<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<font size="+1"><i>February 13, 2018</i></font><br>
<br>
[Newsweek]<br>
<b><a
href="http://www.newsweek.com/sea-level-rise-has-rapidly-accelerated-1992-melting-ice-and-its-not-803326">Sea
Levels Are Surging at Faster and Faster Rates as Antarctica and
Greenland Melt, Satellite Data Reveals</a></b><br>
Sea levels aren't just steadily rising - they're accelerating,
according to a new assessment based on 25 years of satellite data.
The findings, published Monday in Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences, confirm what climate projections have already
told us. The results reveal that sea level rise has been
accelerating for the past 25 years, rather than steadily rising the
same amount each year.<br>
Assuming the acceleration rate stays the same, which the lead author
said is unlikely, sea levels will surge 26 inches by 2100 from
climate change alone... sea levels will rise 26 inches by 2100, the
authors concluded. But, that number "is almost certainly a
conservative estimate of future sea level change," Nerem said. "The
acceleration will probably go up as ice sheets start to respond more
to the warming."<font size="-1"><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.newsweek.com/sea-level-rise-has-rapidly-accelerated-1992-melting-ice-and-its-not-803326">http://www.newsweek.com/sea-level-rise-has-rapidly-accelerated-1992-melting-ice-and-its-not-803326</a></font><br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/satellites-show-warming-accelerating-sea-level-rise-53027617">http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/satellites-show-warming-accelerating-sea-level-rise-53027617</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[Media Matters report]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.mediamatters.org/research/2018/02/12/how-broadcast-tv-networks-covered-climate-change-2017/219277">How
broadcast TV networks covered climate change in 2017</a></b><br>
Research KEVIN KALHOEFER<br>
Most significant findings here:<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://twitter.com/lisahymas/status/963067686346518528">https://twitter.com/lisahymas/status/963067686346518528</a><br>
Here's our broad summary for the report, which you can read in full
here:<br>
<blockquote>Broadcast TV news neglected many critical climate change
stories in 2017 while devoting most of its climate coverage to
President Donald Trump. Seventy-nine percent of climate change
coverage on the major corporate broadcast TV networks last year
focused on statements or actions by the Trump administration, with
heavy attention given to the president's decision to withdraw from
the Paris agreement and to whether he accepts that human-caused
climate change is a scientific reality. But the networks
undercovered or ignored the ways that climate change had real-life
impacts on people, the economy, national security, and the year's
extreme weather events -- a major oversight in a year when weather
disasters killed hundreds of Americans, displaced hundreds of
thousands more, and cost the economy in excess of $300 billion.<br>
</blockquote>
Top trends from a year of broadcast TV news climate coverage<br>
For this study, Media Matters examined 2017 coverage of climate
change on broadcast TV networks, which included segments devoted to
climate change and segments in which a media figure made substantial
mention of climate change. We analyzed coverage on ABC's, CBS', and
NBC's nightly news programs and Sunday morning political shows. We
also analyzed FOX Broadcasting Co.'s syndicated Sunday morning
political show, Fox News Sunday. FOX Broadcasting Co. does not have
a nightly news program, so, overall, there was far less FOX airtime
to analyze. In addition to the corporate broadcast networks, we
examined weekday coverage on PBS's nightly news program, PBS
NewsHour. PBS does not have a Sunday morning political show.<font
size="-1"><br>
</font><font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.mediamatters.org/research/2018/02/12/how-broadcast-tv-networks-covered-climate-change-2017/219277">https://www.mediamatters.org/research/2018/02/12/how-broadcast-tv-networks-covered-climate-change-2017/219277</a><br>
[key findings]</font><font size="-1"><br>
</font><font size="+1"><b>Key findings:</b></font><font size="+1"><br>
The Trump administration drove climate coverage in 2017:<span> </span><a
href="https://www.mediamatters.org/research/2018/02/12/how-broadcast-tv-networks-covered-climate-change-2017/219277#trumpdominated"
style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent;
color: rgb(68, 68, 68) !important; text-decoration: none;
outline: none; font-weight: bold !important; border-bottom: 1px
solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">79 percent</a><span> </span>of the
time that corporate broadcast networks spent covering climate
change, or 205 out of 260 total minutes, featured actions or
statements by the Trump administration. The networks gave vastly
less coverage to the many ways that climate change affects
people's lives through its impacts on things like extreme weather,
public health, and national security.</font><font size="+1"><br>
Virtually all coverage of climate change on Sunday shows -<span> </span><a
href="https://www.mediamatters.org/research/2018/02/12/how-broadcast-tv-networks-covered-climate-change-2017/219277#sundayshowcoverage"
style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent;
color: rgb(68, 68, 68) !important; text-decoration: none;
outline: none; font-weight: bold !important; border-bottom: 1px
solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">94 of 95 minutes</a><span> </span>-
revolved around the Trump administration.</font><font size="+1"><br>
-President Donald Trump's decision to withdraw the U.S. from the
Paris climate agreement dominated coverage of climate-related
policies and news events, being featured in<span> </span><a
href="https://www.mediamatters.org/research/2018/02/12/how-broadcast-tv-networks-covered-climate-change-2017/219277#parisagreement"
style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent;
color: rgb(68, 68, 68) !important; text-decoration: none;
outline: none; font-weight: bold !important; border-bottom: 1px
solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">52 percent</a><span> </span>of all
climate segments on the corporate broadcast networks. The Trump
administration's rollbacks of other climate protections like the
Clean Power Plan received far less coverage.</font><font size="+1"><br>
-Despite 2017 being a record year for weather and climate
disasters, the corporate broadcast networks rarely covered the
link between climate change and extreme weather events in the U.S.
