<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>February 2, 2021</b></font></i></p>
<font size="+1">[NYT]<br>
</font><font size="+1"><b>Forecast: Wild Weather in a Warming World</b><br>
The polar vortex is experiencing an unusually long disturbance
this year because of a “sudden stratospheric warming.” Bundle up.<br>
</font><font size="+1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/30/climate/polar-vortex-weather-climate-change.html">https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/30/climate/polar-vortex-weather-climate-change.html</a><br>
</font>
<p><font size="+1"><br>
</font></p>
<font size="+1">[Ongoing ]</font><br>
<font size="+1"><b>How Climate Change May Affect Your Health</b><br>
No matter where you live or how high your socioeconomic status,
climate change can endanger your health, both physical and mental,
now and in the future.<br>
</font><font size="+1">Jane E. Brody - Feb. 1, 2021<br>
Melting ice caps, warmer oceans, intense storms, heat waves,
droughts, floods and wildfires — all these well-documented effects
of climate change may seem too remote to many people to prompt
them to adopt behaviors that can slow the warming of the planet.
Unless your neighborhood was destroyed by a severe hurricane or
raging wildfire, you might think such disasters happen only to
other people.<br>
<br>
But what if I told you that no matter where you live or how high
your socioeconomic status, climate change can endanger your
health, both physical and mental, now and in the future? Not only
your health, but also the health of your children and
grandchildren? Might you consider making changes to help mitigate
the threat?<br>
<br>
Relatively few Americans associate climate change with possible
harms to their health, and most have given little thought to this
possibility. Even though I read widely about medical issues, like
most Americans, I too was unaware of how many health hazards can
accompany climate change.<br>
<br>
Studies in the United States and Britain have shown that “people
have a strong tendency to see climate change as less threatening
to their health and to their family’s health than to other
people’s health,” according to Julia Hathaway and Edward W.
Maibach at the Center for Climate Change Communication at George
Mason University.<br>
</font><br>
<font size="+1">Two recently published reports set me straight. One,
by two public health experts, called for the creation within the
National Institutes of Health of a “National Institute of Climate
Change and Health” to better inform the medical community, public
officials and ordinary citizens about ways to stanch looming
threats to human health from further increases in global warming.<br>
<br>
The experts, Dr. Howard Frumkin and Dr. Richard J. Jackson, both
former directors of the National Center for Environmental Health
at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, warned that
recent climate-related disasters, including devastating wildfires
and a record-breaking hurricane season, demonstrate that our
failure to take climate change seriously is resulting in needless
suffering and death.<br>
<br>
The second report appeared just as I began investigating the
evidence supporting their proposal: a full-page article in The New
York Times on Nov. 29 with the headline “Wildfire Smoke in
California Is Poisoning Children.” It described lung damage along
with lifelong threats to the health of youngsters forced to
breathe smoke-laden air from wildfires that began raging in August
and fouled the air throughout the fall.<br>
<br>
Children are not the only ones endangered. Anyone with asthma can
experience life-threatening attacks when pollution levels soar.
The risks of heart disease and stroke rise. And a recent study in
JAMA Neurology of more than 18,000 Americans with cognitive
impairment found a strong link between high levels of air
pollution and an increased risk of developing dementia.<br>
<br>
“While anyone’s health can be harmed by climate change, some
people are at greatly increased risk, including young children,
pregnant women, older adults, people with chronic illnesses and
disabilities, outdoor workers, and people with fewer resources,”
Drs. Hathaway and Maibach wrote in Current Environmental Health
Reports.<br>
<br>
Alas, said Dr. Jackson, emeritus professor at the University of
California, Los Angeles, “Human beings respond only to what is a
threat to them at the moment. Californians are now much more aware
— the fires got people’s attention.” The wildfire season is now
starting much earlier and ending later as a result of a warming
climate, an international research team reported in The New
England Journal of Medicine in November.<br>
<br>
Dr. Frumkin, emeritus professor at the University of Washington,
told me, “Lots of people who don’t consider climate change a major
problem relative to themselves do take it seriously when they
realize it’s a health concern. Heat waves, for example, not only
kill people, they also diminish work capacity, sleep quality and
academic performance in children.”<br>
<br>
“Our changing climate will have much more of an impact on people’s
health over time,” Dr. Jackson said. People of all ages will
develop respiratory allergies, and those who already have
allergies can expect them to get worse, as plants and trees
respond to a warmer climate and release their allergens in more
places and for longer periods.<br>
<br>
Infectious diseases carried by ticks, mosquitoes and other vectors
also rise with a warming climate. Even small increases in
temperature in temperate zones raise the potential for epidemics
of Lyme disease, Rocky Mountain spotted fever, encephalitis and
other tick-borne infections, as well as mosquito-borne West Nile
disease, dengue fever and even malaria.<br>
<br>
Climate change endangers the safety of foods and water supplies by
fostering organisms that cause food poisoning and microbial
contamination of drinking water. Extreme flooding and hurricanes
can spawn epidemics of leptospirosis; just walking through
floodwaters can increase the risk of this bacterial blood
infection 15-fold.<br>
<br>
These are just a smattering of the health risks linked to global
warming. They are extensive and require both societal and
individual efforts to minimize. Yes, society is changing, albeit
slowly. The Biden administration has rejoined the Paris Climate
Agreement. General Motors, the nation’s largest car manufacturer,
announced it would dedicate itself to electric vehicles and other
green energy initiatives, and Ford, Volkswagen and others are
doing the same.<br>
<br>
Lest you feel you can’t make a difference, let me suggest some
steps many of us can take to help assure a healthier future for
everyone.</font><br>
<font size="+1">I assume you’ve already changed your light bulbs to
more efficient LEDs. But have you checked the source of your
electricity to see that it relies primarily on nonpolluting
renewable energy sources? Can you install solar panels where you
live? If you can afford to, replace old energy-guzzling appliances
with new efficient ones. And don’t waste electricity or water.<br>
<br>
Now tackle transportation. Drive less and use people power more.
