<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<font size="+1"><i>June 26, 2018</i></font><br>
<br>
[Courts back down - bigger challenge]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/judge-tosses-climate-change-lawsuits-against-big-oil-companies">Judge
Tosses Climate Change Lawsuits Against Big Oil Companies</a></b><br>
A federal judge in California on Monday tossed out lawsuits that
sought to hold several big oil companies accountable for climate
change, saying he believes<b> Congress and President Trump are best
positioned to address the issue of fossil fuels.</b> U.S. District
Judge William Alsup, who raised some eyebrows in March when he held
a hearing with climate change experts to educate himself on the
issue, said the lawsuits against Chevron, Exxon Mobil,
ConocoPhillips, BP, and Royal Dutch Shell demand more attention than
a judge can give. "The problem deserves a solution on a more vast
scale than can be supplied by a district judge or jury in a public
nuisance case," he said. Alsup's ruling came in response to lawsuits
filed by authorities in San Francisco and Oakland who accused oil
companies of promoting fossil fuels as environmentally safe despite
knowing the risks they pose.<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/judge-tosses-climate-change-lawsuits-against-big-oil-companies">https://www.thedailybeast.com/judge-tosses-climate-change-lawsuits-against-big-oil-companies</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[Yikes! Ick! Tick!]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://tamino.wordpress.com/2018/06/25/global-warming-and-tick-borne-diseases/">Global
Warming and Tick-Borne Diseases</a></b><br>
Posted on June 25, 2018 <br>
The tick population has exploded in Maine over the last 20 years.
The reason? Global warming.<br>
Yes, the reason is global warming. Since 1895, average temperature
in Maine has risen about 3.6F (2C). More relevant is the fact that
very cold temperatures have risen much more. Both winter faster than
summer, and nighttime faster than daytime, have greatly reduced the
effectiveness by which cold temperature helps control the tick
population in Maine.<br>
Overnight low temperature during the winter season (Dec-Jan-Feb) in
Maine has already risen by a whopping 6.3F (3.5C).<br>
Ticks have migrated further north, not just because they are better
able to survive hard freeze when there's so much less hard freeze.
It's also because their primary host species have migrated further
north.<br>
The best-known disease spread by ticks is Lyme disease. In 2001
Maine recorded 108 cases (according to the Maine CDC Infectious
Disease Program). By 2017 that number had risen to 1,844 - seventeen
times as many. More relevant is the number per capita, usually given
as the rate per 100,000 people, which has risen from 8.4 to 138.5 -
a "mere" sixteen and a half times as big.<br>
Lyme isn't the only disease spread by ticks, and it isn't the only
disease that has risen dramatically in Maine. The year 2001 saw no
cases of anaplasmosis and only 1 case of babesiosis in the state,
but 2017 brought 663 anaplasmosis infections and 118 of babesiosis.
The rates of these rarer diseases were higher in Maine in 2017 than
the rate of Lyme disease was in 2001.<br>
Yes, the tick population has exploded. Yes, the rates of infectious
disease spread by ticks have exploded. Yes, Mainers are suffering
dread diseases, yes it costs money for medical treatment, yes it
costs time and money for lost work and lost wages, yes it sometimes
causes death.<br>
And yes, it's because of global warming.<br>
It's just one more reason that the politicians who obstruct
aggressive action about global warming are working against the
health and wellbeing of people. It's time to make climate change
your #1 issue in the voting booth.<br>
Until we do, we're living the joke about the word "politics" being
the union of two words: "poly" meaning many, and "ticks" meaning
blood-sucking parasites.<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://tamino.wordpress.com/2018/06/25/global-warming-and-tick-borne-diseases/">https://tamino.wordpress.com/2018/06/25/global-warming-and-tick-borne-diseases/</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[video from Cornell University seminars]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.atkinson.cornell.edu/media/yviewer.php?VideoID=QuNQX7D47kA">Do
We Fully Understand the Challenges and Implications of Climate
Change Scenarios?</a></b><br>
Patrick Reed (Civil and Environmental Engineering) presented in the
2018 Cornell University Climate Change Seminar Series.<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.atkinson.cornell.edu/media/yviewer.php?VideoID=QuNQX7D47kA">http://www.atkinson.cornell.edu/media/yviewer.php?VideoID=QuNQX7D47kA</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[no wood burning, nice try]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/21062018/forest-biomass-renewable-energy-paris-climate-change-emissions-logging-wood-pellets-electricity">Push
to Burn Wood for Fuel Threatens Climate Goals, Scientists Warn</a></b><br>
Scientists say a new EU renewable energy policy on biomass is
'misleading' and will raise emissions. U.S. forests are being turned
into wood pellets to feed demand.<br>
By Bob Berwyn<br>
