<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<font size="+1"><i>July 13, 2018</i></font><br>
<br>
[Exxon backs away]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-12/exxon-quits-koch-backed-business-group-after-climate-change-row">Exxon
Quits Koch-Backed Business Group After Climate Change Row</a></b><br>
By Kevin Crowley and Ari Natter - July 12, 2018<br>
- American Legislative Exchange Council has faced member exodus<br>
- Oil giant disagreed with climate measures debated last year<br>
Exxon Mobil Corp. quit the American Legislative Exchange Council, a
lobbying group bankrolled by fossil fuel companies, following a
disagreement over climate-change policy.<br>
The oil giant won't be renewing its membership after it expired in
June, spokesman Scott Silvestri said by phone. Exxon had a public
spat with ALEC in December when some members backed by climate
skeptics such as the Heartland Institute moved to convince the
federal government to drop its claim that climate change is a risk
to human health.<br>
Exxon's departure comes amid a corporate exodus by the likes of Ford
Motor Co. and Expedia Group Inc. departed, largely in response to
ALEC's positions on climate rules, renewable energy and other
issues.<br>
Late last year, Exxon was among the companies that objected to a
measure debated by ALEC meant to encourage states to prod the
Environmental Protection Agency to rescind its Obama-era
determination that climate change requires regulation.<br>
"The American Legislative Exchange Council values partnership with
Exxon Mobil and stakeholders across the business community," the
group said in an email on Thursday. "We have valued Exxon Mobil's
work and leadership with ALEC on STEM education, among other
issues."<font size="-1">...<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-12/exxon-quits-koch-backed-business-group-after-climate-change-row">https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-12/exxon-quits-koch-backed-business-group-after-climate-change-row</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[California's political hotspot]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://calmatters.org/articles/a-political-firestorm-about-to-hit-the-capitol-who-will-pay-for-wildfire-damages/">A
political firestorm is about to hit the Capitol: Who will pay
for wildfire damages?</a></b><br>
The biggest fight will be over liability - who pays for billions of
dollars of damages from the loss of so many homes, businesses and
lives? Expect another battle over how much utilities like Pacific
Gas & Electric can pass liability costs onto their customers -
and whether the state should step in to help. The backdrop for the
drama: The scientific expectation that hotter, drier conditions
brought on by climate change make it likely that California will
suffer more large, intense fires.<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://calmatters.org/articles/a-political-firestorm-about-to-hit-the-capitol-who-will-pay-for-wildfire-damages/">https://calmatters.org/articles/a-political-firestorm-about-to-hit-the-capitol-who-will-pay-for-wildfire-damages/</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[Posted in VOX]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/7/6/17535720/netherlands-dutch-climate-law-paris-targets">The
Netherlands contemplates the world's toughest climate law</a></b><br>
A new Dutch proposal would put climate at the center of national
politics.<br>
By David Roberts<br>
A coalition of seven Dutch political parties recently unveiled a
climate policy proposal that is breathtaking in its ambition. If it
becomes law, it will codify the most stringent targets for
greenhouse gas reductions of any country in the world...<br>
It would be the world's eighth national climate law (after the UK,
Mexico, Denmark, Finland, France, Norway, and Sweden), but it boasts
a few features that make it particularly notable.<br>
- - - - -<br>
The proposal represents a degree of social and political consensus
that is almost unthinkable in the US - not only that climate change
is "real" (an absurd debate only the US is having), but that it's
urgent and that national policy should support the goals agreed to
in Paris. Those goals obligate developed countries like the
Netherlands to virtually eliminate carbon emissions by mid-century.<br>
- - - -<br>
If passed as proposed, the Dutch law would be the world's most
stringent, putting into statute the following targets:<br>
<blockquote>49 percent reduction in greenhouse gases (relative to
1990 levels) by 2030<br>
95 percent reduction by 2050<br>
100 percent carbon-neutral electricity by 2050<br>
</blockquote>
Under the bill, every year, the Dutch Parliament and the Cabinet
will discuss and debate the year's progress toward decarbonization
goals. With independent advice from the Council of State, they will
