<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>April 15, 2022</b></i></font><br>
</p>
<i>[ This is a significant event in the Biden policy ] </i><br>
<b>Gina McCarthy, White House climate adviser, reportedly to step
down</b><br>
Two sources reported that she was planning to leave her job in the
coming months, being ‘frustrated by the slow pace of climate
progress’...<br>
- -<br>
McCarthy has already delayed her departure, and told one Reuters
source that she plans to leave as soon as next month.<br>
<br>
White House spokesman Vedant Patel said on Thursday: “This is not
true and there are no such plans under way and no personnel
announcements to make.”<br>
- -<br>
“Gina and her entire team continue to be laser focused on delivering
on President Biden’s clean energy agenda,” he said in an email...<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/apr/14/gina-mccarthy-departure-white-house-climate-adviser">https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/apr/14/gina-mccarthy-departure-white-house-climate-adviser</a><br>
<br>
<p><br>
</p>
<i>[ today's TV news reports weather and climate - 2 min video - I
was born in Phoenix long ago ] </i><br>
<b>"Impact Earth": Phoenix TV Team Tackles Climate</b><br>
Apr 14, 2022<br>
greenmanbucket<br>
Amber Sullins, Chief Meteorologist at ABC 15 in Phoenix talks about
the team approach her station is now taking to stories about climate
change and climate solutions.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXmJYICuHBk">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXmJYICuHBk</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
<i>[ IPCC now warns of another human impact ] </i><br>
<b>Latest IPCC Reports Underscore Threat of Climate Disinformation</b><br>
APRIL 4, 2022<br>
<p>Michael Khoo is co-chair of the climate disinformation coalition
at Friends of the Earth, and co-founder of UpShift Strategies.
Phil Newell is Associate Director of Science Defense at Climate
Nexus, a nonprofit climate and clean energy communications group.
Deb Lavoy is a technologist and co-founder of Reality Team.</p>
The latest reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC) confirm that “climate change is causing dangerous and
widespread disruption in nature and affecting the lives of billions
of people,” urging that if we phase out fossil fuels quickly, we can
stabilize the climate. The report released in February on adaptation
notes “[r]hetoric and misinformation on climate change and the
deliberate undermining of science have contributed to misperceptions
of the scientific consensus, uncertainty, disregarded risk and
urgency, and dissent.” Today’s report on mitigation describes how
“opposition from status quo interests” and “the propagation of
scientifically misleading information” are “barriers” to climate
action and have “negative implications for climate policy.” <br>
<br>
Regular exposés reveal how intentional disinformation is spread on
social media platforms, seeding falsehoods on everything from the
expansion of renewable power, to the honest assessment of Texas
power outages, to the causes of the Russian invasion of Ukraine
(yes, right wing personalities tried to blame environmental activist
Greta Thunberg). <br>
<br>
While the majority of Americans believe in climate change and want
action to address it, companies such as Facebook, Google/YouTube,
and Twitter enable the spread of disinformation to wide audiences,
preventing progress. Vested interests increasingly use social media
to flood the narrative, while the platforms profit. Disinformation
is now a guaranteed byproduct, if not a central part, of social
media companies’ business models. <br>
<br>
Climate change disinformation is not new- it has a long history
dating back to 1970s’ ad campaigns run by oil and gas companies, if
not further. To hide its agenda, the fossil fuel industry created a
web of shell companies and coalitions to fund “climate change
counter-movement organizations.” Big Oil copied Big Tobacco, hiring
the same lawyers and front groups to spread disinformation meant to
block regulation. Funding for climate denial grew from $357 million
in 2003 to $808 million in 2018. Along the way, the industry learned
to use social media to gain new audiences to advance its fringe
views. <br>
<br>
In February 2021, a Texas-focused climate disinformation campaign
aimed to deflect blame for deadly power failures during a historic
snow storm. This campaign illustrates how the disinformation
ecosystem fanned the flames, as a single social media post became an
official talking point. As massive infrastructure failures were
killing hundreds, a Twitter user named “Oilfield Rando” posted an
image of a helicopter de-icing a wind turbine, blaming renewables
for the catastrophe. The image was a lie. It was from 2014, and from
Sweden, but it quickly went viral anyway. In just four days,
networks of professional climate deniers pushed it from Twitter to
Facebook to Fox News to a talking point out of Texas Governor Greg
Abbott’s mouth. Thanks to Facebook, and despite its fact-check
promises, 99% of the false posts remained up and without so much as
a warning label. <br>
<br>
These sorts of efforts pay off. Research in the science journal
Nature confirms that climate disinformation reduces climate
literacy, increases social polarization, and can lead to a complete
rejection of accurate information. It reinforces silence and
cultivates distrust in scientists. The vast majority of this harmful
content comes from a very small, highly coordinated network of
actors. They expertly navigate the social media platforms that help
amplify their content, giving it a false sheen of credibility,
relevance, and importance. A whopping 69% of climate disinformation
traffic on Facebook comes from just 10 accounts. <br>
<br>
<b>Disinformation is not the only thing preventing climate action.</b>
The previous U.S. president still calls it a hoax and social media
companies’ ability to reach users has been oversold–which has fed
into some hype and distrust in the overall problem of
disinformation. <br>
<br>
But disinformation functions like industrial-scale advertising–on
which the fossil fuel industry spends millions a year on Facebook
alone. In this model, the ads and disinformation are not intended to
change individual decisions, but to create an environment of
perpetual uncertainty, driven by false problems and distrust in real
solutions. And it is this narrative that is amplified by social
media companies, whose algorithms reward false content, and who give
free passes to high-profile deniers.<br>
<br>
Disinformation is a complex problem, but some aspects have very
simple solutions. Social media companies can choose to stop giving
the small group of disinformers a giant, algorithmically charged
bullhorn to saturate the public with disinformation. We saw the
effectiveness of this strategy when Twitter removed Donald Trump
after he praised the insurrectionists at the U.S. Capitol on January
6th, 2021. Zignal Labs documented that his removal led to a 73% drop
in election-related disinformation. Whether it’s climate or COVID, a
few bad apples are spoiling the bunch. <br>
<br>
There are emerging methods to debunk or pre-bunk disinformation.
