<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><font size="+2"><i><b>March 16, 2022</b></i></font><br>
</p>
<i>[ in desperation, we ask governments to step up ]</i><br>
<b>House Democrats call on Biden to restart climate negotiations in
stalled spending plan</b><br>
MAR 15 2022<br>
-- More than 80 House Democrats this week called on President Joe
Biden to restart negotiations over his delayed social spending bill
and push forward critical climate change funding.<br>
-- The letter comes several months after the House passed more than
$500 billion in climate change investments as part of the
president’s Build Back Better Act.<br>
-- Since then, the legislation has stalled in the Senate and talks
between the White House and some key senators have essentially
stopped.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/15/democrats-urge-biden-to-restart-climate-negotiations-in-stalled-plan.html">https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/15/democrats-urge-biden-to-restart-climate-negotiations-in-stalled-plan.html</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<i>[ affordable housing is sustainable - only if it is not
flammable. ]</i><br>
<b>People Deserve to Know Their Houses Are Going to Burn</b><br>
The old way of insuring against fires isn’t working anymore.<br>
By Emma Marris<br>
Since 2016, more than 50,000 structures in California have been
destroyed by wildfire. During fire season in the West, when the sky
is dim with smoke and the sun’s an eerie red, you might find
yourself breathing in tiny carbonized particles of what used to be
someone’s front-porch swing.<br>
<br>
These fires are only going to get worse as the climate warms. Unless
we want to keep risking lives and inhaling incinerated dreams,
something has to change...<br>
- - <br>
The California Department of Insurance last month released new
regulations that require insurance companies to reward homeowners
who take steps to protect their home from wildfire, such as clearing
brush and trees from the immediate vicinity of their home or putting
on a fire-resistant roof. The policy is being widely praised. But it
raises a broader question: As climate risks to our property, our
livelihoods, and our lives mount, to what extent should we cushion
the blow of these dangers, and is there a limit to how much, or how
long, we pay? Is there a point where protecting people from risk
begets more risk?<br>
<br>
California makes a good case study because it leads the nation in
both annual number and extent of wildfires. Climate change—no
surprise—is making things much worse. Eighteen of the 20 largest
fires in California history have happened since the turn of the
millennium—12 of them since 2016.<br>
<br>
Mark Bove, a meteorologist and the senior vice president of
natural-catastrophe solutions for Munich Reinsurance America, told
me that the California-wildfire situation was rocking the insurance
industry. “We are trying to figure out this new landscape along with
everybody else,” he said. “All the premium earned over three decades
of writing business was gone in the wine-country and Camp fires.”
One estimate, from the actuarial firm Milliman, penciled out that
two years of fires undid 26 years of profits for the state’s
insurers. (Insurers themselves, though, were insulated in part from
these losses by their own reinsurance.)<br>
<br>
Insurance companies are prohibited by state law from using models of
future conditions to set their rates, but with the fires of the past
five or so years, even backwards-looking risk calculations are
beginning to prompt insurers to raise rates or refuse to renew
policies. Some areas are becoming so risky that insurance companies
simply won’t sell policies there.<br>
The California Department of Insurance last month released new
regulations that require insurance companies to reward homeowners
who take steps to protect their home from wildfire, such as clearing
brush and trees from the immediate vicinity of their home or putting
on a fire-resistant roof. The policy is being widely praised. But it
raises a broader question: As climate risks to our property, our
livelihoods, and our lives mount, to what extent should we cushion
the blow of these dangers, and is there a limit to how much, or how
long, we pay? Is there a point where protecting people from risk
begets more risk?<br>
<br>
California makes a good case study because it leads the nation in
both annual number and extent of wildfires. Climate change—no
surprise—is making things much worse. Eighteen of the 20 largest
fires in California history have happened since the turn of the
millennium—12 of them since 2016.<br>
<br>
Mark Bove, a meteorologist and the senior vice president of
natural-catastrophe solutions for Munich Reinsurance America, told
me that the California-wildfire situation was rocking the insurance
industry. “We are trying to figure out this new landscape along with
everybody else,” he said. “All the premium earned over three decades
of writing business was gone in the wine-country and Camp fires.”