adjust programs as necessary to stay on track, in something
analogous to a yearly budgeting process.<br>
Then, on the fourth Thursday of October - "Climate Day" - the
government will issue a public memorandum reviewing progress toward
climate goals and laying out plans for the year ahead...<br>
- - - -<br>
I get why Dutch climate campaigners want to keep the pressure on
(that's their job), but this seems a bit uncharitable. Since only
the 2050 target is legally binding, it would be possible for Dutch
politicians to fritter and fail for the next 30 years, to do nothing
but have annual meetings to no effect, but to believe that will
happen is to completely dismiss the power of transparency and
democratic accountability. Politicians don't want to be seen as
failing!<br>
The bill will ensure that climate change is put in the spotlight
every year. And it contains an unambiguous long-term target, with
required adjustments every five years. If Dutch politicians do fail
on climate goals going forward, they won't be able to hide or
downplay it. The failure will be extremely public. That matters...<br>
- - - - -<br>
Alongside the UK, which also recently signaled that it might aim for
a zero-carbon goal, the Netherlands is going from laggard to leader
on climate at a dizzying pace.<br>
I wasn't sure I'd live to see it, but it looks like a substantial
bloc of nations is forming that is taking climate change science
seriously and making policy around it. The more nations that put
carbon neutrality on record as the appropriate mid-century goal, the
more difficult it will become for other industrialized nations to
justify planning otherwise.<br>
Meanwhile, as countries across the world plot a course toward a
sustainable future, US policy falls farther and farther behind.
America, increasingly alone among nations, still clings, eyes shut
tight, to the dirty past.<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/7/6/17535720/netherlands-dutch-climate-law-paris-targets">https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/7/6/17535720/netherlands-dutch-climate-law-paris-targets</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[China paying attention]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.clientearth.org/china-launches-unprecedented-judge-training-for-environment-cases/">China
launches unprecedented judge training for environment cases</a></b><br>
News / 4 July 2018<br>
China is this week strengthening enforcement of its environmental
laws with the largest ever training of environmental judges in
Beijing.<br>
The week-long set of seminars for over 300 judges was organised by
the Supreme People's Court and ClientEarth. Senior judges and
environmental experts from across the world are sharing
environmental cases from their jurisdictions.<br>
Speakers include Erik Solheim, the Executive Director of UN
Environment; Laurent Fabius, former Prime Minister of France and
chair of the Paris Agreement on climate change; and James Thornton,
CEO of ClientEarth. The week-long training also features speakers
from China's top court.<br>
In recent years, China has established over 600 environmental courts
at all levels of the judiciary. These courts handle all kinds of
environmental disputes, including criminal cases such as wildlife
poaching or illegal logging, civil cases such as personal or
environmental damages from pollution, and administrative cases where
government is violating laws causing damage to the environment...<br>
<blockquote>It is the decisions of these judges which must protect
the environment in the world's largest developing country. The
effectiveness of China's emerging system of environmental laws
ultimately depends on them."<br>
</blockquote>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.clientearth.org/china-launches-unprecedented-judge-training-for-environment-cases/">https://www.clientearth.org/china-launches-unprecedented-judge-training-for-environment-cases/</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[Meanwhile in the US - Science from SLATE]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://slate.com/technology/2018/07/trump-nominee-brett-kavanaughs-shaky-track-record-on-climate-change-air-pollution-and-the-epa.html">Brett
Kavanaugh Has a Shaky Track Record on the Environment</a></b><br>
By SOFIE WERTHAN<br>
Donald Trump announced his nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the
Supreme Court on Monday night. Trump's presidency has already been a
disaster for the environment, and this move is likely to be no
exception. As a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit, Kavanaugh repeatedly wrote opinions
that exposed his lack of support for environmental protection,
ruling multiple times against Environmental Protection Agency
attempts to regulate air pollution and address climate change. In
each case, Kavanaugh cited what he considered to be overreach by the
