<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<font size="+1"><i>August 26, 2018</i></font><br>
<br>
[burning money]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-wildfire-costs-california-20180824-story.html">California's
wildfires are deterring tourists and hitting taxpayers hard,
officials say</a></b><br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-wildfire-costs-california-20180824-story.html">http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-wildfire-costs-california-20180824-story.html</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[NPR To the Point Warren Olney interviews ]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.kcrw.com/latest/can-president-trumps-climate-change-denial-survive-massive-wildfires">Can
President Trump's Climate Change Denial Survive Massive
Wildfires?</a></b><br>
August 23, 2018 - 1:00 PM PT<br>
Wildfires are raging all over the world, and the scientific
consensus is that Global Warming is a major factor. In the US,
forest management is an issue, too--and standard timber-industry
practice may be making things worse. For years, environmentalists
and private companies have battled over their differences. Now,
President Trump's denial of climate change is making resolution
harder than ever.<br>
Guests:<br>
<blockquote>Nathaniel Rich, New York Times Magazine, @NathanielRich<br>
Noah Diffenbaugh, Professor with Stanford University's Department
of Earth System Science and Senior Fellow at the Woods Institute
for the Environment., @StanfordEarth<br>
Ryan Richards, A senior policy analyst for Public Lands at the
Center for American Progress, focusing on natural resource
economics and markets., @ryanri84<br>
Kate Yoder, News editor at Grist, a non-profit online news source
based in Seattle--which covers the environment and issues of
social and economic justice., @katemyoder<br>
</blockquote>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.kcrw.com/latest/can-president-trumps-climate-change-denial-survive-massive-wildfires">https://www.kcrw.com/latest/can-president-trumps-climate-change-denial-survive-massive-wildfires</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[Politician discovers global warming]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-walters-climate-20180824-story.html">Sweating
out a close race, GOP Rep. Mimi Walters ties wildfires to
climate change</a></b><br>
By MICHAEL HILTZIK - AUG 24, 2018 <br>
The adage "All politics is local" often attributed to the late House
Speaker Tip O'Neill appears to be working its magic in the
once-solidly Republican Orange County district of Rep. Mimi Walters.<br>
Walters is facing a stiff challenge in November from Democrat Katie
Porter, a UC Irvine law professor. So it may be no surprise that
she's trimming her political sails to catch the prevailing winds.
Most recently, Walters signed on to an Aug. 22 letter from the
congressional climate solutions caucus observing that the western
wildfires are being "fueled by climate change" and inviting Gov.
Jerry Brown to a meeting to discuss policy options.<br>
The assertion places Walters at odds with President Trump, who has
called climate change a "hoax" and blamed the fires on "bad
environmental laws," and with Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, who has
pointed the finger at "environmental terrorist groups" who interfere
with government forest management programs.<br>
<b>Climate change is a significant contributing factor to the
increased severity and frequency of California wildfires.</b><br>
It also places Walters at odds with her own record on environmental
issues, which is one of the worst in Congress. As my colleague Evan
Halper observed this week, the League of Conservation Voters gives
her a lifetime score of 4% on legislative votes, and a 3% score for
2017.<br>
That record probably won't help Walters in November. Election
forecasters have moved her district from Republican-leaning to a
toss-up. Although GOP voters outnumber Democrats by nearly 8
percentage points, the district went for Hillary Clinton in the 2016
presidential election. We've asked Walters' Washington office to
comment but haven't heard back.<br>
District voters tend to be well-educated, which suggests that they
don't hold much truck with climate change denialism. They also have
close to firsthand experience with wildfires. The Holy fire has been
burning for more than two weeks in remote parts of Orange and
Riverside counties; although authorities say the fire was triggered
by arson, climate change may play a role in its severity, as it has
with other blazes during this ferocious fire season in California...<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-walters-climate-20180824-story.html">http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-walters-climate-20180824-story.html</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[innovation sticks]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/scotland-floating-turbine-tidal-power-record-sr2000-scotrenewables-ofgem-a8503221.html">Scotland's