One estimate, from the actuarial firm Milliman, penciled out that
two years of fires undid 26 years of profits for the state’s
insurers. (Insurers themselves, though, were insulated in part from
these losses by their own reinsurance.)<br>
<br>
Insurance companies are prohibited by state law from using models of
future conditions to set their rates, but with the fires of the past
five or so years, even backwards-looking risk calculations are
beginning to prompt insurers to raise rates or refuse to renew
policies. Some areas are becoming so risky that insurance companies
simply won’t sell policies there.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2022/03/wildfire-insurance-california-fair-plan/627065/">https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2022/03/wildfire-insurance-california-fair-plan/627065/</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<i>[ Now necessary to watch ice melt ] </i><br>
<b>Sea ice that slowed the flow of Antarctic glaciers abruptly
shatters in three days</b><br>
by Lily Roberts, Earth Institute at Columbia University<br>
MARCH 14, 2022
<p>In just three days in late January, a mass of ice the size of
Philadelphia fragmented from the Larsen-B embayment on the
Antarctic Peninsula and floated away, after persisting there for
more than a decade. NASA satellites captured the break-up between
January 19 and 21, and with it saw calving of icebergs from Crane
Glacier and its neighbors as the sea ice no longer buttressed
their fronts. Now more vulnerable to melting and acceleration into
the ocean, the glaciers that line the Antarctic Peninsula could
add directly to sea level...<br>
- -<br>
The Larsen Ice Shelf is situated along the northeast part of the
Antarctic Peninsula, in the Weddell Sea. It is divided into four
regions that occupy distinct embayments along the coastline,
termed Larsen A, B, C and D running north to south, each of which
has undergone its own changes in the last few decades. The great
mass of the ice shelf holds back the flow of many glaciers from
the steep mountains towards the sea, where they contribute to sea
level rise. Larsen-A was the first to disintegrate in 1995,
followed by the abrupt partial collapse of Larsen-B in 2002.
Larsen-C was the fourth largest Antarctic ice shelf as of July
2017, when a giant iceberg, named A68, calved from it, drawing
worldwide attention to the region. Being furthest south, and hence
least subject to warming, the only portion to be considered
relatively stable is Larsen-D.<br>
<br>
The loss of 3,250 square kilometers of ice from the Larsen B ice
shelf in 2002 has been blamed on warmer ocean waters that melted
it from below, and on the presence of meltwater on its surface,
which also accelerated the loss of ice. With only a remnant
portion left behind following the collapse, this section was much
less stable and vulnerable to further disintegration. It grew
thinner, which allowed glaciers on the landward side to flow
faster. Sea ice formed in the newly opened area each winter, but
it was not until 2011 that the sea ice remained year round, and
did not melt the following spring. Between 2011 and 2022, the
glaciers were somewhat stabilized because the remnant ice-shelf
and sea ice that was permanent and attached, fast to the land,
blocking their path into the ocean. But this large expanse
shattered within three days in January, captured by NASA's Terra
and Aqua satellites.<br>
<br>
Stef Lhermitte, a professor at TU Delft, who specializes in
geoscience and remote sensing, explained to GlacierHub that
"[it's] difficult to tell what actually caused the disintegration
as the sea ice was already showing cracks prior to the breakup."