Wherever possible, commute and run errands by cycling, walking or
scootering, which can also directly enhance your health. Or take
public transportation. If you must drive, consider getting an
electric car, which can save fuel costs as well as protect the
environment.<br>
<br>
How about a dietary inventory, one that can enhance your health
both directly and indirectly? Cutting back on or cutting out red
meat to reduce greenhouse gases, relying instead on plant-based
foods, is the perfect start to a healthier planet and its human
inhabitants.<br>
<br>
Reduce waste. Currently, Dr. Jackson said, 30 percent of our food
is wasted. Buy only what you need and use it before it spoils.
Support organizations like City Harvest, which distributes unsold
food from stores and unused food from restaurants to those in
need.<br>
<br>
Reuse or recycle materials instead of throwing out everything you
no longer want nor need.<br>
</font><font size="+1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/01/well/eat/climate-change-health.html">https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/01/well/eat/climate-change-health.html</a><br>
</font>
<p><font size="+1"><br>
</font></p>
<p><font size="+1"><br>
</font></p>
<font size="+1">[watch out]<br>
</font><font size="+1"><b>Wildfire smoke may carry ‘mind-bending’
amounts of fungi and bacteria, scientists say</b><br>
</font><font size="+1">JOSEPH SERNA - FEB. 1, 2021 <br>
When wildfires roar through a forest and bulldozers dig into the
earth to stop advancing flames, they may be churning more into the
air than just clouds of dust and smoke, scientists say.<br>
<br>
Those dark, billowing plumes of smoke that rise on waves of heat
during the day and sink into valleys as the night air cools may be
transporting countless living microbes that can seep into our
lungs or cling to our skin and clothing, according to research
published recently in Science. In some cases, researchers fear
that airborne pathogens could sicken firefighters or downwind
residents.<br>
<br>
“We were inspired to write this because we recognize that there
are many trillions of microbes in smoke that haven’t really been
incorporated in an understanding ... of human health,” said Leda
Kobziar, the University of Idaho’s wildland fire science director.
“At this point, it’s really unknown. The diversity of microbes
that we’ve found are really mind-bending.”<br>
<br>
As this recent fire seasons suggests, the need to understand
what’s in the wildfire smoke we can’t help but breathe and how it
may affect us has never been more pronounced, but scientists say
we are seriously behind the curve.<br>
<br>
Wildfires burned across more than 10.2 million acres of the United
States in 2020, federal statistics show, including some 4.2
million acres in California, where a greater number of residents
were exposed to smoke for a longer period of time than ever
before.<br>
<br>
Wildfire smoke now accounts for up to half of all fine-particle
pollution in the Western U.S., according to researchers. Although
there are many studies on the long-term impacts to human health
from urban air pollution and short-term impacts from wildfire
smoke, there’s little known about the multitude of ways the latter
can hurt us over a lifetime.<br>
<br>
“Frankly, we don’t really know about the long-term effects of
wildfire smoke because community exposures haven’t been long-term
before,” said Dr. John Balmes, a professor of medicine at UC San
Francisco and a member of the California Air Resources Board.<br>
<br>
But humans — and Californians in particular — should expect to
inhale more wildfire smoke in the future.<br>
<br>
Scientists say the planet will continue warming for decades to
come, even if humans suddenly collectively act to stop climate
change. This warming, and other factors, are contributing to ever
more destructive wildfires. The state’s forests, meanwhile, are
struggling to adapt and native plants are being displaced by
faster-burning invasive species.<br>
<br>
Add to those trends a global pandemic that attacks the respiratory
system, and microbe-filled fire smoke every year could be
considered a growing health risk, researchers say. They wonder
whether microbes in wildfire smoke could make cancer patients more
vulnerable to infections or make children with asthma more prone
to developing pneumonia.<br>
<br>
Scientists believe some microbes survive and even proliferate in
wildfire, where heat scorches the ground and leaves behind a layer
of carbon that shields microbes within the earth from intense
heat. Others survive in the air because wildfire particulates can
absorb the sun’s otherwise lethal ultraviolet radiation, the
scientists said. And still other spores are likely spread on wind
currents caused by fire.<br>
<br>
Kobziar and study co-author George Thompson III, an associate
professor of medicine at UC Davis, said that up until now, the
connection between microbes and wildfires has been anecdotal —
such as the tendency for wildland firefighters to get sick with
Valley fever after working on an incident. The illness is