They aired only<span> </span><a
href="https://www.mediamatters.org/research/2018/02/12/how-broadcast-tv-networks-covered-climate-change-2017/219277#extremeweather"
style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent;
color: rgb(68, 68, 68) !important; text-decoration: none;
outline: none; font-weight: bold !important; border-bottom: 1px
solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">four total segments</a><span> </span>that
discussed climate change in the context of disasters that happened
last year, including just two that mentioned climate change in the
context of hurricanes Harvey, Irma, or Maria.</font><font
size="+1"><br>
-CBS and PBS<span> </span><a
href="https://www.mediamatters.org/research/2018/02/12/how-broadcast-tv-networks-covered-climate-change-2017/219277#cbsandpbsled"
style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent;
color: rgb(68, 68, 68) !important; text-decoration: none;
outline: none; font-weight: bold !important; border-bottom: 1px
solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">led all broadcast networks</a><span> </span>in
the number of segments they devoted to climate change in 2017, as
well as in<span> </span><a
href="https://www.mediamatters.org/research/2018/02/12/how-broadcast-tv-networks-covered-climate-change-2017/219277#sciencecoverage"
style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent;
color: rgb(68, 68, 68) !important; text-decoration: none;
outline: none; font-weight: bold !important; border-bottom: 1px
solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">coverage of climate-related
scientific research</a><span> </span>and number of climate
scientists interviewed or quoted. But CBS and PBS were also the
only two networks to feature guests who<span> </span><a
href="https://www.mediamatters.org/research/2018/02/12/how-broadcast-tv-networks-covered-climate-change-2017/219277#flatlydenied"
style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent;
color: rgb(68, 68, 68) !important; text-decoration: none;
outline: none; font-weight: bold !important; border-bottom: 1px
solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">flatly denied that human activity
causes climate change</a>.</font><font size="+1"><br>
-Network climate coverage in 2017 heavily featured climate denial,
most of which came from Trump and officials in his administration.<span> </span><a
href="https://www.mediamatters.org/research/2018/02/12/how-broadcast-tv-networks-covered-climate-change-2017/219277#climatedenial"
style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent;
color: rgb(68, 68, 68) !important; text-decoration: none;
outline: none; font-weight: bold !important; border-bottom: 1px
solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">Nineteen percent</a><span> </span>of
the networks' climate-related segments mentioned that Trump has
called climate change a "hoax," and 37 percent of those did not
rebut that claim by noting the scientific consensus around climate
change or affirming the reality of climate change.</font><font
size="-1">..<br>
</font>Broadcast networks' heavy focus on Trump in their 2017
climate coverage followed their failure to cover climate change as a
campaign issue during 2016. During the presidential campaign in
2016, the corporate broadcast networks did not air a single segment
informing viewers how a win by Trump or Hillary Clinton could affect
climate change or climate policy, as we reported in our previous
version of this annual study. After Trump won the presidency, the
networks played catch-up, covering the Trump actions that they had
failed to warn viewers about the year before. [Media Matters,
3/23/17]<font size="-1"><br>
</font><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.mediamatters.org/research/2018/02/12/how-broadcast-tv-networks-covered-climate-change-2017/219277">https://www.mediamatters.org/research/2018/02/12/how-broadcast-tv-networks-covered-climate-change-2017/219277</a><br>
<br>
<br>
[Sarcasm + Politics video report]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://youtu.be/OJeQl4earvA">China
Wants to Govern the Arctic</a></b><br>
China Uncensored<br>
Published on Feb 12, 2018<br>
As the ice melts and the Northwest Passage opens up, China looks to
plant its flag in those chilly Arctic waters.<br>
<blockquote>"China is definitely on the same planet as the Arctic,
so I guess that's something at least. <br>
It's enough for the Chinese Communist Party to have its own
ambitious strategy for the Arctic."<br>
</blockquote>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://youtu.be/OJeQl4earvA">https://youtu.be/OJeQl4earvA</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/02/12/walters-politicians-cant-have-it-both-ways-on-climate-change/">Walters:
Politicians can't have it both ways on climate change</a></b><br>
Suing oil companies for causing climate change has become a popular
exercise in California's coastal communities.<br>
Officials in five cities and three counties have filed suits,
alleging that the companies knowingly emitted greenhouse gases that
will damage those communities as oceans rise, and should pay for it.<br>
As CALmatters environmental writer Julie Cart says in a recent
article about the phenomenon, "California is the epicenter of
so-called climate-attribution science." She quotes Peter Frumhoff,
director of science and policy for the Union of Concerned
Scientists, on the theory behind the suits: "There's really a quite
robust ability to characterize the extent to which climate change
impacts have worsened."<br>
Moreover, Frumhoff told Cart, by combining data from oil companies'
annual accounting and reports from environmental monitors, "one can
then connect the dots and assign a cost."<br>
It's easy to file a lawsuit that pleases "progressive" local voters.