Others have suggested warmer summer temperatures and foehn winds
that carried warm and wet air to the region are partly
responsible. The breakup of annual sea ice also occurred earlier
than usual this year, which would have also helped destabilize the
ice. Nonetheless, "such rapid breakups are often typical for fast
ice, as fast ice is often a frozen collection of loose sea ice
segments. Once this breaks, it quickly disintegrates," Lhermitte
added.<br>
<br>
The recent break-up of ice in the Larsen-B embayment is important
because the large glaciers that were buttressed by the ice are now
exposed to the sea. Unlike sea ice and melt from an ice shelf,
glaciers add directly to sea level. Although sea ice frozen to
land is not as effective as holding back the flow of glaciers than
the original ice shelf that was once present in the Larsen-B
embayment, it has played a role in minimizing contributions to sea
level rise from the Antarctic Peninsula over the last decade.<br>
<br>
At the same time as scientists watched the breakup at Larsen-B, a
new study was published that details the life cycle of the huge
iceberg that calved from Larsen-C in 2017, A68. It was the sixth
largest iceberg ever documented by satellite observations,
comparable to the size of Delaware when it first broke from the
ice shelf. A68 ceased to exist after three-and-a-half years, when
it underwent rapid disintegration near the South Georgia Islands
east of the southern tip of South America in January 2021.<br>
<br>
The path of the A68 iceberg between July 2017 and March 2021. As
it drifted in the vicinity of the South Georgia islands, it is
estimated to have dumped 152 billion tonnes of fresh water and
nutrients into the surrounding ocean. (As seen in Figure 1).
Credit: Laura Gerrish
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://scx1.b-cdn.net/csz/news/800a/2022/sea-ice-that-slowed-th-2.jpg">https://scx1.b-cdn.net/csz/news/800a/2022/sea-ice-that-slowed-th-2.jpg</a><br>
</p>
<p>Study lead author, Anne Braakmann-Folgmann, who has researched
A68, explains that concerns were raised when it calved because "it
reduced the remaining ice shelf area by a significant amount [and]
Larsen-A and -B had already disintegrated." Iceberg calving is
known to influence the stability of the parent ice shelf that it
leaves behind, but since 2017, what is left of Larsen-C has
remained stable.<br>
<br>
With warming temperatures and changing climatic patterns, notable
events along the Larsen ice shelf are predicted to occur more
frequently. Scientists are able to track each section of the
Larsen Ice Shelf closely, documenting ice shelf collapse, growth
of sea ice and the long survival of giant icebergs which threaten
distant areas. As warming continues, questions prevail over how
long the Larsen-D portion will remain stable. Its location closer
to the South Pole has protected it from the impacts of climate
change—so far. Reducing emissions is not only important for ice on
the Antarctic Peninsula, but for the larger East and West
Antarctic ice sheets, too.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://phys.org/news/2022-03-sea-ice-antarctic-glaciers-abruptly.html">https://phys.org/news/2022-03-sea-ice-antarctic-glaciers-abruptly.html</a><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
<i>[ Dave Roberts gets to drive a nice electric car ] </i><br>
<i> </i><b>The lovely Ford Mustang Mach-E and the danger of
electric cars</b><br>
So. Much. Power.<br>
<br>
David Roberts - March 15, 2022<br>
A representative from Ford ... offered to loan me a Ford Mustang
Mach-E electric vehicle for a week. I've been driving it for a few
days and I thought I would report my early impressions, along with
some larger reservations.<br>
<b>Holy s*** EVs are fun to drive</b><br>
I should note up top that I’m not a car guy. I don’t know much about
them, don’t much like them, and don’t much like driving them. I
never learned to drive a stick shift or change the oil. I don’t
drool over muscle cars or know what “hemi” means. Truth be told, I
kind of hate car culture.<br>
<br>
I should also note that I have only ever driven two EVs in my life.