contracted by inhaling spores of the fungi genus Coccidioides.<br>
<br>
“We have more questions than answers at this point,” Thompson
said. “Our lungs are exposed to pathogens every day we don’t think
much of. But [what] if we increase the number of microbes in there
with fire?”<br>
<br>
In 2018, for example, the Kern County Fire Department sought a
$100,000 grant to get assistance in cutting fuel breaks — which
disturb the soil — because their firefighters would get sick after
doing the work. Data show that Valley fever cases spike on the
county’s valley floor every fall, just as fire season is underway
in the surrounding hills.<br>
<br>
“Aerosolized, microbes, spores, or fungal conidia … have the
potential to travel hundreds of miles, depending on fire behavior
and atmospheric conditions, and are eventually deposited or
inhaled downwind of a fire,” Kobziar and Thompson wrote in their
paper.<br>
<br>
Yet, determining what pathogens exist in wildfire smoke has been
difficult.<br>
<br>
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NASA and team
of chemists, physicists, biologists and forest and fire ecologists
from a number of universities have been collaborating for years to
study wildfire smoke around the country, under the assumption that
nobody will be immune to its effects in the future.<br>
<br>
“As the climate changes, as the temperature warms up, as we build
houses in places that are surrounded by human populations and
housing development expand into regions susceptible to fires, it’s
a matter of time,” said Berry Lefero, manager of NASA’s
Tropospheric Composition Program, which includes a DC-8 jetliner
that circles the globe studying wildfire smoke, ozone and aerosols
in the atmosphere’s lower layer.<br>
<br>
Through the combined work of these researchers, scientists hope,
the public and healthcare workers will one day be able to receive
timely, accurate forecasts on where wildfire smoke will go, what
specific health hazards it poses, and what people in its path
should do to prepare beyond the boilerplate advice to stay
indoors.<br>
<br>
To solve the riddle of what microbes are in the smoke and why,
Kobziar and Thompson need to understand what type of fuel is
burning, like a grass, shrub, or tree; how much of it there was
initially; how severely it was burned (was it just scorched black
or completely reduced to ash or something in between?); and where
the smoke originated.<br>
<br>
Once those variables are determined, there’s the complicated task
of actually capturing the smoke, which is by no means uniform,
Kobziar said.<br>
<br>
In September, Kobziar, a former firefighter, used a drone to
capture samples of the air over Idaho when it was inundated with
smoke from fires in Eastern Washington and Oregon. She then placed
the samples in a petri dish, added some food that microbes like to
eat and waited to see what would happen.<br>
<br>
“Even a couple hundred miles away from the source of the smoke, it
was still significant,” Kobziar said. “We’re still trying to
isolate all the things we found.”<br>
<br>
Tim Edwards, president of the firefighters union Local 2881, which
represents thousands in the California Department of Forestry and
Fire Protection, hope the scientists’ work can boost his own
efforts to get wildland firefighters respirators, since they
typically just rely on face masks or bandanas — unlike their urban
firefighting counterparts.<br>
<br>
It’s not only the dust kicked up in a fire that gets crews sick,
Edwards said.<br>
<br>
“Now, in a wildland conflagration, you have 1,000 homes burning,”
he said. “You burn the house, you don’t know what chemicals they
have in that house, all that is on fire and that’s going in your
lungs.”<br>
</font><font size="+1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-02-01/wildfire-smoke-microbes-in-the-air">https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-02-01/wildfire-smoke-microbes-in-the-air</a></font>
<p><font size="+1"><br>
</font></p>
<p><font size="+1"><br>
</font></p>
<font size="+1">[maybe a cultural/ethical/transformation]<b><br>
</b></font><font size="+1">February 8, 2021 Issue<br>
<b>How a Young Activist Is Helping Pope Francis Battle Climate
Change</b><br>
Molly Burhans wants the Catholic Church to put its assets—which
include farms, forests, oil wells, and millions of acres of
land—to better use. But, first, she has to map them.<br>
<br>
By David Owen - February 1, 2021<b><br>
</b></font><font size="+1">- - <br>
</font><font size="+1">She enrolled at Mercyhurst University, in
Pennsylvania, in 2007, intending to major in dance, but she
withdrew in the fall of her sophomore year, among other reasons
because she had suffered a debilitating foot injury, and because
she had walked in on a student who was trying to kill herself. She
returned to her parents’ house, in Buffalo, and, after a period of
dejection, became involved in the city’s arts community. She took
advantage of a policy at Canisius that allowed the children of
faculty members to study tuition-free. She eventually majored in
philosophy, but she also studied science, mathematics, and art.
