<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><i><font size="+1"><b>July 25, 2020</b></font></i></p>
[Zoom today- book discussion with climate psychologists]<br>
<b>Climate Author Series: Lise Van Susteren on Emotional
Inflammation</b><br>
Saturday, July 25th at 1:00 PM EST, Merritt Juliano will interview
Lise Van Susteren about her new book, Emotional Inflammation. <br>
Climate Author Series<br>
CPA-NA will be hosting a series of Zoom interviews to highlight and
introduce authors in the field of climate psychology. We will kick
off this initiative with a discussion between CPA-NA co-president,
Merritt Juliano JD LCSW and Lise Van Susteren, author of Emotional
Inflammation: Discover Your Triggers and Reclaim Your Equilibrium
During Anxious Times. Dr. Susteren also serves as CPA-NA board
member, and is a founding board member of Climate Psychiatry
Alliance. Dr. Susteren is a practicing psychiatrist in Washington,
DC. She served as assistant clinical professor of psychiatry at
Georgetown University, and is a go-to commentator for CNN NBC, NPR,
the Wall Street Journal, HuffPost and other media outlets. Don't
miss this unique opportunity to hear Dr. Susteren discuss her new
book. Participants will have an opportunity to submit questions for
Dr. Susteren for a closing Q & A session.<br>
<br>
When: Saturday, July 25th, 1:00 - 2:00 PM EST<br>
Members: Free<br>
Non-members: $15<br>
Click to register -
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://climatepsychology.us/event-tickets/climate-author-series-lise-van-susteren-on-emotional-inflammation">https://climatepsychology.us/event-tickets/climate-author-series-lise-van-susteren-on-emotional-inflammation</a>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
[how hot will it get?]<br>
<b>A New Solution to Climate Science's Biggest Mystery</b><br>
For the first time in 41 years, researchers have provided a new
answer to one of the thorniest--and most fundamental--questions in
Earth science...<br>
- -<br>
They wanted a better answer to the question, which is: If you
greatly increase the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, how
hot will the planet get?...<br>
This week, a team of 25 researchers--drawn from across the earth
sciences and descended from the Bavaria effort--published the first
new answer in 41 years. Their estimate of this value, called
"climate sensitivity," significantly reduces the amount of
uncertainty involved in forecasting climate change. "It helps us
answer this fundamental question, which is: How warm is it gonna
get?" Kate Marvel, a climate scientist at NASA and an author of the
paper, told me.<br>
<br>
Since Arrhenius first tried to calculate climate sensitivity,
scientists have talked about it by estimating how much temperatures
would rise if CO₂ doubled. The new paper finds that doubling carbon
dioxide will likely increase Earth's average temperature by 2.6 to
3.9 degrees Celsius (about 5 to 7 degrees Fahrenheit). That's much
narrower than the old estimate, which said that a doubling of CO₂
would raise temperatures by 1.5 to 4.5 degrees Celsius (about 3 to 8
degrees Fahrenheit)...<br>
- - <br>
"We've ruled out 'We'll be fine,' and we don't think 'doom' is very
likely," Marvel said...<br>
- -<br>
The new work may represent the end of the era for this vein of
climate science, Stevens said. At this point, policy makers have all
the information about climate sensitivity they should need to act,
he said. While it's not always clear what a change in the global
mean temperature means for local climates, it is clear now
that--with virtually no uncertainty--any doubling of atmospheric CO₂
would be a significant event. "I think science has done a good job
of putting its foot forward on the global mean," Stevens said. "This
could be the end."<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2020/07/a-new-solution-to-climate-sciences-biggest-mystery-sensitivity/614581/">https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2020/07/a-new-solution-to-climate-sciences-biggest-mystery-sensitivity/614581/</a><br>
- - - -<br>
[What will happen with 5 degrees of warming - 2 min video drama]<br>
<b>5 Degrees Warmer: Civilization Collapses | National Geographic</b><br>
If the world warms by five degrees the planet reaches a nightmare
vision of life on Earth as traditional social systems break down. <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://youtu.be/7nRf2RTqANg">http://youtu.be/7nRf2RTqANg</a>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
[Some educational videos]<br>
<b>What Will Happen If Earth Keeps Getting Warmer? | Avoiding
Apocalypse | Spark</b><br>
Jul 6, 2020<br>
Spark<br>
The Earth is heating up and this climate change will have
cataclysmic consequences for humanity - namely the desertification
of agricultural lands and submersion of some of the planet's most
populated zones. This episode explores the best scientific solutions
to rescue the climate and humanity, including carbon capture,
artificial trees, production of Earth-cooling clouds, and many more.<br>
Subscribe to Spark for more amazing science, tech and engineering
videos - <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://goo.gl/LIrlur">https://goo.gl/LIrlur</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3Q5OEfD9u8">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3Q5OEfD9u8</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
[video discussion]<br>
<b>Sustainable Food Workshop: What it means and how to cook it</b><br>
Streamed live July 22, 2020<br>
Oxford Climate Society<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLaSplhYBwA">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLaSplhYBwA</a><br>
<br>
<p><br>
</p>
[Capital Weather Gang]<br>
<b>Major new climate study rules out less severe global warming
scenarios</b><br>
An analysis finds the most likely range of warming from doubling