The first was the Kia EV6, which I test-drove last week. The second
is this Ford. I can say very little about the fine differences in EV
driving experience.<br>
<br>
In short, I am the least qualified car reviewer on the planet...<br>
- -<br>
The ride is smooth and quiet, the stereo system kicks ass, and that
heated steering wheel … I mean, I’ve found nothing to complain
about. And I’m pretty good at complaining. Car & Driver named
the Ford Mach-E its EV of the year in 2021 and far be it from me to
disagree.<br>
<br>
<b>It’s not clear Americans can handle this kind of power... </b><br>
- -<br>
EVs are such an enormous leap forward in environmental terms that it
feels somewhat perverse to question them, but nonetheless, despite
all the hype, despite all the fun, it's worth remembering that the
top priority — not just for climate hawks but for humanists of all
sorts — should be reducing the need for, and number of, cars.<br>
<br>
The top priority should be making land use and planning choices that
encourage walkable communities, with amenities mixed in, so people
can get out of cars and get onto their feet or bicycles.<br>
<br>
EVs are fun to drive. But no kind of driving is better than walking
in the fresh air, getting exercise and mixing with your neighbors. I
hope EVs don't pull our attention away from that fact.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.volts.wtf/p/the-lovely-ford-mustang-mach-e-and?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjoxNjgzNTA5LCJwb3N0X2lkIjo0OTk4ODk0NywiXyI6IjBWZ2lzIiwiaWF0IjoxNjQ3MzA4Nzk0LCJleHAiOjE2NDczMTIzOTQsImlzcyI6InB1Yi0xOTMwMjQiLCJzdWIiOiJwb3N0LXJlYWN0aW9uIn0.6MQnP03CSQBqg6TLCu5D1LLoEEI4Fl-BHV-064ZxieM&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email&s=r#play">https://www.volts.wtf/p/the-lovely-ford-mustang-mach-e-and?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjoxNjgzNTA5LCJwb3N0X2lkIjo0OTk4ODk0NywiXyI6IjBWZ2lzIiwiaWF0IjoxNjQ3MzA4Nzk0LCJleHAiOjE2NDczMTIzOTQsImlzcyI6InB1Yi0xOTMwMjQiLCJzdWIiOiJwb3N0LXJlYWN0aW9uIn0.6MQnP03CSQBqg6TLCu5D1LLoEEI4Fl-BHV-064ZxieM&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email&s=r#play</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
<i>[ Don't miss the great counter-misinformation video on flopping ]</i><br>
<b>U.S. Oil & Gas Companies Trying To Profit From War In Ukraine
| Climate Town</b><br>
Mar 9, 2022<br>
ClimateTown <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.youtube.com/c/climatetown">https://www.youtube.com/c/climatetown</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJOuyckvDGY">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJOuyckvDGY</a> <br>
<p><i> [ It may be wise to follow global warming like a
global sports event of adaptation ]</i><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<i>[ See the movie - then action ]</i><br>
<b>Rebellion review – thoughtful documentary telling the real story
behind Extinction Rebellion</b><br>
How an unlikely bunch of grassroots activists changed the face of
climate-change protest in Britain forever<br>
Cath Clarke -- 15 Mar 2022<br>
This balanced, thoughtful documentary tells the story of Extinction
Rebellion from the inside. It’s directed by first-timers Maia
Kenworthy and Elena Sánchez Bellot, who capture the
anything-is-possible euphoria of the first wave of protests in April
2019 – activists feeling on the right side of history, no longer
powerless and alone with their anxieties about climate change.<br>
<br>
One of the activists is Farhana Yamin, an environmental lawyer who
superglued herself to Shell’s headquarters in London. A seriously
impressive no-nonsense woman, she has spent more than three decades
trying to make a difference from the inside, attending nearly every
major climate summit since 1991. Frustrated by the blah blah blah
and inaction (and the lobbying funded by the fossil fuel industry),
she joins the protesters. Her husband beams with pride as the police
arrive. Her son taps into his phone: “Mum is being arrested outside
Shell” (presumably on the family’s WhatsApp group).<br>
<br>
The film-makers chronicle the inner tensions at XR with fairness and
sensitivity – this is a documentary that you feel you can trust. One
of XR’s co-founders Roger Hallam, an organic farmer, becomes a
splintering figure. His laser focus and stubbornness, so vital in
starting a movement from scratch, begins to look self-righteous and
blinkered. When XR members oppose flying drones close to Heathrow,
he says it’s his job to be unpopular. It’s painful watching footage
of angry rush-hour commuters confronting XR protesters glued to a
train in east London. Social media reactions flash up on screen:
“Middle class telling working class what to do.”<br>
<br>
Hallam falls out with his daughter Savannah, who, like other young
protesters, seems to feel frozen out of decision-making at XR.