These are becoming more impactful and more cost-effective.
Unfortunately, they are not yet funded at a scale to compete with
the fossil fuel industry. And no inoculation strategy will ever be
as effective as preventing intentional disinformation on platforms
in the first place.<br>
<br>
Social media companies have employed the traditional corporate PR
approach of shifting responsibility to individuals for not being
educated enough to detect disinformation. “The individual humans are
the ones who choose to believe or not believe a thing,” Facebook CTO
Andrew Bosworth told Politico’s Ina Fried last year. The companies
offer new programs that promise to help factual information to
compete with the disinformation, but in the realm of climate they
are half-hearted. <br>
<br>
For instance, Facebook launched the Climate Science Information
Center in 2021 to help outcompete bad information with good, but
analysis by the Institute for Strategic Dialogue during the COP26
climate summit showed that disinformation vastly overwhelmed the
content from Facebook’s Center. If there were any evidence this
strategy works, Facebook would shout that from the rooftops.
Instead, Facebook gives vague platitudes with no real numbers on the
overall percentage of disinformation that has—or hasn’t—been
stopped. Twitter launched Birdwatch to make users responsible for
policing bad content, but it has also not been successful in that
end goal. It is worth noting, however, that Twitter’s moderated
climate “Topic” has actually spawned a reasonable climate
conversation. That’s what happens when you keep the bomb-throwers
out of the debate room.<br>
<br>
There is now an historic opportunity to protect the public from the
companies that drive disinformation. Facebook has repeatedly been
caught lying to Congress. Google/YouTube made public promises to
reduce the monetization of climate disinformation—promises that
researchers exposed as inadequate. Whistleblowers like Frances
Haugen provided incontrovertible proof within 10,000 leaked
documents that Facebook is well aware of the harms it causes. Its
executives consistently choose to ignore recommendations from their
own internal teams to reduce those harms, because implementing the
recommendations would affect growth and profit, or limit the reach
of Republicans. The public winds are shifting for big tech
companies.<br>
<br>
There are many regulatory options that could be used to rein in this
wild-west dystopia. Social media companies–like most other
industries–could disclose safety risks and injuries suffered as a
result of their products. For platforms like Facebook that have been
used to facilitate genocide in Myanmar, this is an essential and
obvious step. The U.S. Congress is considering multiple policy
options to demand transparency and accountability. The European
Parliament is on the verge of passing the Digital Services Act—which
will require tech company reporting and risk assessments—as well as
adopting climate disinformation policies. Courts in France have
already advanced a transparency lawsuit against Twitter. One sign of
this inevitability is that many social media companies are starting
to take voluntary, if inadequate, actions on climate disinformation.
<br>
<br>
Three simple policies for tech companies would start them on a real
path to accountability and reform: <br>
<br>
<b>1) Establish, disclose, and enforce policies </b>to reduce
climate change and other forms of disinformation; <br>
<br>
<b>2) Release all details</b> on the current labeling,
fact-checking, and algorithmic ranking systems; and <br>
<br>
<b>3) Disclose regular reports on the scale and prevalence</b> on
the platform and mitigation efforts taken internally. The leaked
Facebook files confirm that such data collection exists and has
detailed climate denial.<br>
<br>
From the election integrity to trans rights to climate change, we’ve
seen that disinformation has the ability to divide and harm us all.