floating turbine smashes tidal renewable energy records</a></b><br>
Leads to calls for 'wholly renewable electricity system' from
environment group<br>
A floating tidal stream turbine off the coast of Orkney has produced
more green energy in a year than Scotland's entire wave and tidal
sector produced in the 12 years before it came online.<br>
In 12 months of full-time operation, the SR2000 turbine supplied the
equivalent annual power demand of about 830 households.<br>
Its developer claimed the machine - the most powerful of its kind in
the world - had set a benchmark for its industry due to its
performance...<br>
- - - -<br>
Gina Hanrahan, acting head of policy at WWF Scotland, added: "As we
transition to a wholly renewable electricity system, it's really
important that we have a diversity of renewable electricity sources.<br>
"We've seen huge growth in onshore wind and offshore wind over
recent years, and it's great to see new tidal technologies now
hitting new milestones."<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/scotland-floating-turbine-tidal-power-record-sr2000-scotrenewables-ofgem-a8503221.html">https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/scotland-floating-turbine-tidal-power-record-sr2000-scotrenewables-ofgem-a8503221.html</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[audio online - at 25:20 about global warming]<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.npr.org/2018/03/12/592986190/daniel-kahneman-on-misery-memory-and-our-understanding-of-the-mind"><b>Daniel
Kahneman On Misery, Memory, And Our Understanding Of The Mind </b></a><br>
<blockquote>We've dealt with it. But let's say you have another
threat over here where I tell you that in 80 years or 100 years,
the temperature might rise five degrees. And as a result of this,
the oceans might warm a little bit and sea levels might rise by
two or three inches. And as a result of this, models predict that
climate events will become more serious - at least, according to
the models. But you have to understand probability. And in order
to try and head that off, you actually have to take very painful
steps right now - maybe driving your car less, maybe living in a
smaller house, all kinds of things that are painful in the here
and now - for something that seems difficult off in the distance
and requires you to really understand statistics and probability.
You've actually called climate change, in some ways, sort of a
perfect storm of the ways in which our minds are not equipped to
deal with certain kinds of threats.<br>
<br>
KAHNEMAN: I mean, it's really - if you were to design a problem
that the mind is not equipped to deal with, you know, climate
change would fit the bill. It's distance. It's abstract. It's
contested. And it doesn't make - it doesn't take much. If it's
contested, it's 50/50, you know, for many people immediately. You
know, you don't ask, what do most scientists do? Which side of the
National Academy of Sciences - that's not the way it works. You
know, some people say this, other people say that. And if I don't
want to believe in it, I don't have to believe in it.<br>
<br>
So it's - I'm really - well, I'm pessimistic in general. But I'm
pessimistic in particular about the ability of democracies to deal
with a threat like that effectively. If there were a comet
hurtling down toward us - you know, an event that would be
predictable - within a day, we'd mobilize. So it's not even that
it's distant in time. If it was going to affect our children, we'd
mobilize. But this is too abstract, possible, contested. It's very
different. We can't - we're not doing it, in fact.<br>
<br>
VEDANTAM: So besides being pessimistic, does your research and
understanding of this phenomenon give you any insight into how we
should maybe talk about climate change and what we can do?<br>
<br>
KAHNEMAN: Well, I think scientists, in a way, are deluded in that
they have the idea that there is one way of knowing things. And
it's you know things when you have evidence for them. But that's
simply not the case. I mean, you know, people who have religious
beliefs or strong political beliefs. they know things without
having, you know, compelling evidence for it. And so there is a
possibility, you know, of knowing things, which is clearly
determined socially. I mean, we have our religion and our politics
and so on because we love it - we love or used to love and trust
the people who held those beliefs.<br>
<br>
There is no other way to explain, you know, why people hold to one
religion and think other religions are funny, you know, which is
really a very common observation. So the only way would be to
create social pressure. So, for me, it would be a milestone if you
manage to take influential evangelists, preachers, to adopt the
idea of global warming and to preach it. That would change things.