Activists of colour and others feel passionately about putting
climate justice at the centre of the transition to renewable energy.
Children as young as five are mining cobalt for solar panels and
electric cars, says one woman. “I don’t want the same world but
eco.”<br>
<br>
This is a film that gets a lot done in less than 90 minutes – it
could easily have run to double that length. There’s only a bit here
on the police crackdown on XR, which does lead to a wonderfully
English moment in which an officer stops a woman who looks to be in
her 60s. He suspects that she might be harbouring items that could
be used in criminal damage. She opens her handbag: “Gingerbread, a
waterproof and a flask of tea?”<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.theguardian.com/film/2022/mar/15/rebellion-review-thoughtful-documentary-telling-the-real-story-behind-extinction-rebellion">https://www.theguardian.com/film/2022/mar/15/rebellion-review-thoughtful-documentary-telling-the-real-story-behind-extinction-rebellion</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<i>[ Methane risk ]</i><br>
<b>‘Imminent’ tipping point threatening Europe’s permafrost
peatlands</b><br>
14 March 2022 <br>
Large swathes of northern Europe and western Siberia may become
“climatically unsuitable” for carbon-rich permafrost peatlands
within a few decades, even under moderate warming scenarios, a new
study warns.<br>
<br>
These carbon-rich landscapes span more than 1.4m square kilometres
(km2) and contain around 40bn tonnes of carbon – about twice what is
stored in Europe’s forests. <br>
<br>
The study finds that under a moderate warming scenario, around 75%
of this area could be too warm or too wet to maintain permafrost by
the 2060s. However, the researchers stress, how much carbon is
released – and over what timescales – is very much an open
question...<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/imminent-tipping-point-threatening-europes-permafrost-peatlands">https://www.carbonbrief.org/imminent-tipping-point-threatening-europes-permafrost-peatlands</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
<i>[The news archive - looking back]</i><br>
<font size="5"><b>March 16, 2011</b></font><br>
CBS News reports on the aggressive anti-science attitudes of the
112th Congress.<br>
All 31 Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Committee
declined on Tuesday to vote in favor of a series of amendments
acknowledging the scientific consensus around climate change.<br>
<blockquote><b>House Republicans reject climate change science</b><br>
BY LUCY MADISON<br>
MARCH 16, 2011 - CBS NEWS<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>The three amendments were attached to a bill aiming to
curb the Environmental Protection Agency's power to regulate
greenhouse gasses. They posited that "Congress accepts the
scientific finding ... that 'warming of the climate system is
unequivocal'"; that the scientific evidence regarding climate
change "is compelling"; and that "human-caused climate change is a
threat to public health and welfare."<br>
<br>
The committee passed the measure, but voted down the amendments,
with 30 of the 31 Republicans voting against them and one - Marsha
Blackburn, of Tennessee - declining to vote either way. Democrats
unanimously voted in favor of the amendments.<br>
<br>
Republicans, who have strongly opposed Obama administration
efforts to regulate greenhouse gasses, have been pushing to strip
the EPA of its regulatory power. The party blocked Democratic
efforts last year to pass climate change legislation.<br>
<br>
Rep. Henry Waxman (Calif.), the committee's ranking Democrat who
offered one of the three amendments, said they should not even be
necessary because the "finding is so obviously correct."<br>
<br>
Rep. Joe Barton (R-Tex.), however, contended that the science of
the issue was "not settled."<br>
<br>
"My good friend from California tries to make it clear that the
science is settled. I would say it's not settled," Barton said of
Waxman's amendment, according to the Hill.<br>
<br>
The global scientific community is largely unified in the belief
that the climate is warming as a result of human actions, among
them the release of greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere.<br>
<br>
Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) said Republicans' rejection of
Waxman's amendment showed "what it means to be on the wrong side
of history and the wrong side of science."<br>
<br>
Daniel Lashof, the Director of the Climate Center at the National
Resources Defense Council (NRDC), told Hotsheet the GOP refusal to
acknowledge climate science reflected Republicans "substituting
ideology for science" in the face of political interests.<br>
<br>
"They started with a conclusion - which is they don't want to
limit carbon pollution - and then worked backwards and put