The European Union declared this week that it could make deeper
greenhouse gas cuts than it has already pledged under the Paris
climate agreement. But its scientific advisors warn that the EU's
new renewable energy policy could undermine that goal because it
fails to fully account for the climate impacts of burning wood for
fuel.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/21062018/forest-biomass-renewable-energy-paris-climate-change-emissions-logging-wood-pellets-electricity">https://insideclimatenews.org/news/21062018/forest-biomass-renewable-energy-paris-climate-change-emissions-logging-wood-pellets-electricity</a><br>
<br>
<br>
[New terms from a retired politician]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/393718-climate-change-disputers-are-actually-innovation-pessimists">Climate
change disputers are actually innovation pessimists</a></b><br>
BY FORMER REP. BOB INGLIS, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR - <br>
Climate action is being blocked more by pessimism about innovation
than skepticism about causation. Scratch a climate skeptic, and
you'll find an innovation pessimist. They don't believe it can be
done. Overwhelmed by the scale of the problem, they assume that we
can't change our trajectory. Secretly, they're depressed about it.
They need hope. <br>
Had these pessimists been in the stadium at Rice University in
September of 1963, they might have chanted "No way" when President
Kennedy said of the Mariner spacecraft then on its way to Venus,
"The accuracy of that shot is comparable to firing a missile from
Cape Canaveral and dropping it in this stadium between the 40-yard
lines."<br>
Innovation pessimists are right to point out that the drive for
innovation was more immediate and more visible in 1963. The Soviet's
launch of Sputnik had raised the specter of a goose-stepping,
hostile power in control of space. We were unified, and our response
was completely within our control.<br>
Climate change crawls and creeps; it doesn't goose step.
Addressing it requires a coordinated global response, and innovation
pessimists are right to doubt the ability of the United Nations and
the ability of the regulatory state to solve the problem.<br>
But the innovation pessimists are missing the dynamism that comes
from the internalization of negative externalities, and they're
underestimating the strength of the American market. <br>
Internalizing negative externalities involves adding the health and
climate damages to the price of fossil fuels. This accountability
would shatter the illusion that energy from fossil fuels is cheap.
In a transparent, accountable energy market, consumers - not
regulators, not mandates, not fickle tax incentives - would drive
demand for clean energy. Entrepreneurs would race to supply that
demand, and we'd power our lives with the fuels of the future.<br>
Most simply, this could be accomplished through a carbon tax applied
at the mine and at the pipeline. The revenue raised from the carbon
tax should then be returned to taxpayers in cuts to existing taxes
or in the form of dividend checks to ensure no growth of government.<br>
The strength of the American market would become evident when we
applied our carbon tax to imports from countries lacking the same
price on carbon dioxide. This border adjustment would entice our
trading partners to enact their own carbon taxes. Why pay a tax on
entry into the U.S. when you could have paid that same tax to your
home country, enabling your goods to enter the U.S. without a carbon
tax adjustment?<br>
If innovation pessimists need hope, there's a further category that
needs correction. They're innovation opponents. They're vested
politically or financially in fossil fuels. They don't want a level
playing field. They don't want transparency. Sometimes they even
conjure up national security arguments so that the fossils can
continue to socialize their soot.<br>
Such is the case with Secretary of Energy Rick Perry. It was
reported earlier this month that the Department of Energy has
reached back to the Cold War-era Defense Production Act to draft a
plan that would enable the DOE to direct operators to purchase
electricity from coal and nuclear facilities that are at risk of
retirement.<br>
There's no red army getting ready to invade. The army marching on
coal is natural gas. While, there may be an argument for continuing
subsidies for emission-less nuclear power, there's no argument for
favoring dirtier-burning coal over cleaner-burning natural gas.<br>
Had innovation opponents like Perry been in the Rice stadium that
day in 1963, they would have gone beyond pessimism toward the
innovation speech of the century - they would have tried to scramble
the signal from the microphone.<br>
They would have wanted to silence the credo of American
exceptionalism spoken by Kennedy: "Those who came before us made
certain that this country rode the first waves of the industrial
revolutions, the first waves of modern invention, and the first wave
of nuclear power, and this generation does not intend to founder in
the backwash of the coming age of space. We mean to be a part of it
- we mean to lead it."<br>
Backwash indeed: frozen piles of coal, coal ash slurries, mountain
top removal, asthma and other lung diseases, climate damages.
