<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<font size="+1"><i>January 8, 2018</i></font><br>
<br>
[slideshow]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://youtu.be/f4cRItULPAo">Victorian
heat melts tar on the busy Hume Highway Friday</a></b><br>
Victorian heatwave MELTS a busy highway bringing traffic to a
standstill - as Melbourne and Sydney brace for a scorching weekend.<br>
Surging temperatures on Australia's east coast melted tar on a busy
Victorian highway on Friday, causing a huge traffic jam as drivers
dodged the sticky mess.<br>
Video taken from the car's passengers shows a section of the 10
kilometre stretch of affected bitumen, and countless cars travelling
at a crawl bumper to bumper.<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://youtu.be/f4cRItULPAo">https://youtu.be/f4cRItULPAo</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[GOP]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.postandcourier.com/news/former-s-c-gop-congressman-bob-inglis-finds-new-focus/article_a25f3aba-dea5-11e7-bf96-37fdc3b1c863.html">Former
SC GOP Congressman Bob Inglis finds new focus in climate change,
criticizing Trump</a></b><br>
Inglis has been arguing for many years the roll-out of a carbon tax.
Without growing the government, he explained the tax would impose a
fee on users of fossil fuels as they release carbon dioxide into the
environment. He works from home in rural Greenville, but also
travels widely, spreading this message to conservative voters in
politically red zip codes. <br>
"I'm confident that we're going to win, that America is going to
price carbon dioxide and lead the world to solutions on climate
change through free enterprise innovation," he said. "I'm absolutely
confident about that. The question is, 'Will we do it soon enough to
make a difference?'"...<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.postandcourier.com/news/former-s-c-gop-congressman-bob-inglis-finds-new-focus/article_a25f3aba-dea5-11e7-bf96-37fdc3b1c863.html">https://www.postandcourier.com/news/former-s-c-gop-congressman-bob-inglis-finds-new-focus/article_a25f3aba-dea5-11e7-bf96-37fdc3b1c863.html</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[rational basis for hope]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.ibtimes.com/humans-earths-only-hope-societal-changes-key-controlling-rising-temperatures-2635715">Humans
Earth's Only Hope: Societal Changes Key To Controlling Rising
Temperatures</a></b><br>
Using past climate projections and social processes, the global
temperature is predicted to increase by 3.4 to 6.2 degrees C in
2100, but the latest model shows that it could only be around 4.9
degrees C...<br>
Due to the complexity of physical processes, climate models have
uncertainties in global temperature prediction. The new model found
that temperature uncertainty associated with the social component
was of a similar magnitude to that of the physical processes, which
implies that a better understanding of the human social component is
important but often overlooked.<br>
The model found that long-term solution devised by us to counter
climate change like electric cars had by far the most impact in
reducing greenhouse emissions. This showed the team that only humans
can counter the climate change we could've so easily triggered.<br>
"A better understanding of the human perception of risk from climate
change and the behavioral responses are key to curbing future
climate change," said lead author Brian Beckage, a professor of
plant biology and computer science at the University of Vermont in <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.nimbios.org/press/FS_humanclimate">a press
release.</a><br>
"It is easy to lose confidence in the capacity for societies to make
sufficient changes to reduce future temperatures. When we started
this project, we simply wanted to address the question as to whether
there was any rational basis for 'hope' - that is a rational basis
to expect that human behavioral changes can sufficiently impact
climate to significantly reduce future global temperatures," said
NIMBioS Director Louis J. Gross, who co-authored the paper and
co-organized the Working Group.<br>
"Climate models can easily make assumptions about reductions in
future greenhouse gas emissions and project the implications, but
they do this with no rational basis for human responses," Gross
said. "The <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.nimbios.org/press/FS_humanclimate">key result
from this paper</a> is that there is indeed some rational basis
for hope."...<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.ibtimes.com/humans-earths-only-hope-societal-changes-key-controlling-rising-temperatures-2635715">http://www.ibtimes.com/humans-earths-only-hope-societal-changes-key-controlling-rising-temperatures-2635715</a></font><br>
-<br>
[National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.nimbios.org/press/FS_humanclimate">Curbing
Climate Change - Study Finds Strong Rationale for the Human
Factor</a></b><br>
Jan 1, 2018<br>