However, winning in court is another matter, and by just filing the
actions, California governments may be risking their ability to
borrow money at low rates.<br>
Jay Newman, a former hedge fund manager specializing in governmental
debt, points out in a recent Wall Street Journal article that
localities alleging calamitous effects of climate change are not
mentioning those supposed effects in the required disclosures
accompanying their debt issues.<br>
"By the end of this century Oakland, Calif., will be experiencing a
'100-year flood' every week," Newman writes. "At least that's what
the Oakland city government argued last year, when it filed a
lawsuit against several oil companies for contributing to climate
change. The city forecasts that rising water levels in the San
Francisco Bay will threaten the sewer system and other property
'with a total replacement cost of between $22 billion and $38
billion.'<br>
If they include their apocalyptic projections of their lawsuits
into their debt disclosures, they might find that they can't borrow
or will be paying much higher interest rates. But if they don't,
they will undermine their lawsuits.<br>
They can't – or shouldn't – have it both ways. Actions, even filing
lawsuits, have consequences.<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/02/12/walters-politicians-cant-have-it-both-ways-on-climate-change/">https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/02/12/walters-politicians-cant-have-it-both-ways-on-climate-change/</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[federal tax rebate]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/11022018/geothermal-heat-pump-infographic-google-startup-dandelion-tax-breaks-low-emissions-hvac">Geothermal:
Tax Breaks and the Google Startup Bringing Earth's Heat into
Homes</a></b><br>
By cutting costs and laying pipes for entire communities, Dandelion
is trying to make low-emissions heating and cooling more affordable.<br>
BY LYNDSEY GILPIN,<br>
During one bitter cold winter in upstate New York, Matt VanDerlofske
spent $4,000 on fuel oil to heat his drafty, two-story home for the
season. That was twice what he typically paid, and he had to cancel
family vacations to afford it.<br>
"I never wanted it to happen again," he said. His solution was an
unusual choice for a homeowner in the U.S., but one that's gaining
interest: He had a hole drilled hundreds of feet into his backyard
and a geothermal heat pump installed by Dandelion, a startup energy
company conceived at X, Google's innovation lab that's now part of
its parent company, Alphabet.<br>
Underground, below the frost line, the Earth is consistently around
50 to 60 degrees Fahrenheit. Geothermal heat pumps use that
temperature to keep buildings comfortable by circulating fluid
through a set of pipes that runs through the earth and then connects
with a heat pump. The result is much more efficient heating and
cooling with clean energy than commercial air conditioning and
heating systems - and much lower emissions.<br>
Right now, a tiny percentage of U.S. homes use geothermal heat
pumps, according to Xiaobing Liu, a geothermal researcher at Oak
Ridge National Laboratory; about 500,000 buildings in the commercial
sector use the technology.<br>
<b>Dandelion is trying to expand that market for geothermal heating
by lowering the price, and it just got a big boost from the
federal government.</b><br>
On Friday, Congress voted to extend a 30 percent federal tax credit
for geothermal heat pump installations. With state incentives
included - a $26,000 system in New York would qualify for a $6,000
state rebate - the federal tax credit would drop the cost enough to
make it more competitive with traditional heating and cooling...<br>
European countries have been using geothermal to heat residential
and commercial buildings for decades. In Sweden, 20 percent of
buildings use geothermal heat pumps. China also has a goal to
replace 70 million tons of coal with geothermal heating by 2020.<br>
"This credit reinstatement gives the geothermal heat pump industry a
shot in the arm and much needed parity with other renewables," said
Dougherty, whose Geothermal Exchange Organization has been intensely
lobbying Congress since the temporary credits expired. "It makes
geothermal that much more competitive with conventional HVAC
technology."<br>
As more geothermal system manufacturers enter the market and more
homeowners and businesses use it, the costs are expected to decline.<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/11022018/geothermal-heat-pump-infographic-google-startup-dandelion-tax-breaks-low-emissions-hvac">https://insideclimatenews.org/news/11022018/geothermal-heat-pump-infographic-google-startup-dandelion-tax-breaks-low-emissions-hvac</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
Environmental Research Letters<br>
LETTER - THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE IS OPEN ACCESS<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aaa49f">Deconstructing
climate misinformation to identify reasoning errors</a></b><br>
<font size="-1">John Cook1,3, Peter Ellerton2 and David Kinkead2<br>