It's not going to happen by presenting more evidence. That, I
think, is clear.<br>
</blockquote>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=592986190">https://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=592986190</a><br>
audio<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.npr.org/2018/03/12/592986190/daniel-kahneman-on-misery-memory-and-our-understanding-of-the-mind">https://www.npr.org/2018/03/12/592986190/daniel-kahneman-on-misery-memory-and-our-understanding-of-the-mind</a><br>
<br>
<br>
[smart move]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/403124-dem-reps-ask-california-governor-to-end-all-fossil-fuel-extraction#.W37P2uNRa8g.twitter">Dem
lawmakers urge California governor to end fossil fuel extraction</a></b><br>
BY MIRANDA GREEN - <br>
Two Democratic members of Congress are urging California Gov. Jerry
Brown (D) to put a cap on any new fossil fuel projects and set a
timeline for a hard stop on oil and gas extraction throughout the
state.<br>
In a letter sent to Brown on Wednesday, Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.)
and Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) asked him to end all fossil fuel
production in the Golden State as part of the governor's commitment
to "driving transformational change."<br>
The lawmakers mentioned threats of climate change, increased air
pollution and impacts to low income communities in their reasoning
for the sweeping request.<br>
"We regularly hear from constituents about the tremendous burdens
that fossil fuel production places on our communities, especially
low-income communities and communities of color. California is home
to some of the country's most polluted air basins," Khanna and Lee
wrote in the letter.<br>
"The pollution from oil and gas field operations and refinery
facilities is a major contributor to the array of air quality
related health problems that hurt our most overburdened
communities."<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/403124-dem-reps-ask-california-governor-to-end-all-fossil-fuel-extraction#.W37P2uNRa8g.twitter">http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/403124-dem-reps-ask-california-governor-to-end-all-fossil-fuel-extraction#.W37P2uNRa8g.twitter</a></font><br>
<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://apnews.com/4adc5a2a2e6b45df953ebcba6b63d171/Big-oil-asks-government-to-protect-it-from-climate-change"><br>
Big oil asks government to protect it from climate change</a></b><br>
By WILL WEISSERT - Aug. 22, 2018<br>
PORT ARTHUR, Texas (AP) - As the nation plans new defenses against
the more powerful storms and higher tides expected from climate
change, one project stands out: an ambitious proposal to build a
nearly 60-mile "spine" of concrete seawalls, earthen barriers,
floating gates and steel levees on the Texas Gulf Coast.<br>
Like other oceanfront projects, this one would protect homes,
delicate ecosystems and vital infrastructure, but it also has
another priority - to shield some of the crown jewels of the
petroleum industry, which is blamed for contributing to global
warming and now wants the federal government to build safeguards
against the consequences of it...<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://apnews.com/4adc5a2a2e6b45df953ebcba6b63d171/Big-oil-asks-government-to-protect-it-from-climate-change">https://apnews.com/4adc5a2a2e6b45df953ebcba6b63d171/Big-oil-asks-government-to-protect-it-from-climate-change</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[short term thinking]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/aug/24/norway-1tn-wealth-fund-urged-to-keep-oil-and-gas-investments">Norway's
$1tn wealth fund urged to keep oil and gas investments</a></b><br>
Government advisers reject central bank's proposal to sell billions
held in oil stocks<br>
Government advisers have urged Norway not to ditch oil and gas
investments from its $1tn sovereign wealth fund, in a setback for
those backing the world's biggest fossil fuel divestment.<br>
<b>Norway's central bank last year recommended the fund sell the
billions it holds in oil stocks to avoid the risk of a permanent
drop in crude prices.</b><br>
However, a government-appointed commission has rejected the
proposal, warning that a less diverse investment strategy would have
major consequences for the fund's returns.<br>
"A sale of energy stocks would challenge the current investment
strategy of the fund, with broad diversification of the investments
and a high threshold for exclusion," the commission said on Friday.<br>
The Government Pension Fund Global was built off the oil and gas
revenues that have made Norway rich<br>
It also has major holdings in international oil firms, including
$6.14bn in Shell, followed by billions of dollars invested in other
oil majors such as BP, Chevron, ExxonMobil and Total.<br>
It has smaller stakes in the Italian oil firm Eni, the US oil firm
ConocoPhillips and the US oil services group Schlumberger. Most oil
company share prices have climbed in the past year along with crude
prices.<br>
Divesting those stocks was "not an effective insurance" against the
"substantial" hit Norway faced to its tax take if its oil and gas