Innovation is not your friend if you're wed to the past or if you've
made promises you can't keep to people who trusted you to protect
them from a future that you cannot hold back. <br>
To the innovation pessimists, we can offer hope. To the innovation
opponents, we must offer correction. <br>
Former Rep. Bob Inglis (R-S.C.) directs republicEn.org, a community
committed to free enterprise action on climate change. He served in
Congress from 1993-1999 and 2005-2011.<br>
<br>
<br>
The Center for Climate & Security <br>
<b><a
href="https://climateandsecurity.org/2018/06/25/climate-and-security-week-in-review-june-19-25/">Climate
and Security Week in Review: June 19-25</a></b><br>
by Caitlin Werrell and Francesco Femia<br>
EEAS_ClimatePeaceSecurity_2018<br>
EU External Action Service High level event on Climate, Peace and
Security, Friday, 22 June in Palais d'Egmont, Brussels<br>
Here are a list of notable headlines and comments on climate and
security matters from the past week. If we've missed any, let us
know.<br>
RELEASE:<b> <br>
At Critical Juncture for the EU, Experts Unveil "Europe's
Responsibility to Prepare"</b> <br>
Framework for Climate and Security <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://climateandsecurity.org/2018/06/20/release-at-critical-juncture-for-the-eu-experts-unveil-europes-responsibility-to-prepare-framework-for-climate-and-security/">https://climateandsecurity.org/2018/06/20/release-at-critical-juncture-for-the-eu-experts-unveil-europes-responsibility-to-prepare-framework-for-climate-and-security/</a>
<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://climateandsecurity.org/2018/06/25/climate-and-security-week-in-review-june-19-25/">https://climateandsecurity.org/2018/06/25/climate-and-security-week-in-review-june-19-25/</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[History: Fundamental Classic climate videos from Peter Sinclair]<br>
<b><a
href="https://climatecrocks.com/2018/06/24/not-just-hansen-what-we-knew-in-82/">Not
Just Hansen: What We Knew in '82</a></b><br>
June 24, 2018<br>
My first real-live teacher on climate science was long time
planetary researcher, Physicist Mike MacCracken, then of Livermore
Lab.<br>
His '82 lecture on Climate at Sandia Labs could, in large part, have
been delivered last week.<br>
<b><a href="https://youtu.be/OmpiuuBy-4s">Global Warming: What We
Knew in 82</a></b><br>
greenman3610<br>
Published on Mar 26, 2012 <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://youtu.be/OmpiuuBy-4s">https://youtu.be/OmpiuuBy-4s</a><br>
Join the conversation and support this series at <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.climatecrocks.com">http://www.climatecrocks.com</a><br>
In 1982, Mike MacCracken, then a senior researcher at Livermore
Laboratory, gave a lecture at Sandia Labs on the subject of global
climate change.<br>
I talked to Dr. MacCracken not long ago at the University of
Michigan,and asked him, if he were to give the lecture today, what
would be changed, and what would be the same.<br>
<blockquote><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYIk4cjsMb0">Mike's
lecture starts here, 1 of 6</a><br>
Dr. Michael MacCracken - 1982 Climate Change Presentation - Part 1
of 6<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYIk4cjsMb0">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYIk4cjsMb0</a><br>
<br>
<a
href="https://climatecrocks.com/2012/03/08/james-hansen-at-ted/">James
Hansen at TED</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://climatecrocks.com/2012/03/08/james-hansen-at-ted/">https://climatecrocks.com/2012/03/08/james-hansen-at-ted/</a><br>
<br>
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRc_9nNTZg0">More on
Global Sea Ice (2010)</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRc_9nNTZg0">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRc_9nNTZg0</a><br>
<br>
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwdnqWL1YkY">Dr. Julienne
Stroeve on Polar ice, 2012</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwdnqWL1YkY">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwdnqWL1YkY</a><br>
<br>
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5JpcfzxrL4M">Andrew
Dessler on Water Vapor feedback</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5JpcfzxrL4M">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5JpcfzxrL4M</a><br>