federal agency as justification.<br>
Kavanaugh's record on the environment-as with many other fraught
political issues-is a subject of scrutiny because Justice Anthony
Kennedy had served as a crucial swing vote on environmental
protections. Most notably, Kennedy cast the deciding vote in the
landmark 2007 Supreme Court case Massachusetts v. EPA, which ruled
that the EPA has the authority to regulate carbon dioxide and
greenhouse gases as air pollutants under the Clean Air Act.<br>
<blockquote>• 2012: In a split ruling, the Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia struck down a federal rule aimed at reducing
air pollution in downwind states caused by power plants,
smokestacks, and refineries in upwind states (known popularly as
the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule). In the opinion, written by
Judge Kavanaugh, the court found that the EPA had overstepped its
authority by improperly requiring states "to reduce their
emissions by more than their own significant contribution to a
downwind state's nonattainment."<br>
<br>
• 2014: Judge Kavanaugh argued in a dissenting opinion that the
EPA must weigh monetary costs when deciding whether to regulate
power plant emissions. In the case, the appeals court affirmed the
EPA's emissions standards for mercury and other pollutants from
power plants, and the majority agreed that the EPA did not need to
consider the costs. Kavanaugh bristled at this decision, writing,
"In my view, it is unreasonable for EPA to exclude considerations
of costs in determining whether it is 'appropriate' to impose
significant new regulations on electric utilities."<br>
<br>
• 2016: During oral arguments about the Clean Power Plan,
President Obama's signature climate change policy, Judge Kavanaugh
acknowledged that climate change is real, but suggested that it
was the job of legislators to come up with solutions, not the EPA
or the courts. "The policy is laudable," Kavanaugh said, referring
to the Clean Power Plan. "The earth is warming. Humans are
contributing. I understand the international impact and the
problem of the commons." But, he added, "Global warming isn't a
blank check" for the president to impose emissions regulations.<br>
<br>
• 2017: In a 2-to-1 ruling, the Court of Appeals for the District
of Columbia ruled against an Obama-era EPA regulation that aimed
to phase out hydrofluorocarbons, a type of potent greenhouse gas
commonly used for refrigeration and air conditioning. The court
ruled that the EPA cannot ban the substances under the Clean Air
Act provision meant to protect the ozone layer. "However much we
might sympathize or agree with EPA's policy objectives, EPA may
act only within the boundaries of its statutory authority," Judge
Kavanaugh wrote.<br>
"Here, EPA exceeded that authority."<br>
Kavanaugh's legal philosophy rested on the idea that the EPA's
expansive attempts to regulate pollution and combat climate change
go too far, unless there's an explicit go-ahead from Congress.
This philosophy is particularly worrisome when Congress currently
seems to have no interest in regulating pollution or combatting
climate change.... <br>
</blockquote>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://slate.com/technology/2018/07/trump-nominee-brett-kavanaughs-shaky-track-record-on-climate-change-air-pollution-and-the-epa.html">https://slate.com/technology/2018/07/trump-nominee-brett-kavanaughs-shaky-track-record-on-climate-change-air-pollution-and-the-epa.html</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[Tampa Bay TImes report:]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.tampabay.com/african-woman-tells-un-that-climate-change-is-security-risk-ap_world8056b03c4aaa4aaaa99787fcc9c5d3b6">African
woman tells UN that climate change is security risk</a></b><br>
UNITED NATIONS (AP) - An African woman whose people are nomads
constantly searching for food and water told Security Council
members Wednesday they must consider climate change as a security
risk that is fueling extremism, conflict and migration.<br>
Hindou Ibrahim said in a speech to the council that climate change
is affecting the daily lives of people in the vast Sahel region who
depend on agriculture, fishing and livestock and are struggling to
survive.<br>
She said the scarcity of resources has fueled internal migration as
well as migration through Africa to Europe, sparked local conflicts
that become national and regional, and led to the growth of
terrorist groups.<br>
Ibrahim, an activist from Chad who co-chairs the International
Indigenous People Forum on Climate, which promotes U.N. action on
climate change, urged the council and the broader international
community to take action to help them cope.<br>
"Solutions are there," she said. "Why not give them access to
energy? You can help them go to school. You can help them to get