The only path to progress is to do the reverse: unite and demand
social media companies disclose their data and be held accountable
for their role in perpetuating this existential threat.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://techpolicy.press/latest-ipcc-reports-underscore-threat-of-climate-disinformation/">https://techpolicy.press/latest-ipcc-reports-underscore-threat-of-climate-disinformation/</a><br>
<p>- -</p>
[ for instance from the Guardian last year ]<br>
<b>The forgotten oil ads that told us climate change was nothing</b><br>
Since the 1980s, fossil fuel firms have run ads touting climate
denial messages – many of which they’d now like us to forget. Here’s
our visual guide<br>
by Geoffrey Supran and Naomi Oreskes<br>
18 Nov 2021 <br>
<b>Why is meaningful action to avert the climate crisis proving so
difficult?</b> It is, at least in part, because of ads.<br>
<br>
The fossil fuel industry has perpetrated a multi-decade,
multibillion dollar disinformation, propaganda and lobbying campaign
to delay climate action by confusing the public and policymakers
about the climate crisis and its solutions. This has involved a
remarkable array of advertisements – with headlines ranging from
“Lies they tell our children” to “Oil pumps life” – seeking to
convince the public that the climate crisis is not real, not
human-made, not serious and not solvable. The campaign continues to
this day.<br>
<br>
As recently as last month, six big oil CEOs were summoned to US
Congress to answer for the industry’s history of discrediting
climate science – yet they lied under oath about it. In other words,
the fossil fuel industry is now misleading the public about its
history of misleading the public.<br>
<br>
We are experts in the history of climate disinformation, and we want
to set the record straight. So here, in black and white (and color),
is a selection of big oil’s thousands of deceptive climate ads from
1984 to 2021. This isn’t an exhaustive analysis, of which we have
published several, but a brief, illustrated history – like the
“sizzle reels” that creatives use to highlight their best work – of
the 30-plus year evolution of fossil fuel industry propaganda. This
is big oil’s PR sizzle reel.<br>
<br>
<b>Early days: learning to spin</b><br>
Humble Oil (now ExxonMobil) was not self-conscious about the
potential environmental impacts of its products in this 1962
advertisement touting “Each day Humble supplies enough energy to
melt 7 million tons of glacier!”<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/bc26f9877245599725835f964ef753296e43a155/0_0_2482_1630/master/2482.jpg?width=620&quality=45&auto=format&fit=max&dpr=2&s=4ad5fb7810956e63f0bb74ae938c4084">https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/bc26f9877245599725835f964ef753296e43a155/0_0_2482_1630/master/2482.jpg?width=620&quality=45&auto=format&fit=max&dpr=2&s=4ad5fb7810956e63f0bb74ae938c4084</a><br>
The truth behind the ad: Three years earlier, in 1959, America’s oil
bosses had been warned that burning fossil fuels could lead to
global heating “sufficient to melt the icecap and submerge New
York”.<br>
<br>
Their knowledge only grew. A 1979 internal Exxon study warned of
“dramatic environmental effects” before 2050. “By the late 1970s”, a
former Exxon scientist recently recalled, “global warming was no
longer speculative”.’<br>
<b>‘Reposition global warming as theory (not fact)’</b><br>
In 1991, Informed Citizens for the Environment, a front group of
coal and utility companies announced that “Doomsday is cancelled”
and asked, “Who told you the earth was warming … Chicken Little?”
They complained about “weak” evidence, “non-existent” proof,
inaccurate climate models and asserted that the physics was “open to
debate”.<br>
The truth behind the ads: Instead of warning the public about global
heating or taking action, fossil fuel companies stayed silent as
long as they could. In the late 1980s, however, the world woke up to
the climate crisis, marking what Exxon called a “critical event”.
The fossil fuel industry’s PR apparatus swung into action,
implementing a strategy straight out of big tobacco’s playbook: to
weaponize science against itself.<br>
<br>
A 1991 memo by Informed Citizens for the Environment made that
strategy explicit: “Reposition global warming as theory (not fact).”<br>
<b>‘Emphasize the uncertainty’</b><br>
Mobil and ExxonMobil ran one of the most comprehensive climate
denial campaigns of all time, with a foray in the 1980s, a blitz in
the 1990s and continued messaging through the late 2000s. Their
climate “advertorials” – advertisements disguised as editorials –
appeared in the op-ed page of the New York Times and other
newspapers and were part of what scholars have called “the longest,
regular (weekly) use of media to influence public and elite opinion
in contemporary America”.<br>
<b>Economic scaremongering</b><br>
“Don’t risk our economic future,” implored the Global Climate
Coalition, a front group for utility, oil, coal, mining, railroad
and car companies. This 1997 ad also targeted the Kyoto negotiations
and was part of a $13m campaign that was so successful that the
White House told GCC: President Bush “rejected Kyoto, in part, based
on input from you”...<br>
- -<br>
<b>It’s not our fault, it’s yours</b><br>
From 2004 to 2006, a $100m-plus a year BP marketing campaign
“introduced the idea of a ‘carbon footprint’ before it was a common
buzzword”, according to the PR agent in charge of the campaign. The
targets of this campaign were the “routine human activities” and
“lifestyle choices” of “individuals” and the “average American
household”. In 2019, BP ran a new “Know your carbon footprint”
campaign on social media...<br>
The truth behind the ads: Big oil’s rhetoric has evolved from
outright denial to more subtle forms of propaganda, including
shifting responsibility away from companies and on to consumers.