Humans may be the dominant cause of global temperature rise, but
they may also be a crucial factor in helping to reduce it, according
to a new study that for the first time builds a novel model to
measure the effects of behavior on climate.<br>
Drawing from both social psychology and climate science, the new
model investigates how human behavioral changes evolve in response
to extreme climate events and affect global temperature change...<br>
The results, published today in the journal Nature Climate Change,
demonstrate the importance of factoring human behavior into models
of climate change.<br>
"<b>A better understanding of the human perception of risk from
climate change and the behavioral responses are key to curbing
future climate change,</b>" ...<br>
The paper was a result of combined efforts of the joint Working
Group on Human Risk Perception and Climate Change at the National
Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis (NIMBioS) at the
University of Tennessee, Knoxville... <br>
The Working Group of about a dozen scientists from a variety of
disciplines, including biology, psychology, geography, and
mathematics, has been researching the questions surrounding human
risk perception and climate change since 2013.<br>
"It is easy to lose confidence in the capacity for societies to make
sufficient changes to reduce future temperatures. When we started
this project, we simply wanted to address the question as to whether
there was any rational basis for 'hope' - that is a rational basis
to expect that human behavioral changes can sufficiently impact
climate to significantly reduce future global temperatures," said
NIMBioS Director Louis J. Gross, who co-authored the paper and
co-organized the Working Group.<br>
"Climate models can easily make assumptions about reductions in
future greenhouse gas emissions and project the implications, but
they do this with no rational basis for human responses," Gross
said. <b>"The key result from this paper is that there is indeed
some rational basis for hope."</b><br>
That basis for hope can be the foundation which communities can
build on in adopting policies to reduce emissions, said co-author
Katherine Lacasse, an assistant professor of psychology at Rhode
Island College.<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.nimbios.org/press/FS_humanclimate">http://www.nimbios.org/press/FS_humanclimate</a></font><br>
-<br>
[Nature Climate Change]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-017-0031-7">Linking
models of human behaviour and climate alters projected climate
change</a></b><br>
<blockquote>Abstract<br>
Although not considered in climate models, perceived risk stemming
from extreme climate events may induce behavioural changes that
alter greenhouse gas emissions. Here, we link the C-ROADS climate
model to a social model of behavioural change to examine how
interactions between perceived risk and emissions behaviour
influence projected climate change. Our coupled climate and social
model resulted in a global temperature change ranging from 3.4 -
6.2 degreesC by 2100 compared with 4.9 degreesC for the C-ROADS
model alone, and led to behavioural uncertainty that was of a
similar magnitude to physical uncertainty (2.8 degreesC versus
3.5 degreesC). Model components with the largest influence on
temperature were the functional form of response to extreme
events, interaction of perceived behavioural control with
perceived social norms, and behaviours leading to sustained
emissions reductions. <b>Our results suggest that policies
emphasizing the appropriate attribution of extreme events to
climate change and infrastructural mitigation may reduce climate
change the most.</b><br>
</blockquote>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-017-0031-7">https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-017-0031-7</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[Jerry Large / Columnist]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/climate-change-expert-shows-how-to-slay-carbon-bigfoot/">Climate-change
expert shows how to slay carbon bigfoot</a></b><br>
Originally published January 7, 2018 <br>
A scientist creates a competition to encourage a grass-roots battle
against global warming through individual lifestyle choices...<br>
He and some dedicated volunteers decided to create teams so there
would be both cooperation and competition. Fifteen teams started and
13 completed the three-month competition. Teams could have as many
as seven members, but they had to be a mix of ages and lifestyles.<br>
The participants started in January 2016 and spent that month
recording data using a spreadsheet Bindschadler designed to keep
track of their carbon footprint in three categories: home (energy,
water use, garbage), transportation, and food and shopping.<br>
It was a rough measure, but enough to get a baseline. Over the next
two months, the teams competed to see which would lower its carbon
score most from its starting point.<br>
Bindschadler said the primary objective is to educate people about
their own habits and about where the biggest carbon costs are.