She told me that in high school she’d been so focussed on ballet
that she was never much of a student; now she devoted herself to
academics with the same intensity that she’d once devoted to
dance. She spent six months travelling, by herself, in Guatemala,
where she volunteered with several N.G.O.s. “What I learned there
is that land is a critical vehicle not only for food security and
ecosystem support but also for helping people in rural poverty get
out of poverty,” she said. She was surprised by some of the
friends she made. “They were Christians, but not like the
Christians you see on TV—none of the prosperity gospel crap,” she
said. “In fact, exactly the opposite. I began to think, Maybe I’m
a Christian.”..<br>
</font><font size="+1">- -<b><br>
</b></font><font size="+1">Burhans is still in contact with
officials at the Vatican, and she has faith that the Pope will
eventually return to her proposal. “If the Vatican suddenly says
yes, I’ll drop everything and go,” she told me. In the meantime,
though, GoodLands plans to expand its mission to include lay
clients, both for-profit and nonprofit: real-estate companies,
asset-management firms, universities, land trusts, and similar
organizations. She has turned away such clients in the past, but
will do so no longer. “The same approach that we’ve used for
Catholic properties can be used for other landholders,” she said.
“What we do has value for any large property owner who cares about
the environment, and in order to scale this work we need to serve
everyone.” She isn’t certain, yet, how to make all that happen.
But she has ideas. <br>
</font><font size="+1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/02/08/how-a-young-activist-is-helping-pope-francis-battle-climate-change">https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/02/08/how-a-young-activist-is-helping-pope-francis-battle-climate-change</a><b><br>
</b></font>
<p><font size="+1"><b><br>
</b></font></p>
<p><font size="+1"><b><br>
</b></font></p>
<font size="+1">[Latest battle]<b><br>
</b></font><font size="+1"><b>Texas governor threatens to sue Joe
Biden because of his ‘hostile’ agenda to tackle climate crisis<br>
</b>Abbott calls on every state agency to challenge federal action
that threatens oil and gas industry</font><i><font size="+1"><b><br>
</b></font></i><br>
<font size="+1">Texas governor Greg Abbott pledged to fight climate
crisis executive orders signed by Joe Biden that he claims will
undercut his state’s oil and gas production.<br>
<br>
Through his own executive order, the governor authorised state
agencies to bring legal challenges to policies implemented by the
new president and his administration.<br>
<br>
“When it comes to threats to your jobs, you have a governor who
has your back,” Mr Abbott told workers at an oilfield service firm
where he signed his order. “Texas is going to protect the oil and
gas industry from any type of hostile attack from Washington.”<br>
<br>
On Wednesday Mr Biden unveiled a series of orders designed to
combat climate change that energy producing states see as a threat
to their core businesses.</font><i><font size="+1"><b><br>
</b></font></i><br>
<font size="+1">The president made climate change a national
security concern, ordered a pause in new oil and gas leases on
federal land, and cut subsidies as part of his drive to transition
away from fossil fuels.<br>
<br>
He also directed federal agencies to “procure carbon
pollution-free electricity and clean, zero-emission vehicles to
create good-paying, union jobs and stimulate clean energy
industries.”<br>
<br>
Mr Biden hopes to set the country on a path to decarbonise the
power sector by 2035, and reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions
by 2050.<br>
<br>
</font><font size="+1">When Mr Abbott was the state's attorney
general during the Obama administration he sued the federal
government 31 times — mostly over environmental legislation and
regulation.<br>
<br>
Ken Paxton, the current attorney general of Texas, has already
challenged the new administration by asking a federal judge to
temporarily block enforcement of a Department of Homeland Security
directive establishing a 100-day halt to most deportations.</font><br>
<font size="+1">"This is a homework assignment for every state
agency in Texas," he added.<br>
<br>
The governor also plans to prohibit cities in Texas from banning
natural gas appliances under a state bill he intends to file.<br>
<br>
Texas produces more than 40 per cent of the nation's crude oil,
and just under a quarter of its natural gas. The oil and gas
industry makes up approximately one third of the gross state
product.<br>
<br>
Environmentalists argue that the governor’s order is misguided
given the severity of climate change’s impacts on the state from
hurricanes, storms, flooding, and extreme heat waves.</font><i><font
size="+1"><b><br>
</b></font></i><font size="+1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/texas-sue-biden-climate-crisis-b1795752.html">https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/texas-sue-biden-climate-crisis-b1795752.html</a></font><i><font
size="+1"><b><br>
</b></font></i>
<p><i><font size="+1"><b><br>
</b></font></i></p>
<p><i><font size="+1"><b><br>
</b></font></i></p>
[information battleground]<br>
<b>How to spot the tricks Big Oil uses to subvert action on climate
change</b><br>