<br>
<a
href="https://phys.org/news/2010-12-decade-clouds-positive-climate-feedback.html">Andrew
Dessler on Water Vapor and Clouds</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://phys.org/news/2010-12-decade-clouds-positive-climate-feedback.html">https://phys.org/news/2010-12-decade-clouds-positive-climate-feedback.html</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CavtDvGk8mM">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CavtDvGk8mM</a><br>
</blockquote>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://climatecrocks.com/2018/06/24/not-just-hansen-what-we-knew-in-82/">https://climatecrocks.com/2018/06/24/not-just-hansen-what-we-knew-in-82/</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<font size="+1"><b>This Day in Climate History - June 26, 2006 -
from D.R. Tucker</b></font><br>
June 26, 2006: The Associated Press reports:<br>
<blockquote>"The Supreme Court agreed Monday to consider whether the
Bush administration must regulate carbon dioxide to combat global
warming, setting up what could be one of the court's most
important decisions on the environment.<br>
<br>
"The decision means the court will address whether the
administration's decision to rely on voluntary measures to combat
climate change are legal under federal clean air laws.<br>
<br>
"'This is the whole ball of wax. This will determine whether the
Environmental Protection Agency is to regulate greenhouse gases
from cars and whether EPA can regulate carbon dioxide from power
plants,' said David Bookbinder, an attorney for the Sierra Club.<br>
<br>
"Bookbinder said if the court upholds the administration's
argument it also could jeopardize plans by California and 10 other
states, including most of the Northeast, to require reductions in
carbon dioxide emissions from motor vehicles.<br>
<br>
"There was no immediate comment from either the EPA or White House
on the court's action.<br>
<br>
"’Fundamentally, we don't think carbon dioxide is a pollutant, and
so we don't think these attempts are a good idea,’ said John
Felmy, chief economist of the American Petroleum Institute, a
trade group representing oil and gas producers.<br>
<br>
"A dozen states, a number of cities and various environmental
groups asked the court to take up the case after a divided lower
court ruled against them.<br>
<br>
"They argue that the Environmental Protection Agency is obligated
to limit carbon dioxide emissions from motor vehicles under the
federal Clean Air Act because as the primary ‘greenhouse'’ gas
causing a warming of the earth, carbon dioxide is a pollutant.<br>
<br>
"The administration maintains that carbon dioxide -- unlike other
chemicals that must be controlled to assure healthy air -- is not
a pollutant under the federal clean air law, and that even if it
were the EPA has discretion over whether to regulate it.<br>
<br>
"A federal appeals court sided with the administration in a
sharply divided ruling.<br>
<br>
"One judge said the EPA's refusal to regulate carbon dioxide was
contrary to the clean air law; another said that even if the Clean
Air Act gave the EPA authority over the heat-trapping chemical,
the agency could choose not to use that authority; a third judge
ruled against the suit because, he said, the plaintiffs had no
standing because they hadn't proven harm.<br>
<br>
"Carbon dioxide, which is release when burning fossil fuels such
as coal or gasoline, is the leading so-called 'greenhouse' gas
because as it drifts into the atmosphere it traps the earth's heat
-- much like a greenhouse. Many scientists cite growing evidence
that this pollution is warming the earth to a point of beginning
to change global climate."<br>
</blockquote>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/26/washington/AP-Scotus-Greenhouse-Gases.html?pagewanted=print">http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/26/washington/AP-Scotus-Greenhouse-Gases.html?pagewanted=print</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>
</i></font><font size="+1"><i><font size="+1"><i>To receive daily
mailings - <a
href="mailto:subscribe@theClimate.Vote?subject=Click%20SEND%20to%20process%20your%20request">click
to Subscribe</a> </i></font>to news digest. </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>