustrial temperatures - a threshold most scientists say we
should avoid - but it hasn't shown up on the thermometer yet.<br>
The Conversation We may not be able to predict exactly how much
future temperatures or sea levels will rise, but we do know that
unless we curb our carbon emissions, our planet will be a very
uncomfortable place for our grandchildren and their grandchildren.
Large-scale social changes take time: they are the sum of many
individual changes, in both attitudes and behaviors. To minimize
that time lag, we need to start acting now.<br>
Timothy H. Dixon is Professor of Geology and Geophysics, Natural and
human-caused hazards, sea level rise and climate change at the
University of South Florida.<br>
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the
original article.<br>
<font size="-1" color="#666666"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.desmogblog.com/2017/08/19/curbing-climate-change-why-its-so-hard-act-time">https://www.desmogblog.com/2017/08/19/curbing-climate-change-why-its-so-hard-act-time</a></font><br>
<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/08/20/543881831/as-indias-climate-changes-farmers-in-the-north-experiment-with-new-crops"><br>
As India's Climate Changes, Farmers In The North Experiment With
New Crops</a></b><br>
August 20, 20177 Julie McCarthy/NPR<br>
Heard on Weekend Edition Sunday<br>
Dust is just one factor. The capital city and much of northern India
are routinely shrouded in man-made pollutants. In fact, Delhi vies
with Beijing for the dirtiest air in the world...<br>
Many of India's 1.3 billion people - a fifth of the world's
population - face pollution that is cutting short lives, stunting
children's cognitive development and putting public health under
terrific stress.<br>
Air pollution is the leading risk factor for most deaths and
disabilities in India, a country that's home to 13 of 20 of the
world's most polluted cities...<br>
The country's dilemma is stark: To lift millions from poverty, it
will require ever more energy. But most of India's electricity is
generated by coal-burning power plants. Millions of new cars choke
the roads each year. Add to the mix the burning of garbage and
crops, and it's a toxic cocktail that makes India the third-largest
contributor of greenhouse gas emissions in the world, after China
and the United States...<br>
India is turning to its greatest source of clean, renewable energy:
sunshine...<br>
It's drenched in it 300 days of every year. Already, solar energy is
changing the landscape across New Delhi, and the deserts of
Rajasthan. But pollution is diminishing its power.<br>
<font size="-1" color="#666666"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/08/20/543881831/as-indias-climate-changes-farmers-in-the-north-experiment-with-new-crops">http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/08/20/543881831/as-indias-climate-changes-farmers-in-the-north-experiment-with-new-crops</a></font><br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://pratt.duke.edu/news/solar-pollution">Air Pollution
Casts Shadow over Solar Energy Production</a></b><br>
JUNE 26, 2017<br>
According to a new study, airborne particles and their accumulation
on solar cells are cutting energy output by more than 25 percent in
certain parts of the world. The regions hardest hit are also those
investing the most in solar energy installations: China, India and
the Arabian Peninsula..<br>
The study appears online June 23 in Environmental Science &
Technology Letters...<br>
The resulting calculations estimate the total loss of solar energy
production in every part of the world. While the United States has
relatively little migratory dust, more arid regions such as the
Arabian Peninsula, Northern India and Eastern China are looking at
heavy losses -- 17 to 25 percent or more, assuming monthly
cleanings. If cleanings take place every two months, those numbers
jump to 25 or 35 percent.<br>
<font size="-1" color="#666666"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://pratt.duke.edu/news/solar-pollution">http://pratt.duke.edu/news/solar-pollution</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://thinkprogress.org/game-of-thrones-climate-change/">Cli-fi:
'Game of Thrones' finally embraces the climate change metaphor</a></b><br>
<font size="-1">..</font> it's only now, in the middle of the show's
seventh and penultimate season, that the metaphor has finally
started to come into focus. At last, Game of Thrones is earning the
label "CliFi," science fiction or fantasy with a climate change
twist.<br>
But, finally, with the two most recent episodes, a major thrust of
the show has shifted to whether the (relatively) "good guys" led by
Jon Stark, can actually come up with the concrete evidence needed to
persuade the two warring queens that the threat is real, imminent,
and what they need to focus on to survive.<br>
In this season's third episode, Jon asks Tyrion Lannister (Cersei's
dwarf brother, now adviser to Daenerys) the defining question: "How
do I convince people who don't know me that an enemy they don't
believe in is coming to kill them all?"<br>
Jon is as frustrated as any climate scientist. He had risen to head
of the Night's Watch, and now is King of the North. He's actually
seen and fought a battle with the White Walkers, who are led by the
Night King. And he saw them raise an Army of the Dead - wights, or
reanimated corpses - from those who died in the battle. Like climate
change, this is going to be an impossible fight to win without
everyone's help.<br>
Tyrion gives two classic explanations for the skepticism with which
Daenerys greets Jon: "She's not about to head north to fight an
enemy she's never seen on the word of a man she doesn't know," and
"people's minds aren't made for problems that large. White Walkers,
the Night King, Army of the Dead, it's almost a relief to confront a
comfortable, familiar monster like my sister."<br>
In Episode 5, Jon figures out that the only way he is going to
convince skeptics, especially Cersei, is by providing irrefutable
evidence. For climate scientists, that often involves taking
skeptical politicians up to the frozen north to see Greenland
melting before their very eyes (though even that doesn't always
work).<br>
Since that isn't feasible here, Jon decides to take a team up to the
frozen north to capture a wight to bring back as evidence to
persuade the queens, particularly Cersei. On Earth, it's not clear
what evidence could persuade Trump and his team of climate science
deniers. They deny even the most well-established science.<br>
<font size="-1" color="#666666"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://thinkprogress.org/game-of-thrones-climate-change/">https://thinkprogress.org/game-of-thrones-climate-change/</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://sputniknews.com/environment/201708201056625085-global-warming-danger/">Doomsday
Clock Ticking Away: Will Humankind Survive Global Warming?</a></b><br>
NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies... the average global
temperature was almost one degree Celsius higher than the average
for July between 1951 and 1980. <br>
Speaking about the chances of natural disasters caused by global
warming increasing in the near future, and what kind of catastrophes
people should be looking out for, he said we have already seen a
huge increase in the frequency of extreme events such as cyclones,
droughts, floods and all other sorts of extreme climate conditions.<br>
"We are only expecting these to increase as global temperatures
continue to rise. One thing is clear: the rates of these natural
disasters are going to increase and impact humans around the world,"
Dr. Crowther warned.<br>
<font size="-1" color="#666666"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://sputniknews.com/environment/201708201056625085-global-warming-danger/">https://sputniknews.com/environment/201708201056625085-global-warming-danger/</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
<font size="+1"><b>This Day in Climate History August 21, - from
D.R. Tucker<br>
</b></font> <br>
<br>
<font size="+1"><i>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
</i></font><font size="+1"><i> </i></font><font
size="+1"><i> You are encouraged to forward this email </i></font>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><small>. </small><small><b>** Privacy and Security: </b>
This is a text-only mailing that carries no 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>