health (care). You can help them to do another alternative in their
life, and keep them in peace and think about the future."<br>
Ibrahim said nomadic pastoralists don't know there is a Security
Council where people think about peace around the world but they are
living climate change.<br>
It is "deep humiliation" if a man in the nomadic community can't
feed his family because "his dignity is not respected," Ibrahim
said. To preserve their dignity, the options for nomadic men are
grim: Either stay home and join a terror group and fight and die, or
leave and risk dying in the sea...<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.tampabay.com/african-woman-tells-un-that-climate-change-is-security-risk-ap_world8056b03c4aaa4aaaa99787fcc9c5d3b6">http://www.tampabay.com/african-woman-tells-un-that-climate-change-is-security-risk-ap_world8056b03c4aaa4aaaa99787fcc9c5d3b6</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[not surprising]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.climateliabilitynews.org/2018/07/12/credit-downgrades-climate-change/">Credit
Downgrades Imminent for Cities Unprepared for Climate Impacts,
Study Says</a></b><br>
By Jennifer Dorroh<br>
Many U.S. coastal communities, unprepared for flooding and other
effects of global warming-driven sea level rise, are heading toward
an imminent downgrade of their credit unless they act quickly, a new
report says.<br>
<br>
The report warns that federal subsidies for rebuilding flooded
properties, coupled with the rollback of standards for that
rebuilding, create the illusion that cities and towns can continue
to ignore flood risks without financial consequences. But a
reckoning is coming, says <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://repository.upenn.edu/mes_capstones/73/">"Credit
Downgrade Threat as a Non-regulatory Driver for Flood Risk
Mitigation and Sea Level Rise Adaptation,"</a> a white paper
published last month by the University of Pennsylvania Scholarly
Commons.<br>
<br>
The absence of clear market or government warnings about imminent
risks of climate change is leading many communities to squander what
could be their last chance at affordable credit to fund resilient
infrastructure projects, the report says.<br>
<br>
John Miller, the paper's author and a water resources engineer who
studies the connection between credit ratings and climate change,
said a shift is coming soon. Even if U.S. policy and spending keep
absorbing the risk of rebuilding in flood zones in the short term,
that is unlikely to continue indefinitely as investors, underwriters
and credit ratings agencies are asking increasingly pointed
questions about sea level rise-related risks. That could quickly
lead to credit downgrades.<br>
<br>
"The rating companies are really being pushed by the investors to
look at the term of a bond. During the term of a bond, you have now
changing conditions that put more risk on the revenue based on
property values," Miller said. "If you're issuing a 30 to 40-year
bond, your investors are already looking toward, say, 2050." By that
time, more than 300,000 properties in the U.S. currently worth $136
billion could be rendered unusable by routine flooding unless carbon
emissions and rapid ice sheet loss can be significantly cut.<br>
<br>
The report urges municipal leaders to stop taking their cues from
the federal government when it comes to preparing for the effects of
sea level rise. Last year, President Donald Trump rescinded the
Federal Flood Risk Management Standard that had been signed by
President Barack Obama in 2015 setting new goals for mitigating
flood risk.<br>
- - -- <br>
To cities not inclined to prepare, Mahaney gives this advice: Look
at the science. When some local factions fought the zoning changes,
the city worked to educate its citizens about the risk of doing
nothing. "Without this intervention, there would be immense loss of
property and life by 2050," he said. "That made a strong point to
counteract the naysayers."<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.climateliabilitynews.org/2018/07/12/credit-downgrades-climate-change/">https://www.climateliabilitynews.org/2018/07/12/credit-downgrades-climate-change/</a></font><br>
- - - -<br>
[<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1072&context=mes_capstones">Download</a>
the Whitepaper]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://repository.upenn.edu/mes_capstones/73/">Credit
Downgrade Threat as a Non-regulatory Driver for Flood Risk
Mitigation and Sea Level Rise Adaptation</a></b><br>
John A. Miller, University of Pennsylvania<br>
Abstract<br>
Federal policies and regulations with higher standards that respond
to flood risk and sea level rise are being rolled back by the
current administration. In that void, the threat of credit rating
downgrades is expected to be a developing non-regulatory driver to