sector was hurt by an oil price crash, the commission argued.<br>
The commission, headed by the economist O/ystein Tho/gersen, said
the fund's existing investment strategy was "simple, well founded
and has served the fund well"...<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/aug/24/norway-1tn-wealth-fund-urged-to-keep-oil-and-gas-investments">https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/aug/24/norway-1tn-wealth-fund-urged-to-keep-oil-and-gas-investments</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[fire safety reminder]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/smoke-gets-your-eyes-and-mouth-and-lungs-too">Smoke
Gets in Your Eyes…and Mouth and Lungs Too</a></b><br>
Wildfire smoke presents a real threat to public health<br>
BY CASEY O'BRIEN - AUG 3 2018<br>
Wildfires are burning in California. There are now at least 18 major
fires tearing across the Golden State, leaving a trail of death and
destruction. The Carr fire around the city of Redding has destroyed
an estimated 1,000 homes and killed at least six people. The
Ferguson fire prompted the closure of Yosemite National Park on July
23, and visitors aren't expected to be allowed to enter the park
until at least this Sunday. Fires in Lake and Mendocino Counties
have prompted evacuations of residents there. <br>
- - - -<br>
A longer and more intense wildfire season means that wildfire smoke
will become even more of a health risk. "We have to assume every
summer is going to be the worst summer we have ever had," says Sarah
Henderson, senior environmental scientist for the British Columbia
Center for Disease Control. In British Columbia, the fire season is
also getting longer, Henderson says. Normally fires burn about 980
km (600 miles) a year; last summer, more than 1.2 million hectares
(nearly 3 million acres) burned. British Columbia was in a state of
emergency for 70 days due to wildfire, the longest provincial state
of emergency in BC's history. More than 60,000 BC residents had to
evacuate their homes.<br>
<br>
In a longitudinal study of various cities in British Columbia,
Henderson found that distributions of asthma medications increased
considerably on high smoke days, by up to 7 percent. In general,
people with respiratory or cardiac problems are more at risk during
days with poor air quality, but even healthy people are vulnerable
to headaches and respiratory problems.<br>
<br>
Government health agencies are already preparing for a future with
more wildfires. The British Columbia Lung Association public health
department released a series of recommendations for residents on how
to prepare for wildfire season, including making sure that buildings
have up-to-date air filters, and encouraging them to purchase
portable air purifiers. In Los Angeles-where officials have worked
hard to regulate pollution from sources like ports, highways, and
oil and gas operations-wildfires have significant impact on air
quality. The California Department of Public Health website directs
residents to follow CDC guidelines and utilize face masks with an
N95 or higher rating if they need to go outside; they are available
at many hardware stores. Officials recommend people check the fit,
because a mask that doesn't fit well can actually worsen the problem
by making it hard for the people who wear them to breathe
comfortably. Dr. Henderson suggests getting a N95 respirator face
mask professionally fitted, if possible. Staying indoors on smoky
days is also recommended. <br>
- - - - -<br>
Albinson's experience is a warning, and a reminder, that one doesn't
have to be directly in a fire's path to suddenly be in harm's way. <br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/smoke-gets-your-eyes-and-mouth-and-lungs-too">https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/smoke-gets-your-eyes-and-mouth-and-lungs-too</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[when is high tide?]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.hakaimagazine.com/features/are-coastal-nuclear-power-plants-ready-for-sea-level-rise/">Are
Coastal Nuclear Power Plants Ready for Sea-Level Rise?</a></b><br>
As shorelines creep inland and storms worsen, nuclear reactors
around the world face new challenges.<br>
by John Vidal - August 21, 2018 <br>
This article was originally published in Ensia, a magazine that
presents new perspectives on environmental challenges and solutions
to a global audience. Read more stories like this at ensia.com.<br>
The outer defensive wall of what is expected to be the world's most
expensive nuclear power station is taking shape on the shoreline of
the choppy gray waters of the Bristol Channel in western England.<br>
By the time the US $25-billion Hinkley Point C nuclear station is
finished, possibly in 2028, the concrete seawall will be 12.5 meters
high, 900 meters long, and durable enough, the UK regulator and
French engineers say, to withstand the strongest storm surge, the
greatest tsunami, and the highest sea-level rise.<br>
<br>
But will it? Independent nuclear consultant Pete Roche, a former
adviser to the UK government and Greenpeace, points out that the
tidal range along this stretch of coast is one of the highest in the