Taking a plane has a huge carbon footprint, for instance...<font
size="-1"><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/climate-change-expert-shows-how-to-slay-carbon-bigfoot/">https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/climate-change-expert-shows-how-to-slay-carbon-bigfoot/</a></font><br>
-<br>
[Jan 21]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.tamingbigfootseattle.org/">A Friendly
Competition to Reduce Your Carbon Footprint in Seattle</a></b><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.tamingbigfootseattle.org/">http://www.tamingbigfootseattle.org/</a><br>
<br>
<br>
[Comment Berkeley Daily Planet]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2018-01-06/article/46370">The
Peril We All Face Due To Human Folly</a><br>
</b>Jack Bragen<br>
Sunday January 07, 2018<br>
Soylent Green was a 1973 movie starring Charlton Heston, loosely
based on the 1966 science fiction book "Make Room, Make Room!" by
author Harry Harrison. The movie explored the effects of unchecked
population, it predicted global warming (in 1973) and it concluded
with the uncovering of a secret, that the ocean was dying, and with
it, everyone would die. <br>
Thus, human beings have known of global warming for more than fifty
years. It was too inconvenient for us to find alternatives to fossil
fuels.<br>
Worse yet is how human beings treat our oceans. We've used them as a
sewer, a garbage dump, a nuclear testing ground and nuclear waste
sight, a platform for military battles. And worse. Recently there
was the meltdown of the Fukushima nuclear reactors, which released
large amounts of radioactive material into the ocean. Additionally,
we had the BP oil spill disaster in Gulf of Mexico. <br>
At the same time, we expect the ocean to provide us with oxygen, and
we use it as a source of food. The ocean is responsible for about 70
percent of the oxygen we breathe. Due to warming of the oceans, some
scientists believe that there has already been a forty percent
reduction in the plankton that produces oxygen. <br>
When our situation worsens, it is conceivable that our oceans could
turn anaerobic. This means everything in the ocean will die, and it
means that human beings and most animals will slowly suffocate to
death. <br>
Environmental issues are no longer strictly in the domain of bird
watchers, hikers and nature lovers. Environmentalism is also no
longer about mere health concerns, such as carcinogens in our
environment, lead and mercury contamination, birth defects, towns
becoming sick due to toxic waste, and so on. Now, the ante has been
raised to whether or not our planet will continue to support human
life, whatsoever. <br>
Is it too late for us? We must not assume that. It appears that the
Republican Party, the fossil fuel industry, Congress, and the
President, believe that it is hopeless to reverse global warming;
and that we may as well build structures that will house the
fortunate few. <br>
I am certain that President Trump is well aware of the scientific
fact of global warming, despite his public denial of that. His
circle of concern excludes everything and everyone other than his
own power, importance, and wealth. <br>
To appease some of the less informed members of the public, oil
companies have periodically aired ads claiming that we can take the
carbon dioxide out of our atmosphere and store it. Any credible
scientist can tell you that this would either A; require more energy
than was obtained by burning the fossil fuels, or else B; it would
deplete our atmosphere of oxygen. <br>
We currently have sufficient technology to convert to renewable
energy. What stands in the way?--human folly of various kinds, such
as greed, denial, the desire for comfort, and resistance to change.
<br>
As it stands, we're looking at the likelihood of most life on our
planet becoming extinct, and it seems to be happening much faster
than we anticipated. <br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2018-01-06/article/46370">http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2018-01-06/article/46370</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[Antarctic desert]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/01/180106103436.htm">In
Antarctic dry valleys, early signs of climate change-induced
shifts in soil</a></b><br>
In a study spanning two decades, a team of researchers led by
Colorado State University found declining numbers of soil fauna,
nematodes and other animal species in the McMurdo Dry Valleys, one
of the world's driest and coldest deserts. This discovery is
attributed to climate change, which has triggered melting and
thawing of ice in this desert since an uncharacteristically warm
weather event in 2001.<br>
There are no plants, birds or mammals in the McMurdo Dry Valleys,
located in the largest region of the Antarctic continent. But
microbes and microscopic soil invertebrates live in the harsh
ecosystem, where the mean average temperature is below -15 degrees
Celsius, or 5 degrees Fahrenheit.<br>
The findings offer insight and an alarm bell on how ecosystems
respond to climate change and to unusual climate events, scientists
said.<br>
"Until 2001, the region was not experiencing a warming trend," said
Walter Andriuzzi, lead author of the study and a postdoctoral
researcher in the Department of Biology and School of Global
Environmental Sustainability.<br>
"On the contrary, it was getting colder," he continued. "But in
2001, the cooling trend stopped abruptly with an extremely warm
weather event. Since then, the average temperatures are either
stable or are increasing slightly. But most importantly, there have
been more frequent intense weather events."<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/01/180106103436.htm">https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/01/180106103436.htm</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
Techno-fix illusions<b><br>
</b><b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://climateandcapitalism.com/2017/12/14/big-bad-fix-the-case-against-climate-geoengineering/">Big
Bad Fix: The case against climate geoengineering</a></b><br>
Technologies that promise easy solutions to the climate crisis
actually pose high risks to people, ecosystems and security, and are
dangerous distractions from the urgent need for deep emission cuts.<br>
A new report warns that geoengineering, the large-scale manipulation
of the climate, is gaining acceptance as a would-be technological
fix for climate change in key emitting countries, as these countries
refuse to break away from their fossil-fuelled economies.<br>
<em><a
href="https://www.boell.de/sites/default/files/bigbadfix_a4_col4web.pdf?dimension1=division_iup"
target="_blank" rel="noopener">Click here to download The Big
Bad Fix (pdf).</a></em> <br>
Geoengineering research programs and projects planned by industry
and state-funded and private research institutions are
proliferating, primarily in high-emitting countries such as the US,
the UK and China. The Big Bad Fix analyses the context and risks of
geoengineering, and reveals the actors, vested interests and
political developments underway to advance the large-scale
technological schemes to manipulate the Earth's natural systems.<br>
Although considered reckless and unacceptable by many scientific and
political experts, geoengineering is now increasingly being pushed
into the mainstream of climate policy debates, where it creates the
illusion of a technological shortcut to manage the symptoms of
climate change without addressing its root causes.<br>
However, as the report details, geoengineering poses many risks for
people, ecosystems and security. It relies on excessive land, water
and resource consumption, threatens food security, and undermines
democratic control over the world's commons because its untested
technologies are also developed by patent-holders for profit.<br>
Therefore, the report states, irreversible harm to biodiversity and
ecosystem integrity is highly probable. There are also serious
concerns about geoengineering governance, including the potential
for unilateral deployment, the risk of conflict in the event of
adverse regional impacts and side effects, and the risk of
weaponization of geoengineering technologies.<br>
Instead of resorting to unproven, risky techno-fixes, the report
calls for the rapid implementation of a climate-just vision for
limiting global warming to under 1.5 degreesC.<br>
<blockquote>Barbara Unmusig, Director of the Heinrich Boll
Foundation: "Proponents of geoengineering are feeding the illusion
that we can escape our climate crises without having to adjust our
emission-heavy lifestyles. But reality is not that simple. Not
only do geoengineering technologies come with new risks and side
effects, they also distract from the only proven solution for
climate change: a radical reduction of climate changing emissions.