future risk planning and adaptation. Several exposed communities
have been downgraded due, in part, to their lost tax base from major
disasters. As sea level rise manifests along the coasts, reducing
property value, impacts on revenue will present new challenges in
servicing debt. Credit rating agencies in the last few years have
issued publications giving some notice on how climate change is to
be considered in municipal credit ratings. Proactive communities,
conducting planning and realizing adaptation practices in the
present are likely to be spared the need to increase revenues to
counter the higher borrowing costs that are coincident with a bond
rating downgrade, due to likely loss of taxable properties, caused
by sea level rise in the future. Municipalities that do not engage
now in addressing the threats associated with climate change may
have to increase taxes to offset the increased bond return demanded
by investors.<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1072&context=mes_capstones">Download
the paper</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://repository.upenn.edu/mes_capstones/73/">https://repository.upenn.edu/mes_capstones/73/</a><br>
<br>
<br>
[UCD study]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/07/180709202909.htm">Grasslands
more reliable carbon sink than trees</a></b><br>
In wildfire-prone California, grasslands a less vulnerable carbon
offset than forests<br>
Date: July 9, 2018<br>
Source: University of California - Davis<br>
Summary:<br>
<blockquote> A study has found that increased drought and wildfire
risk make grasslands and rangelands a more reliable carbon sink
than trees in 21st century California. As such, the study
indicates they should be given opportunities in the state's
cap-and-and trade market, which is designed to reduce California's
greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.<br>
</blockquote>
"Looking ahead, our model simulations show that grasslands store
more carbon than forests because they are impacted less by droughts
and wildfires," said lead author Pawlok Dass, a postdoctoral scholar
in Professor Benjamin Houlton's lab at UC Davis. "This doesn't even
include the potential benefits of good land management to help boost
soil health and increase carbon stocks in rangelands."<br>
CARBON UP IN SMOKE<br>
Unlike forests, grasslands sequester most of their carbon
underground, while forests store it mostly in woody biomass and
leaves. When wildfires cause trees to go up in flames, the burned
carbon they formerly stored is released back to the atmosphere. When
fire burns grasslands, however, the carbon fixed underground tends
to stay in the roots and soil, making them more adaptive to climate
change.<br>
"In a stable climate, trees store more carbon than grasslands," said
co-author Houlton, director of the John Muir Institute of the
Environment at UC Davis. "But in a vulnerable, warming,
drought-likely future, we could lose some of the most productive
carbon sinks on the planet. California is on the frontlines of the
extreme weather changes that are beginning to occur all over the
world. We really need to start thinking about the vulnerability of
ecosystem carbon, and use this information to de-risk our carbon
investment and conservation strategies in the 21st century."...<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/07/180709202909.htm">https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/07/180709202909.htm</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[recent heatwave]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jul/11/heatwave-climate-change-americans-survey">Heatwave
seems to make manmade climate change real for Americans</a></b><br>
The record-breaking high temperatures across much of North America
appear to be shaping people's thinking, a survey finds<br>
The warm temperatures that have scorched much of the US appear to be
influencing Americans' acceptance of climate science, with a new
poll finding a record level of public confidence that the world is
warming due to human activity.<br>
A long-running survey of American attitudes to climate change has
found that 73% of people now think there is solid evidence of global
warming. A further 60% believe that this warming is due, at least in
some part, to human influences.<br>
Both of these findings are record highs in a twice-yearly survey
that has been conducted by the University of Michigan and Muhlenberg
College since 2008. The latest poll was conducted during May, which
was hotter than any May recorded in the contiguous US in 124 years
of record keeping, according to the National Ocean and Atmospheric
Administration, eclipsing the 1930s during the Dust Bowl era.<br>
- - -- <br>
The survey found that while 90% of Democrats accept there is solid
evidence of climate change, only 50% of Republicans feel the same.<br>
However, Borick said that messaging from those who deny or obfuscate