world, and that erosion is heavy. Indeed, observers reported serious
flooding on the site in 1981 when an earlier nuclear power station
had to be shut down for a week, following a spring tide and a storm
surge. However well built, says Roche, the new seawall does not
adequately take into account sea-level rise due to climate change.<br>
<br>
"The wall is strong, but the plans were drawn up in 2012, before the
increasing volume of melting of the Greenland ice cap was properly
understood and when most experts thought there was no net melting in
the Antarctic," he says. "Now estimates of sea level rise in the
next 50 years have gone up from less than 30 centimeters to more
than a meter, well within the operating lifespan of Hinkley Point
C-let alone in 100 years time when the reactors are finally
decommissioned or the even longer period when spent nuclear fuel is
likely to be stored on site."<br>
In fact, research by Ensia suggests that at least 100 US, European,
and Asian nuclear power stations built just a few meters above sea
level could be threatened by serious flooding caused by accelerating
sea-level rise and more frequent storm surges.<br>
Some efforts are underway to prepare for increased flooding risk in
the future. But a number of scientific papers published in 2018
suggest that climate change will impact coastal nuclear plants
earlier and harder than the industry, governments, or regulatory
bodies have expected, and that the safety standards set by national
nuclear regulators and the United Nations' nuclear watchdog, the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), are out of date and take
insufficient account of the effects of climate change on nuclear
power.<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.hakaimagazine.com/features/are-coastal-nuclear-power-plants-ready-for-sea-level-rise/">https://www.hakaimagazine.com/features/are-coastal-nuclear-power-plants-ready-for-sea-level-rise/</a></font><br>
- - - - -<br>
[See for yourself]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-the-worlds-nuclear-power-plants">Mapped:
The world's nuclear power plants</a></b><br>
To help provide a global overview of the nuclear power sector both
today and throughout its history, Carbon Brief has produced this
interactive map.<br>
It shows the location, operating status and generating capacity of
all 667 reactors that have been built, or are under construction,
around the world, ever since Russia's tiny Obninsk plant became the
first to supply power to the grid in 1954.<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-the-worlds-nuclear-power-plants">https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-the-worlds-nuclear-power-plants</a></font><br>
- - -- -<br>
[locates, but does not show elevation]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://pris.iaea.org/pris/">The
Database on Nuclear Power Reactors</a></b><br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://pris.iaea.org/pris/">https://pris.iaea.org/pris/</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[Some fundamental science]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://climatestate.com/2018/08/25/the-villain-in-the-atmosphere-by-isaac-asimov/">The
villain in the atmosphere is carbon dioxide</a></b><br>
<b>by Isaac Asimov</b> - First published July 1986<br>
It does not seem to be a villain. It is not very poisonous and it is
present in the atmosphere in so small a quantity that it does us no
harm. For every 1,000,000 cubic feet of air there are only 340 cubic
feet of carbon dioxide - only 0.034 percent.<br>
What's more, that small quantity of carbon dioxide in the air is
essential to life. Plants absorb carbon dioxide and convert it into
their own tissues, which serve as the basic food supply for all of
animal life (including human beings, of course). In the process,
they liberate oxygen, which is also necessary for all animal life.<br>
But here is what this apparently harmless and certainly essential
gas is doing to us<br>
The sea level is rising very slowly from year to year. The high
tides tend to be progressively higher, even in quiet weather, and
storms batter at breakwaters more and more effectively, erode the
beaches more savagely, batter houses farther inland.<br>
<br>
In all likelihood, the sea level will continue to rise and do so at
a greater rate in the course of the next hundred years. This means
that the line separating ocean from land will retreat inland
everywhere. It will do so only slightly where high land abouts the
ocean. In those places, however, where there are low-lying coastal
areas (where a large fraction of humanity lives) the water will
advance steadily and inexorably and people will have to retreat
inland.<br>
<br>
It is not only that people will be forced to retreat by the millions
and that virtually all of Long Island will become part of the
shallow offshore sea bottom, leaving only a line of small islands
running east to west, marking off what had been the island's highest
points. Eventually the sea will reach a maximum of two hundred feet
above the present water level, and will be splashing against the
windows along the twentieth floors of Manhattan's skyscrapers.