Published 6 February 2018 • © 2018 The Author(s). Published by IOP
Publishing Ltd <br>
Environmental Research Letters, Volume 13, Number 2<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aaa49f/pdf">article
PDF</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aaa49f/pdf">http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aaa49f/pdf</a></font><br>
<blockquote> Abstract<br>
Misinformation can have significant societal consequences. For
example, misinformation about climate change has confused the
public and stalled support for mitigation policies. When people
lack the expertise and skill to evaluate the science behind a
claim, they typically rely on heuristics such as substituting
judgment about something complex (i.e. climate science) with
judgment about something simple (i.e. the character of people who
speak about climate science) and are therefore vulnerable to
misleading information. Inoculation theory offers one approach to
effectively neutralize the influence of misinformation. Typically,
inoculations convey resistance by providing people with
information that counters misinformation. In contrast, we propose
inoculating against misinformation by explaining the fallacious
reasoning within misleading denialist claims. We offer a strategy
based on critical thinking methods to analyse and detect poor
reasoning within denialist claims. This strategy includes
detailing argument structure, determining the truth of the
premises, and checking for validity, hidden premises, or ambiguous
language. Focusing on argument structure also facilitates the
identification of reasoning fallacies by locating them in the
reasoning process. Because this reason-based form of inoculation
is based on general critical thinking methods, it offers the
distinct advantage of being accessible to those who lack expertise
in climate science. We applied this approach to 42 common
denialist claims and find that they all demonstrate fallacious
reasoning and fail to refute the scientific consensus regarding
anthropogenic global warming. This comprehensive deconstruction
and refutation of the most common denialist claims about climate
change is designed to act as a resource for communicators and
educators who teach climate science and/or critical thinking<br>
</blockquote>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aaa49f">http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aaa49f</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[Classic lecture 2014 Paleo-climatology]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://youtu.be/81Zb0pJa3Hg">Global
Warming 56 Million Years Ago: What it Means for Us</a></b><br>
Simon Fraser University<br>
Published on Mar 5, 2014<br>
January 30, 2014 - Deep Time, Global Change and YOU lecture series:
<br>
Global Warming 56 Million Years Ago & What it Means for Us. <br>
Presented by Dr. Scott Wing, Smithsonian Institute<br>
Human greenhouse gas emissions will alter conditions on earth for
thousands of years. The past event that best mirrors current warming
occurred 56 million years ago & is called the Paleocene-Eocene
Thermal Maximum, or PETM. <br>
Dr. Wing will explain what we know about the causes of PETM, and
what we have learned about its effects on ecosystems. The lessons of
deep time have great relevance as we rapidly mold our planet in the
ongoing geological epoch, the Anthropocene. <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="http://www.sfu.ca/cstudies/science">www.sfu.ca/cstudies/science</a><br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://youtu.be/81Zb0pJa3Hg">https://youtu.be/81Zb0pJa3Hg</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[Classic 1956 radio presentation]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="Audio:%20https://youtu.be/AuV0crHDkmY">Climate Change and
Industrial Activity - Excursions in Science Radio Program from
1950s</a></b><br>
Global warming discussion from a 1956-57 radio program called
"Excursions in Science" presented by General Electric Research
Laboratories. Program discusses Dr. Gilbert Plass and his climate
research.<br>
Audio: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://youtu.be/AuV0crHDkmY">https://youtu.be/AuV0crHDkmY</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<font size="+1"><b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/climate-change-action-a-moral-obligation-says-daryl-hannah/">This
Day in Climate History February 13, 2013</a> - from D.R.
Tucker</b></font><br>
February 13, 2013: On the Fox News Channel program "Hannity," Daryl
Hannah discusses the anti-Keystone XL movement. In addition, Hannah
discusses the risks of KXL in an interview for CBSNews.com.<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://video.foxnews.com/v/2163423203001/">http://video.foxnews.com/v/2163423203001/</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/climate-change-action-a-moral-obligation-says-daryl-hannah/">http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/climate-change-action-a-moral-obligation-says-daryl-hannah/</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>