climate science has shifted away from outright rejection of
temperature data. While Donald Trump has previously called climate
change "bullshit" and a Chinese-inspired hoax, he has rarely spoken
of the issue while president apart from framing action to address it
as economically costly.<br>
<br>
"The talking points have turned more to the cost to mitigate climate
change rather than deny its existence," Borick said. "That said, if
you want one factor that influences your view on climate change,
it's party affiliation. Age, race and gender don't even come close."<br>
- - <br>
A string of warm days in New York City helped trigger a return to
smog-like conditions on 2 July, when the temperature in the city
reached 95F (35C).<br>
Researchers who flew a light aircraft taking measurements over a
hazy New York were astonished to find that the ozone concentration
was 150 parts per billion. This far exceeds the Environmental
Protection Agency's eight-hour average ozone health standard of 70
parts per billion. The high ozone readings have continued, with
preliminary data for Tuesday showing 85 parts per billion in New
York.<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jul/11/heatwave-climate-change-americans-survey">https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jul/11/heatwave-climate-change-americans-survey</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[Hell no, Shell Knew?]<br>
<font size="+1"><b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.desmog.co.uk/2018/07/10/what-shellknew-and-how-it-was-used-stall-international-climate-change-negotiations">What
#ShellKnew and How it Was Used to Stall International Climate
Change Negotiations</a></b><br>
Read time: 7 mins<br>
By Mat Hope - Tuesday, July 10, 2018</font><br>
<font size="+1"><span class="print-link" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);
font-size: 14.3px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures:
normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400;
letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px;
text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial;
text-decoration-color: initial;"></span></font>
<div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary
field-label-hidden" style="min-height: 280px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);
font-size: 14.3px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures:
normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400;
letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px;
text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial;
text-decoration-color: initial;">
<div class="field-items">
<div class="field-item even"><font size="+1">Shell, one of the
world's largest oil companies, has gained privileged access
to the<span> </span><span class="caps" style="font-size:
0.9em;">UN</span><span> </span>climate change negotiations
while pushing the same unworkable solutions for almost 20
years, internal company documents reveal.<br>
DeSmog<span> </span><span class="caps" style="font-size:
0.9em;">UK</span><span> </span>has previously reported on
a tranche of<span> </span><a
href="http://www.desmog.co.uk/2018/04/04/internal-shell-oil-climate-documents-revealed"
target="_blank" style="text-decoration: none; color:
rgb(51, 153, 204);">documents</a><span> </span>first
unearthed by Jelmer Mommers of<span> </span><em>De
Correspondent </em>published on<span> </span><em><a
href="http://climateinvestigations.org/shell-oil-climate-documents/document-index/"
target="_blank" style="text-decoration: none; color:
rgb(51, 153, 204);">Climate Files</a></em>, that reveal<span> </span><a
href="http://www.desmog.co.uk/shellknew" target="_blank"
style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(51, 153, 204);">Shell
knew</a><span> </span>about the<span> </span><a
href="http://www.desmog.co.uk/2018/05/17/shell-knew-charting-thirty-years-corporate-climate-denialism"
target="_blank" style="text-decoration: none; color:
rgb(51, 153, 204);">causes and impacts of climate change</a><span> </span>since<span> </span><a
href="http://www.desmog.co.uk/2018/04/04/here-what-shellknew-about-climate-change-way-back-1980s"
target="_blank" style="text-decoration: none; color:
rgb(51, 153, 204);">at least the 1980s</a>.<br>
Analysis of these documents, combined with new sources
freshly uncovered by DeSmog<span> </span><span class="caps"
style="font-size: 0.9em;">UK</span>, shows that while
Shell's understanding of the science developed, its proposed
solution to the problem has remained remarkably static.<br>
The sources also reveal how Shell uses trade associations to
gain privileged access to the annual<span> </span><span
class="caps" style="font-size: 0.9em;">UNFCCC</span><span> </span>climate
negotiations, despite the organisations'
professed independence.<br>
For almost two decades, Shell has pushed the same proposal