themselves in a position where they had to deny science," he said,
adding that he thought the tendency to "ignore the facts and
substitute politics" was "disturbing."<br>
<br>
Politico reported in January that nearly all of the leading GOP
presidential contenders have at some point expressed concerns
about the impact of climate change - including Tim Pawlenty, Mitt
Romney, and Mike Huckabee. (Huckabee is even purported to have at
one time supported cap-and-trade legislation - a charge he now
vehemently denies.)<br>
<br>
Senate Democrats are also scrambling to block efforts in their
chamber to keep the EPA from having regulatory power over
greenhouse gases .<br>
<br>
In a statement on Tuesday night, a White House spokesperson
slammed the Senate GOP's efforts, arguing that an amendment from
Senate Republicans "rolls back the Clean Air Act and harms
Americans' health by taking away our ability to decrease air
pollution."<br>
<br>
"Instead of holding big polluters accountable, this amendment
overrules public health experts and scientists," the statement
continued, according to the Hill. "Finally, at a time when
America's families are struggling with the cost of gasoline, the
amendment would undercut fuel efficiency standards that will save
Americans money at the pump while also decreasing our reliance on
foreign oil."<br>
</blockquote>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.cbsnews.com/news/house-republicans-reject-climate-change-science/">http://www.cbsnews.com/news/house-republicans-reject-climate-change-science/</a><br>
<p>- -<br>
</p>
<p><b class="moz-txt-star">More daily summaries<span
class="moz-txt-tag"></span></b> <br>
--------------------------------------- <br>
Climate Nexus <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://climatenexus.org/hot-news/*">https://climatenexus.org/hot-news/</a>
<br>
Delivered straight to your inbox every morning, Hot News
summarizes the most important climate and energy news of the day,
delivering an unmatched aggregation of timely, relevant reporting.
It also provides original reporting and commentary on climate
denial and pro-polluter activity that would otherwise remain
largely unexposed. 5 weekday <br>
<br>
================================= <br>
<b class="moz-txt-star"><span class="moz-txt-tag"></span>Carbon
Brief Daily <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/newsletter-sign-up">https://www.carbonbrief.org/newsletter-sign-up</a><span
class="moz-txt-tag"></span></b> <br>
Every weekday morning, in time for your morning coffee, Carbon
Brief sends out a free email known as the “Daily Briefing” to
thousands of subscribers around the world. The email is a digest
of the past 24 hours of media coverage related to climate change
and energy, as well as our pick of the key studies published in
the peer-reviewed journals. <br>
more at <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.getrevue.co/publisher/carbon-brief">https://www.getrevue.co/publisher/carbon-brief</a>
<br>
<br>
================================== <br>
*The Daily Climate Subscribe <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://ehsciences.activehosted.com/f/61*">https://ehsciences.activehosted.com/f/61*</a>
<br>
Get The Daily Climate in your inbox - FREE! Top news on climate
impacts, solutions, politics, drivers. Delivered week days. Better
than coffee. <br>
Other newsletters too <br>
more at <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.dailyclimate.org/originals/">https://www.dailyclimate.org/originals/</a>
<br>
<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>
<b class="moz-txt-star"><span class="moz-txt-tag"></span><br>
</b></p>
<p>/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------/</p>
<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"
moz-do-not-send="true"><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"
moz-do-not-send="true">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"
moz-do-not-send="true"><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. This is a hobby production curated by Richard
Pauli<br>
By regulation, the .VOTE top-level domain cannot be used for
commercial purposes. Messages have no tracking software.<br>
To subscribe, email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated
moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:contact@theclimate.vote"
moz-do-not-send="true">contact@theclimate.vote</a> <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:contact@theclimate.vote" moz-do-not-send="true"><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"
moz-do-not-send="true">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"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://TheClimate.Vote</a> <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://TheClimate.Vote/"
moz-do-not-send="true"><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>