Three ways fossil fuel companies try to trick the public.<br>
By Jariel Arvin - Feb 1, 2021<br>
In his first week in office, President Joe Biden committed to an
all-of-government approach to tackle climate change, signing
executive orders recommitting the US to the Paris climate agreement,
pausing new leases for oil and gas companies on federal land, and
stating his intention to conserve 30 percent of federal lands by
2030.<br>
<br>
Yet while Biden’s climate actions have been lauded by many, there
are some, often with connections to the fossil fuel industry, who
strongly oppose taking stronger action on climate.<br>
<br>
Many such detractors use common oil-industry talking points in their
arguments — talking points that have been developed in collaboration
with PR firms and lobbyists to undercut clean energy policies and
prolong dependence on fossil fuels.<br>
<br>
A 2019 report by researchers at George Mason, Harvard University,
and the University of Bristol describes how the fossil fuel industry
deliberately misled the public by funding climate denial research
and campaigns all while knowing for decades that human-induced
climate change exists.<br>
<br>
Aware of the science but afraid of the impacts it might have on
their returns, oil executives funded opposition research that
“attacked consensus and exaggerated the uncertainties” on the
science of climate change for many years with the goal of
undermining support for climate action.<br>
<br>
Their messaging has worked for so long because Big Oil has become
really good at stretching the truth.<br>
<br>
“What’s really important to keep in mind is that part of the reason
that oil and gas propaganda is so effective is that there is always
a grain of truth to it,” said Genevieve Guenther, the founder of End
Climate Silence, an organization that works to promote accurate
media coverage of the climate crisis.<br>
<br>
“I call it ‘sort of true,’ where there’s something about the
messaging that’s true, but that grain of truth gets developed into a
whole tangle of lies that obscure the real story,” Guenther said.<br>
<br>
Guenther, originally a professor of Renaissance literature, is also
working on a book titled The Language of Climate Change. I spoke
with her to get a better understanding of how to recognize — and
counter — Big Oil propaganda.<br>
<br>
As the Biden administration takes important steps to address the
climate emergency, the fossil fuel industry and its allies in the
media will be ramping up the misinformation campaign to skew public
opinion and get in the way of climate policy. Fox News has already
started.<br>
<br>
Which is why it’s more important than ever to be aware of the tools
oil and gas companies use to cloud the issue.<br>
<br>
My conversation with Guenther, edited for length and clarity, is
below.<br>
<br>
<b>Jariel Arvin</b><br>
I’d like to start with your thoughts on how the Biden administration
is handling climate change so far.<br>
<br>
<b>Genevieve Guenther</b><br>
I think that the Biden administration has come a really long way
since the beginning of the [2020] primaries. I think that the
Sunrise Movement and Evergreen Action folks, and other activists
connected to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Jay Inslee, have done an
amazing job, basically schooling Biden on climate.<br>
<br>
So far, Biden’s the best president on climate that we have had. But
I’m not quite ready to do a backflip and wave my pom-poms yet,
though, because I know that his major plan, which is to decarbonize
the power grid by 2035, will need to be routed in some way through
Congress.<br>
<br>
I am anticipating that’s not going to be easy and expect a massive
PR blitz [from the fossil fuel industry], which is going to be timed
for the attempt to pass this plan, whether directly or through
budget reconciliation. And I worry that the Biden administration,
and the climate movement more broadly, might not be ready,<br>
<br>
<b>Jariel Arvin</b><br>
So what are the talking points the oil industry uses to try to
convince the public in these PR blitzes?<br>
<br>
<b>Genevieve Guenther</b><br>
People can recognize fossil fuel industry talking points by thinking
about what they’re designed to do. In general, fossil fuel talking
points are designed to do three things: make people believe that
climate action will hurt them, and hurt their pocketbooks in
particular; make people think we need fossil fuels; and try to
convince us that climate change isn’t such a big deal.<br>
<br>
<b>Jariel Arvin</b><br>
How do they make people believe that taking climate action is going
to hurt them financially?<br>
<br>
<b>Genevieve Guenther</b><br>
Right now, they’re really hammering the point that climate action is
going to hurt jobs and the economy. So, for instance, Sen. Ted Cruz
released a press statement saying that by rejoining the Paris
climate accords, Biden is showing that “he’s more interested in the
views of the citizens of Paris than in the jobs of the citizens of
Pittsburgh.”<br>
<br>
<b>Jariel Arvin</b><br>
Yeah, and we also saw Rep. Lauren Boebert make a similar statement
saying she works for “the people of Pueblo, not the people of Paris”
and that the Paris agreement would put “blue-collar jobs at risk.”<br>
<br>
<b>Genevieve Guenther</b><br>
Yeah, exactly. So Cruz is arguing that Democrats plan to destroy the
jobs they don’t like, including thousands of manufacturing jobs.