Naturally the Manhattan streets will be deep under water, as will
the New Jersey shoreline and all of Delaware. Florida, too, will be
gone, as will much of the British Isles, the northwestern European
coast, the crowded Nile valley, and the low-lying areas of China,
India, and the Soviet Union.<br>
<br>
Many cities will be drowned, but much of the most productive farming
areas of the world will be lost. Although the change will not be
overnight, and though people will have time to leave and carry with
them such of their belongings as they can, there will not be room in
the continental interiors for all of them. As the food supply
plummets with the ruin of farming areas, starvation will be rampant
and the structure of society may collapse under the unbearable
pressures.<br>
<br>
And all because of carbon dioxide. But how does that come about?
What is the connection?<br>
It begins with sunlight, to which the various gases of the
atmosphere (including carbon dioxide) are transparent. Sunlight,
striking the top of the atmosphere, travels right through miles of
it to reach the Earth's surface, where it is absorbed. In this way,
the Earth is warmed.<br>
<br>
The Earth's surface doesn't get too hot, because at night the
Earth's heat radiates into space in the form of infrared radiation.
As the Earth gains heat by day and loses it by night, it maintains
an overall temperature balance to which Earthly life is
well-adapted.<br>
<br>
However, the atmosphere is not quite as transparent to infrared
radiation as it is to visible light. Carbon dioxide in particular
tends to be opaque to that radiation. Less heat is lost at night,
for that reason, than would be lost if carbon dioxide were not
present in the atmosphere. Without the small quantity of that gas
present, the Earth would be distinctly cooler on the whole, perhaps
a bit uncomfortably cool.<br>
<br>
This is called the "greenhouse effect" of carbon dioxide. It is so
called because the glass of greenhouses lets sunshine in but
prevents the loss of heat. For that reason it is warm inside a
greenhouse on sunny days even when the temperature is low.<br>
<br>
We can be thankful that carbon dioxide is keeping us comfortably
warm, but the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is
going up steadily and that is where the villainy comes in. In 1958,
when the carbon dioxide of the atmosphere first began to be measured
carefully, it made up only 0.0316 percent of the atmosphere. Each
year since, the concentration has crept upward and it now stands at
0.0340 percent. It is estimated that by 2020 the concentration will
be about 0.0660 percent, or nearly twice what it is now.<br>
<br>
This means that in the coming decades, Earth's average temperature
will go up slightly. Winters will grow a bit milder on the average
and summers a bit hotter. That may not seem frightening. Milder
winters don't seem bad, and as for hotter summers, we can just run
our air-conditioners a bit more.<br>
<br>
But consider this: If winters in general grow milder, less snow will
fall during the cold season. If summers in general grow hotter, more
snow will melt during the warm season. That means that, little by
little, the snow line will move away from the equator and toward the
poles. The glaciers will retreat, the mountain tops will grow more
bare, and the polar ice caps will begin to melt.<br>
<br>
That might be annoying to skiers and to other devotees of winter
sports, but would it necessarily bother the rest of us? After all,
if the snow line moves north, it might be possible to grow more food
in Canada, Scandinavia, the Soviet Union, and Patagonia.<br>
<br>
Still, if the cold weather moves poleward, then so do the storm
belts. The desert regions that now exist in subtropical areas will
greatly expand, and fertile land gained in the north will be lost in
the south. More may be lost than gained.<br>
<br>
It is the melting of the ice caps, though, that is the worst change.
It is this which demonstrates the villainy of carbon dioxide.<br>
<br>
Something like 90 percent of the ice in the world is to be found in
the huge Antarctica ice cap, and another 8 percent is in the
Greenland ice cap. In both places the ice is piled miles high. If
these ice caps begin to melt, the water that forms won't stay in
place. It will drip down into the ocean and slowly the sea level
will rise, with the results that I have already described.<br>
<br>
Even worse might be in store, for a rising temperature would manage
to release a little of the carbon dioxide that is tied up in vast
quantities of limestone that exist in the Earth's crust. It will
also liberate some of the carbon dioxide dissolved in the ocean.