Before geoengineering is put into action, we need clear and
binding regulations for these technologies. An international
framework of regulation must be grounded in the precautionary
principle, and technologies with associated risks that are not
predictable, justifiable or manageable must be prohibited
outright."<br>
</blockquote>
The report concludes that the numerous high-impact risks of
geoengineering, and the political, social, cultural, economic,
ethical, moral, intergenerational and rights-based problems it
implies, render geoengineering unacceptable. Further, the authors
argue that it is a dangerous distraction from the urgent need to
support viable alternatives: making deep emission cuts in the
near-term and rapidly transforming our economies to allow for a
socially and ecologically sustainable and just future, rather than
locking the world into a long-term dependence on non-existent,
high-risk technologies.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://climateandcapitalism.com/2017/12/14/big-bad-fix-the-case-against-climate-geoengineering/">http://climateandcapitalism.com/2017/12/14/big-bad-fix-the-case-against-climate-geoengineering/</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<font size="+1"><b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://mediamatters.org/research/2013/01/08/study-warmest-year-on-record-received-cool-clim/192079">This
Day in Climate History January 8, 2013</a> - from D.R.
Tucker</b></font><br>
January 8, 2013:<br>
Media Matters releases an analysis showing that "...news coverage of
climate change on ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX remained low in 2012 despite<br>
record temperatures and a series of extreme weather events in the
U.S. <br>
When the Sunday shows did discuss climate change, scientists were
shut out of the debate while Republican politicians were given a
platform<br>
to question the science."<br>
Since 2009, climate coverage on the Sunday shows has declined every
year. <b>In 2012, the Sunday shows spent less than 8 minutes on
climate change, down from 9 minutes in 2011, 21 minutes in 2010,
and over an hour in 2009.</b> The vast majority of coverage -- 89
percent -- was driven by politics, and none was driven by scientific
findings.<br>
- ABC's This Week covered it the most, at just over 5 minutes. <br>
- NBC's Meet the Press covered it the least, in just one 6 second
mention.<br>
<b>In Four Years, Sunday Shows Have Not Quoted A Single Scientist On
Climate Change.</b> Of those who were asked about climate change
on the Sunday shows, 54 percent were media figures, 31 percent were
politicians and not one was a scientist or climate expert. This is
consistent with a previous Media Matters analysis which found that
none of the Sunday shows quoted any scientists on climate change
between 2009 and 2011. By contrast, two-thirds of those interviewed
or quoted on the nightly news programs in 2012 were scientists.
[Media Matters, 4/16/12]<br>
<b>Sunday Shows Obscured Scientific Consensus On Climate Change. </b>Not
only did the Sunday shows shut out those who accept the science of
climate change, but they also failed to inform their audiences that
the vast majority of climate scientists agree that climate change is
occurring and is driven by human activity. Only 11 percent of
coverage implied that scientists agree on global warming, while 44
percent failed to correct a guest who questioned the science. By
contrast, 60 percent of nightly news coverage alluded to the
scientific consensus. <br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://mediamatters.org/research/2013/01/08/study-warmest-year-on-record-received-cool-clim/192079">http://mediamatters.org/research/2013/01/08/study-warmest-year-on-record-received-cool-clim/192079</a></font><br>
<br>
<font size="+1"><i>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
</i></font><font size="+1"><i><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/2017-October/date.html">Archive
of Daily Global Warming News</a> </i></font><i><br>
</i><span class="moz-txt-link-freetext"><a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote">https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote</a></span><font
size="+1"><i><font size="+1"><i><br>
</i></font></i></font><font size="+1"><i> <br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="a%20href=%22mailto:contact@theClimate.Vote%22">Send
email to subscribe</a> to news clippings. </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>