carbon dioxide to be between 4.1 to 8.1 degrees Fahrenheit<br>
By Andrew Freedman and Chris Mooney - July 22 at 10:28 AM<br>
The current pace of human-caused carbon emissions is increasingly
likely to trigger irreversible damage to the planet, according to a
comprehensive international study released Wednesday. Researchers
studying one of the most important and vexing topics in climate
science -- how sensitive the Earth's climate is to a doubling of the
amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere -- found that warming is
extremely unlikely to be on the low end of estimates.<br>
<br>
These scientists now say it is likely that if human activities --
such as burning oil, gas and coal along with deforestation -- push
carbon dioxide to such levels, the Earth's global average
temperature will most likely increase between 4.1 and 8.1 degrees
Fahrenheit (2.3 and 4.5 degrees Celsius). The previous and
long-standing estimated range of climate sensitivity, as first laid
out in a 1979 report, was 2.7 to 8.1 degrees Fahrenheit (1.5 to 4.5
Celsius).<br>
If the warming reaches the midpoint of this new range, it would be
extremely damaging, said Kate Marvel, a physicist at NASA's Goddard
Institute of Space Studies and Columbia University, who called it
the equivalent of a "five-alarm fire" for the planet.<br>
The new range is narrower than previous studies but shows at least a
95 percent chance that a doubling of carbon dioxide, which the world
is on course to reach within the next five decades or so, would
result in warming greater than 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit (2 degrees
Celsius) relative to preindustrial temperatures. That is the
threshold beyond which scientists say the Earth will suffer
dangerous effects -- disruptive sea level rise, intolerable heat
waves and other extreme weather and permanent damage to
ecosystems...<br>
- - <br>
Staying below that is still possible. If steep emissions cuts are
made in the near-term, a doubling of carbon dioxide levels could be
avoided. But if a doubling does occur, there would be a 6 to 18
percent chance of exceeding the upper bound defined by the study of
8.1 Fahrenheit (4.5 Celsius).<br>
<br>
The study by 25 researchers from around the world, published in the
journal Reviews of Geophysics, is the result of a four-year effort
sponsored by the World Climate Research Program. It includes a
narrower projected sensitivity range of 4.7 to 7 degrees Fahrenheit
(2.6 to 3.9 Celsius) that has a 66 percent chance of occurring.<br>
<br>
<b>The 'holy grail' of climate science</b><br>
For decades, climate scientists have been seeking to answer the
question of how much global temperatures would climb if the amount
of carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere were to double. This
measure was estimated in a 1979 study from the National Research
Council led by Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor Jule
Charney.<br>
<br>
The "Charney Report" concluded that the planet's climate sensitivity
was most likely within the range of 2.6 to 8.1 degrees Fahrenheit
(1.5 to 4.5 Celsius).<br>
<br>
Ever since, researchers have tried to narrow that range, contending
with myriad uncertainties in how the oceans and atmosphere respond
to historical changes in solar output, the planet's orbit, past
periods with higher amounts of carbon dioxide in the air as well as
feedback, such as how various cloud types act to trap or reflect
heat energy. In addition, scientists have wrestled with
uncertainties in models that simulate past, present and future
climate change.<br>
<br>
"Constraining climate sensitivity has been something of a holy grail
in climate science for some time," said study co-author Zeke
Hausfather, director of climate and energy at the Breakthrough
Institute.<br>
<br>
The climate sensitivity question has taken on new urgency as some of
the newest computer models developed for the U.N. Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), due in a report next year, show a
higher climate sensitivity than earlier models.<br>
<br>
The new result narrows the range from what Charney and his
colleagues calculated while raising the lower bound...<br>
- - <br>
<b>Knowing the climate sensitivity range could enable better
decision-making</b><br>
The term "climate sensitivity" might seem like an academic
construct, a metric that matters more in the grand theories and
computer models of scientists than it does in our everyday lives.<br>
<br>
In fact, the study has a message that matters to us a great deal:
There is basically little or no chance that we are going to get
lucky and find that the warming caused by our activities turns out
to be minor.<br>
<br>
There are at least two main lines of evidence that lead to the
conclusion, based on the study. The first is simply the warming that
has already occurred since the industrial revolution.<br>
<br>
Currently, with atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide at 415
parts per million (compared with a preindustrial level of 280 parts
per million), the world is about halfway toward doubling atmospheric
carbon dioxide (560 parts per million). And already, the Earth has
warmed by at least 1 degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) above
preindustrial temperatures.<br>
<br>
The new research finds that, in light of this, there is strong
evidence refuting the notion that a doubling of carbon dioxide would
only cause about 2.6 degrees (1.5 Celsius) of warming.<br>
<br>
At the same time, researchers rejected the idea that there is any
factor in the climate system that will counteract the warming trend
in a meaningful way.<br>
<br>
In the past, climate change contrarians and doubters have said that
clouds might be such a factor. For instance, if as the planet warms
the overall size, composition or surface area of clouds increases,