This is completely false, because building out clean energy
infrastructure is going to create millions of manufacturing jobs in
this country which can’t be outsourced.<br>
<br>
And whatever fossil fuel jobs have been lost in the past year
happened a) on Trump’s watch, and b) due to market forces that have
absolutely nothing to do with any explicit climate policy passed by
any administration.<br>
<br>
<b>Jariel Arvin</b><br>
So if the claim is untrue, how has the idea that taking action on
climate change will cause millions of job losses become so
pervasive?<br>
<br>
<b>Genevieve Guenther</b><br>
There’s a mythology in this country of the coal miner and the oil
and gas worker, as the kind of exemplary masculine figure who acts
as the backbone of America.<br>
<br>
<b>Jariel Arvin</b><br>
Do you think there’s any truth to that?<br>
<br>
<b>Genevieve Guenther</b><br>
It is true that if we phase out the fossil fuel industry there are
going to be people, and indeed whole communities, that will need to
find their livelihood in different industries. That is absolutely
true.<br>
<br>
But two things about that: Number one, you can design policies so
that those people don’t suffer, and number two, you can put
incentives in place so that the new jobs are created in the
geographical regions that are already depopulated and suffering
economically, because the fossil fuel industry is not actually
prosperous enough anymore to sustain a vibrant economy in those
regions to begin with.<br>
<br>
So, you can set up both: policies to ease the transition and
policies to incentivize new investment so that the economy ends up
more vibrant in these locations than it was before. Nothing is
inevitable. The transition can be managed.<br>
<br>
<b>Jariel Arvin</b><br>
Okay, so what’s the second talking point oil and gas uses?<br>
<br>
<b>Genevieve Guenther</b><br>
The second thing oil and gas companies will do is try to make people
believe that we need fossil fuels, and that oil and gas companies
should stay in business.<br>
<br>
One I’ve seen a lot lately raises people’s national security fears
with the message that we need to extract oil to maintain our “energy
independence,” as if domestically produced fossil energy alone were
powering America’s homes and businesses.<br>
<br>
The truth is that, according to the US Energy Information Agency, in
2019 (the latest year for which full data is available) the US
imported 9.14 million barrels of petroleum a day — half a million
more than we exported. It’s clean, safe energy sources like wind and
solar that are sure to be domestically produced, not oil and methane
gas.<br>
<b><br>
</b><b>Jariel Arvin</b><br>
So they act as if US independence will be lost without fossil fuels,
while in reality America still depends on other countries to get its
oil and gas. Got it. What else?<br>
<br>
<b>Genevieve Guenther</b><br>
Another talking point designed to make us believe that we need
fossil fuels is the message that we cannot halt global warming
without “innovation.” This is a tricky one, because you’ll often
hear energy researchers talk about the innovations we’ll want to
develop in order to enable continued aviation and industrial
shipping.<br>
<br>
But saying that new technologies will help us is different from
saying that we need them, which implies that the world cannot stop
using fossil fuels now. So politicians in the pockets of the oil and
gas producers will proclaim that they support “innovation,” and
fossil fuel companies will place ads touting the money they’re
spending on research and development— but the money they actually do
spend is orders of magnitude smaller than their PR budgets, not to
mention their budgets for exploring and developing new fossil fuel
reserves.<br>
<br>
<b>Jariel Arvin</b><br>
What’s the third big talking point?<br>
<br>
<b>Genevieve Guenther</b><br>
The third thing Big Oil will try to do is to make people believe
that climate change is not such a big deal. Either they call people
trying to communicate the dangers of global warming “alarmists,” or
they simply don’t talk about the climate crisis at all.<br>
<br>
In their campaign of silence they’re aided by the vast majority of
the broadcast news media, which mostly proceeds as if the crisis
didn’t exist and won’t even mention the words “climate change” when
they report on floods, fires, and hurricanes in which there are
scientifically established links to global warming.<br>
<br>
It’s weird to think of silence as messaging, but sometimes what you
don’t say is as important as what you do.<br>
<br>
<b>Jariel Arvin</b><br>
Okay, so we now have the three points the fossil fuel industry often
uses: Convince people climate action will hurt their pocketbooks,
suggest that we need fossil fuels, and downplay the climate
emergency. How do climate scientists, activists, and the media
counter that narrative?<br>
<b><br>
</b><b>Genevieve Guenther</b><br>
We’ve got to keep climate change in the foreground of people’s
attention. We’ve got to be clear about why we’re making this energy
transition — it’s not just because it’s a new way to create jobs,
and it’s not just because we like clean air and water.<br>
<br>
It’s because if we don’t do it, we might actually destroy
civilization.<br>
<br>
We’re not going to change up everything unless we have to, and guess
what? We have to. This is what an existential threat means.<br>