to tackle climate change, which still hasn't come to
fruition - a global carbon market plus carbon capture
and storage.<br>
As<span> </span><a
href="https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4411094/Document6.pdf"
target="_blank" style="text-decoration: none; color:
rgb(51, 153, 204);">early as 1992</a>, Shell was calling
for "market-based" solutions to ramping up renewables and
cutting carbon dioxide emissions from the energy sector..<br>
</font><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.desmog.co.uk/2018/07/10/what-shellknew-and-how-it-was-used-stall-international-climate-change-negotiations">http://www.desmog.co.uk/2018/07/10/what-shellknew-and-how-it-was-used-stall-international-climate-change-negotiations</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<br>
[EPA juggernaut]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/396298-trump-admin-moves-forward-on-replacing-obama-epa-climate-rule">EPA
takes next step toward replacing Obama-era climate rule</a></b><br>
By Timothy Cama - 07/10/18 <br>
The Trump administration is taking a big step forward in its effort
to replace the Obama administration's climate change rule for power
plants with a more industry-friendly alternative.<br>
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said that on Monday it
sent a proposed rule to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from power
plants to the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review.<br>
The OMB review, an internal process that checks for compliance with
various laws and administration priorities, is the final step before
the rule can be released publicly and made available for public
comment.<br>
The EPA hasn't revealed the contents of the proposal. The Trump
administration in December requested public input on ideas for a
replacement.<br>
The rule would replace the Clean Power Plan, the main pillar of
former President Obama's climate change agenda that sought a 32
percent cut in carbon emissions from the country's power sector by
2030. States were allowed to decide how best to accomplish that
goal.<br>
The Obama rule was put on hold by the Supreme Court in 2016 as a
result of litigation led in part by then-Oklahoma Attorney General
Scott Pruitt. Pruitt went on to become EPA administrator before
resigning last week under the cloud of numerous scandals.<br>
Pruitt and President Trump prioritized repealing the Clean Power
Plan, and Pruitt formally proposed undoing it last year, an action
that has not yet been made final.<br>
Sources familiar with the EPA's deliberations say the agency wants
to write a regulation that focuses almost exclusively on making
coal-fired power plants more efficient. That would result in minimal
reductions in carbon emissions, and environmentalists say emissions
could in turn increase since coal plants would be cheaper to
operate.<br>
While Pruitt initially did not want to replace the Clean Power Plan,
industry leaders pushed him in that direction, arguing that doing so
would reduce the risk of climate-change lawsuits against companies,
as well as future lawsuits against the EPA for not regulating
greenhouse gases.<br>
Both Pruitt and current acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler have
expressed skepticism of the scientific consensus that the climate is
changing and that human activity is the primary cause.<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/396298-trump-admin-moves-forward-on-replacing-obama-epa-climate-rule">http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/396298-trump-admin-moves-forward-on-replacing-obama-epa-climate-rule</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[text document]<br>
<font size="+1"><b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/Publications/PDF_Papers/Symons.pdf?language=printer">This
Day in Climate History - July 13, 2003</a> - from D.R. Tucker</b></font><br>
<p dir="ltr"
style="line-height:1.38;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt;"
id="docs-internal-guid-562e291a-9351-38a0-1f5a-3d907174b640"><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 11pt; white-space: pre-wrap;">July 13, 2003: Former EPA Climate Policy Adviser Jeremy Symons recounts the George W. Bush Administration's assault on climate science in a Washington Post op-ed.</span><br>
</p>
<a
href="http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/Publications/PDF_Papers/Symons.pdf?language=printer"
style="text-decoration:none;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial; color: rgb(17, 85, 204); font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-position: normal; text-decoration: underline; -webkit-text-decoration-skip: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/Publications/PDF_Papers/Symons.pdf?language=printer</span></a><br>
<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>