they could reflect more sunlight from Earth, which would cool the
planet some. But the study finds that isn't likely to happen.<br>
<br>
"We find that a negative total cloud feedback is very unlikely," the
authors write, concluding that for this reason the climate
sensitivity cannot be very low.<br>
<br>
"The uncertainty is really asymmetric here," Marvel said in an
interview. "We can be very confident in ruling out sensitivities on
the low end. So basically what we're saying here is that there is
really no evidence for any sort of natural response, any sort of
big, stabilizing feedback, that in the absence of human actions, is
going to save us from climate change."<br>
<br>
But Gavin Schmidt, the study's co-author and Marvel's colleague at
NASA Goddard, offered some optimism, noting that collective action
by nations could prevent the doubling of carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere.<br>
<br>
"The primary determinant of future climate is human actions," Marvel
said.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2020/07/22/climate-sensitivity-co2/">https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2020/07/22/climate-sensitivity-co2/</a><br>
<br>
<p><br>
</p>
[Dose of positivism]<br>
<b>What Could Possibly Go Right? | Episode 14 with Rob Hopkins</b><br>
Jul 23, 2020<br>
postcarboninstitute<br>
Rob Hopkins is an author and a cofounder of Transition Town Totnes
and Transition Network. He approaches the question of "What could
possibly go right?" with a fascination in the power of imagination
for our future. His insights include:<br>
<br>
That we need to create the conditions for the human imagination to
re-emerge.<br>
<br>
That trauma, anxiety, loneliness and systemic problems have caused
our imaginations to shrink, which can put at risk our ability to
reimagine everything needed in these times.<br>
<br>
That to some extent, COVID has provided us some space for us to
think in a different way and pause to "take a collective breath".<br>
<br>
That we may each emerge from lockdown as different people than we
went in, in a profound and extraordinary way.<br>
<br>
That we need to be wary of governments without imagination, which
are only thinking of how to get back to the way things were.<br>
<br>
That this has been a phenomenal global act of love and solidarity in
history.<br>
<br>
That any solutions will start with us, working together in
communities with a sense of solidarity and mutual aid.<br>
<br>
That community movements need proper support and resources, with
governments recognizing that allocating money effectively towards
these has spin off benefits for public health, mental health and
social cohesion strategies. <br>
Learn more: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://bit.ly/pci-wcpgrseries">https://bit.ly/pci-wcpgrseries</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTB53G6Bz5w">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTB53G6Bz5w</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
[Sarcasm photo - TheOnion]<br>
<b>In-Flight Announcement Thanks Passengers For Choosing To Destroy
Planet With Southwest</b><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.theonion.com/in-flight-announcement-thanks-passengers-for-choosing-t-1844491537?utm_source=TheOnion_Daily_RSS&utm_medium=email">https://www.theonion.com/in-flight-announcement-thanks-passengers-for-choosing-t-1844491537?utm_source=TheOnion_Daily_RSS&utm_medium=email</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
[Digging back into the internet news archive]<br>
<font size="+1"><b>On this day in the history of global warming -
July 25, 1977 </b></font><br>
The New York Times runs a front-page story entitled: "Scientists
Fear Heavy Use of Coal May Bring Adverse Shift in Climate."<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FB0F11F8395E137B93C7AB178CD85F438785F9">http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FB0F11F8395E137B93C7AB178CD85F438785F9</a><br>
<br>
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------/<br>
<br>
/Archive of Daily Global Warming News <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/2017-October/date.html"><https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/2017-October/date.html></a>
/<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote">https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote</a><br>
<br>
/To receive daily mailings - click to Subscribe <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:subscribe@theClimate.Vote?subject=Click%20SEND%20to%20process%20your%20request"><mailto:subscribe@theClimate.Vote?subject=Click%20SEND%20to%20process%20your%20request></a>
to news digest./<br>
<br>
*** Privacy and Security:*This is a text-only mailing that carries
no images which may originate from remote servers. Text-only
messages provide greater privacy to the receiver and sender.<br>
By regulation, the .VOTE top-level domain must be used for
democratic and election purposes and cannot be used for commercial
purposes.<br>
To subscribe, email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:contact@theclimate.vote">contact@theclimate.vote</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:contact@theclimate.vote"><mailto:contact@theclimate.vote></a>
with subject subscribe, To Unsubscribe, subject: unsubscribe<br>
Also you 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><br>
Links and headlines assembled and curated by Richard Pauli for <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://TheClimate.Vote">http://TheClimate.Vote</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://TheClimate.Vote/"><http://TheClimate.Vote/></a>
delivering succinct information for citizens and responsible
governments of all levels. List membership is confidential and
records are scrupulously restricted to this mailing list.<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>