<br>
I worry that the Biden administration isn’t bringing that message to
the foreground, because you need that to be part of the
understanding of why we’re doing this work.<br>
<br>
The motivation here is that we’re trying to save our world. We’re
trying to save the lives of our children. I think activists do a
pretty good job of keeping that messaging in the foreground, but I
really wish that politicians would do it too. I think they’re still
running scared, and I don’t think they have to be.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.vox.com/22260311/oil-gas-fossil-fuel-companies-climate-change">https://www.vox.com/22260311/oil-gas-fossil-fuel-companies-climate-change</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
[maybe sooner, by the middle of the century]<br>
<b>Why Phoenix may be uninhabitable by the end of this century</b><br>
Factors like climate change and the destruction of urban foliage are
causing cities like Phoenix to overheat<br>
By MATTHEW ROZSA<br>
FEBRUARY 1, 2021 <br>
<br>
"There will come a day when the temperature won't fall below 100
degrees in Phoenix during the nighttime," Dr. Andrew Ross, a
professor of social and cultural analysis at New York University who
wrote "Bird on Fire: Lessons from the World's Least Sustainable
City," told Salon. "That will be a threshold of some kind."<br>
<br>
The American Southwest has long been a refuge for those seeking the
health benefits of warm, dry air and sunny days. But too much of a
good thing is not a good thing — for human health or for the natural
ecosystem. Now, the Southwest is facing a reckoning: decades of
human development, coupled with rising global temperatures as a
result of carbon emissions, means that many major cities in the
Southwest may become uninhabitable for humans this century.<br>
<br>
The reason has to do with something called the Heat Island Effect, a
concept that describes the effect in which the densely-populated,
central parts of a city with lots of concrete and asphalt will have
higher temperatures compared to the less populous areas, as Dr. Juan
Declet-Barreto, senior social scientist at the Union of Concerned
Scientists, explained to Salon. The term "island" is not a metaphor
here, Declet-Barreto said, because when you look at a thermal map of
many cities, "the temperatures inside the central parts of a city
resemble an island, surrounded by a cooler ocean in the surrounding
more rural areas." Obviously, the effect is apt to be more dire in
desert cities like Phoenix. <br>
<br>
Sarah Mincey, associate professor at Indiana University's O'Neill
School of Public and Environmental Affairs, added that the Heat
Island Effect is caused by urban centers gradually losing their tree
canopies, meaning that sunlight is absorbed and held in by materials
like roads and rooftops, which are typically darker in color. When
they finally do release that heat back into the air, it increases
the temperature experienced by the people in those urban
environments.<br>
<br>
"Tree canopies mitigate this as they can shade these surfaces,
avoiding the absorption of heat in the first place and through the
cooling effects of transpiration – releasing of moisture into their
surrounding environments," Mincey explained. "In general, western US
cities have less urban tree canopy cover than eastern US cities, so
mitigation of UHI [Urban Heat Islands] there is likely more
difficult."<br>
<br>
Declet-Barreto offered the following metaphor to understand how it
works.<br>
<br>
"If you think about how hot it would be, imagine yourself standing
on a downtown area where there is little, maybe no shade, no trees,
and in the middle of the summer," Declet-Barreto told Salon. "And
then you think about standing in that same spot, but imagine that
that spot was to be replaced by turf grass under your feet and some
three canopy above you. Then intuitively you can imagine that it
will be a lot cooler when you're standing underneath the tree, as
compared to being standing out in the bare sun."<br>
<br>
As Dr. B.D. Wortham-Galvin, associate professor in the School of
Architecture at Clemson University, explained to Salon by email, the
Heat Island Effect is worsened by climate change.<br>
<br>
"Over the coming decades, climate change will increase extreme
weather events, raise temperatures while cities simultaneously
increase in population density," Wortham-Galvin explained. "This
confluence of events means that all cities, but US Southern cities
in particular, will begin to experience the Heat Island Effect more
frequently and within more intra-urban locales. Without a Heat
Equity and Resiliency plan, more urban residents will suffer
negative health and economic impacts."<br>
<br>
In Phoenix specifically, the negative aspects of the Heat Island
Effect will also be exacerbated by ongoing infrastructure projects
that exacerbate resource scarcity issues. Water infrastructure in
Arizona is already tenuous, as human habitation in both Phoenix and
Tucson is dependent on the Central Arizona River Project, a massive
infrastructure project that diverts water from the Colorado River to
central and southern Arizona.<br>
<br>
"That's how Phoenix and Tucson and large metro areas get their
water... It doesn't have a direct impact on the heat, but obviously
in a region that is drying out and has always had water scarcity,