With still more carbon dioxide, the temperature of the Earth will
creep upward a little more and release still more carbon dioxide.<br>
<br>
All this is called the "runaway greenhouse effect," and it may
eventually make Earth an uninhabitable planet.<br>
<br>
But, as you can see, it is not carbon dioxide in itself that is the
source of the trouble; it is the fact that the carbon dioxide
concentration in the atmosphere is steadily rising and seems to be
doomed to continue rising. Why is that?<br>
<br>
To blame are two factors. First of all, in the last few centuries,
first coal, then oil and natural gas, have been burned for energy at
a rapidly increasing rate. The carbon contained in these fuels,
which has been safely buried underground for many millions of years,
is now being burned to carbon dioxide and poured into the atmosphere
at a rate of many tons per day.<br>
<br>
Some of that additional carbon dioxide may be absorbed by the soil
or by the ocean, and some might be consumed by plant life, but the
fact is that a considerable fraction of it remains in the
atmosphere. It must, for the carbon dioxide content of the
atmosphere is going up year by year.<br>
<br>
To make matters worse, Earth's forests have been disappearing,
slowly at first, but in the last couple of centuries quite rapidly.
Right now it is disappearing at the rate of sixty-four acres per
minute.<br>
<br>
Whatever replaces the forest- grasslands or farms or scrub- produces
plants that do not consume carbon dioxide at a rate equal to that of
forest. Thus, not only is more carbon dioxide being added to the
atmosphere through the burning of fuel, but as the forests
disappear, less carbon dioxide is being subtracted from the
atmosphere by plants.<br>
<br>
But this gives us a new perspective on the matter. The carbon
dioxide is not rising by itself. It is people who are burning the
coal, oil, and gas, because of their need for energy. It is people
who are cutting down the forests, because of their need for
farmland. And the two are connected, for the burning of coal and oil
is producing acid rain which helps destroy the forests. It is
people, then, who are the villains.<br>
<br>
What is to be done?<br>
First, we must save our forests, and even replant them. From
forests, properly conserved, we get wood, chemicals, soil retention,
ecological health- and a slowdown of carbon dioxide increase.<br>
<br>
Second, we must have new sources of fuel. There are, after all,
fuels that do not involve the production of carbon dioxide. Nuclear
fission is one of them, and if that is deemed too dangerous for
other reasons, there is the forthcoming nuclear fusion, which may be
safer. There is also the energy of waves, tides, wind, and the
Earth's interior heat. Most of all, there is the direct use of solar
energy.<br>
<br>
All of this will take time, work, and money, to be sure, but all
that time, work, and money will be invested in order to save our
civilization and our planet itself.<br>
<br>
After all, humanity seems to be willing to spend more time, work,
and money in order to support competing military machines that can
only destroy us all. Should we begrudge less time, work, and money
in order to save us all?<br>
Source<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://archive.org/details/66EssaysOnThePastPresentAndFuture">https://archive.org/details/66EssaysOnThePastPresentAndFuture</a><br>
Releases<br>
1986 6-Jul-86, Newsday "Are We Drowning Our Tomorrows?" <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.asimovonline.com/oldsite/Essays/other_essays.html">http://www.asimovonline.com/oldsite/Essays/other_essays.html</a><br>
1987 <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.amazon.com/Past-Present-Future-Isaac-Asimov/dp/0879753935">https://www.amazon.com/Past-Present-Future-Isaac-Asimov/dp/0879753935</a><br>
<font size="-2"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://climatestate.com/2018/08/25/the-villain-in-the-atmosphere-by-isaac-asimov/">http://climatestate.com/2018/08/25/the-villain-in-the-atmosphere-by-isaac-asimov/</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
<font size="+1"><b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xua78w7e4DA">This Day in
Climate History - August 26, 2013</a> - from D.R. Tucker</b></font><br>
August 26, 2013: 350.org releases a video recommending that
hurricanes be named after politicians who assert that human-caused
climate change is a hoax.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xua78w7e4DA">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xua78w7e4DA</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>