then every drop of water is a cause for concern — where the next
bucket is coming from, how much it costs," Ross said.<br>
<br>
Ross also noted that, because water levels in Lake Powell (located
in Utah and Arizona) and Lake Mead (located in Nevada and Arizona)
are dropping, "there are sort of crisis-type responses are being
proposed. One of which I think is called demand management, which is
basically states paying farmers not to use the water that they're
entitled to so that it can service cities instead."<br>
<br>
Ross also pointed to the problem with the materials used to
construct houses in the southwestern states. "We're not talking
about adobe traditional structures, which are very climate
appropriate for the Southwest," he said. "Builders don't build adobe
houses anymore." He described a lot of the houses that are built as
"energy pigs" which are "not designed to be climate appropriate."<br>
<br>
The Heat Island Effect, like so many other ecological issues, also
has a disproportionate impact on people from more marginalized
backgrounds.<br>
<br>
"The elevated air and structure temperatures from Urban Heat Island
Effects not only increase energy consumption, but also air pollution
and greenhouse gas emission and, therefore, have a negative effect
on urban ecosystems," Wortham-Galvin wrote to Salon. "Heat Islands
in cities disproportionately impact the most vulnerable populations,
to include: the elderly, children, and those with pre-existing
health conditions. The development of policies and practices that
ameliorate the Heat Island Effect is also, thus, an equity issue.
Certain neighborhoods within cities can often be hotter than others;
particularly those without an existing significant number of green
spaces, trees, and roof gardens. Those same neighborhoods may have a
disproportionate number of residents without access to cooling and
at greater risk."<br>
<br>
Mincey echoed this observation, writing to Salon that recent
research has found "tree canopy cover is lowest in low-income and
minority communities" and that, within 100 American cities,
"formerly redlined neighborhoods – more likely low-income and
minority communities – are today five degrees hotter in summer, on
average, than areas once favored for housing loans with a couple
western cities – Portland and Denver – seeing greater than 12
degrees hotter in summer in the parts of these cities haunted by
redlining legacies."<br>
<br>
While America's western cities are obviously going to be heavily
impacted by this, the problem is an international one.<br>
<br>
"It's not just a desert city," Declet-Barreto told Salon. "Every
single place where there is a built environment, where there are
cities and roadways and glass and pavement and buildings and
highways and cars and air conditioning and so on, are going to be
hotter than the surrounding areas where it's a little more rural or
less." As a result "we see cities not just like the ones you
mentioned, — Phoenix, Las Vegas, Tucson — but many in India, many in
the Persian Gulf, that, as climate change continues unabated, are
facing significant threats to the population."<br>
<br>
Declet-Barreto said that "extreme heat episodes" are going to
"increase in frequency and magnitude and length." Indeed, scientists
predict that by 2060, Phoenix will have 132 days — over a third of
the year — with 100 degree temperatures. Extreme heat limits the
ability of airlines to take off and causes heat deaths: 172 people
died of heat in 2017, which will undoubtedly be cooler than 2060.
One wonders if anyone will want to live there by then. <br>
<br>
MATTHEW ROZSA<br>
Matthew Rozsa is a staff writer for Salon. He holds an MA in History
from Rutgers University-Newark and is ABD in his PhD program in
History at Lehigh University. His work has appeared in Mic, Quartz
and MSNBC.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.salon.com/2021/01/31/why-phoenix-may-be-uninhabitable-by-the-end-of-this-century/">https://www.salon.com/2021/01/31/why-phoenix-may-be-uninhabitable-by-the-end-of-this-century/</a><br>
<br>
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
[Digging back into the internet news archive]<br>
<font size="+1"><b>On this day in the history of global warming -
February 2, 2007 </b></font><br>
<p>The 4th IPCC report is released.<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://youtu.be/rBHjVN0dn6A">http://youtu.be/rBHjVN0dn6A</a> <br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/conference-on-global-warming/">http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/conference-on-global-warming/</a> <br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://abcnews.go.com/International/video/global-warming-fault-2843769">http://abcnews.go.com/International/video/global-warming-fault-2843769</a>
<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/bleak-assessment-global-warming-2845826">http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/bleak-assessment-global-warming-2845826</a>
<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------/<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 mailing is text-only. It does not
carry images or attachments which may originate from remote
servers. A text-only message can 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. Messages have no tracking software.<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>