This mimics big tobacco’s effort to combat criticism and defend
against litigation and regulation by “casting itself as a kind of
neutral innocent, buffeted by the forces of consumer demand”...<br>
- -<br>
<b>Greenwashing: talk clean, act dirty</b><br>
“We’re partnering with major universities to develop the next
generation of biofuels,” said Chevron in 2007. This is also a top
talking point of BP, ExxonMobil and others.<br>
BP “developed an ‘all of the above’ strategy” for marketing energy
from 2006 to 2008, “before any presidential candidates spoke of the
same”, according to BP’s PR lead.<br>
<br>
Big oil continues to promote this narrative of “fossil fuel
solution-ism’, including its “all of the above” language, on social
media, in Congress and in paid-for, pretend editorials in the
Washington Post. To make this spin stick, fossil fuel companies have
been calling methane “clean” since at least the 1980s. “Natural gas
is already clean,” said API Facebook ads and billboards last year...<br>
- -<br>
<b>Distorting reality in the 2020s and beyond</b><br>
A Shell TV ad last year featured birds in the sky, fields of wind
and solar farms, the CEO of a Shell renewables subsidiary saying
she’s “made the future far cleaner and far better for our children”,
and not one reference to fossil fuels...<br>
- -<br>
Today, we’re all inundated with ads that leverage a combination of
narratives, including those illustrated above, to present fossil
fuel companies as climate saviors. It’s way past time we called
their bluff.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/18/the-forgotten-oil-ads-that-told-us-climate-change-was-nothing">https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/18/the-forgotten-oil-ads-that-told-us-climate-change-was-nothing</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<i>[ Why are we ignoring their future? ]</i><br>
<b>We’re Failing To Prepare Our Children for the Climate Fight</b><br>
Eleanor Cummins<br>
April 13, 2022<br>
The New Republic<br>
<br>
Most schoolchildren get only an hour or two of climate education per
year. It’s up to their parents to teach them optimism and action in
the face of a daunting crisis.<br>
<br>
Climate change is hurtling forward at frightening speed. And the
American K-12 system still isn’t remotely prepared to teach children
about what they’ll soon face. Today, the majority of students in
U.S. schools get between zero and two hours of instruction per year
about climate change—hardly enough time to discuss the political,
cultural, and environmental ramifications of greenhouse gas
emissions, let alone make space for the emotions elicited by such an
existential threat. In some districts, climate education is actually
disinformation, as teachers rely on materials created by the fossil
fuel industry to mislead children on the origin of the problem and
our possible futures.<br>
<br>
The obstacles to quality climate education are manifold, according
to Miseducation: How Climate Change Is Taught in America, a recent
book-length investigation by journalist Katie Worth. Surveys suggest
a majority of K-12 teachers in the United States still believe that
scientists disagree about the anthropogenic origin of climate
change, encouraging skepticism to seep into the classroom. Many
districts rely on old, outdated textbooks that tend to minimize the
crisis, if they touch on global warming at all. And teachers who
support climate education in one classroom may find their work
undermined by “skeptics” teaching the same kids later in the day.<br>
<br>
There are signs of progress. As of 2019, for example, 86 percent of
Americans agreed that climate change should be taught in school in
some form. But just having a working knowledge of the carbon cycle
would be insufficient for kids today, says Mary DeMocker, author of
The Parents’ Guide to Climate Revolution. If we only teach kids the
facts about the present crisis, “we’re burdening them with science
in a way that’s fatalistic,” she told me. To foreclose solutions and
sidestep politics is like saying, “Here, let us help you cultivate
some resilience for your dismal future.” The real solution lies
elsewhere—in radically redefining the priorities of American, and in
particular, white American, parents, teachers, and other caretakers.
Instead of preparing children for the workforce or to reach higher
standards of living than the last generation, we need to support
young people in cultivating both “resilience and resistance” for one
of the toughest challenges humanity has ever faced, DeMocker says.
In the process, the rest of us might also reap some of these
qualities for ourselves. <br>
<br>
In Lydia Millet’s 2020 novel, A Children’s Bible, a teenage narrator
named Eve decides to do the thing she dreads most and inform her
younger brother about climate change. “I have to tell you a new
story now,” she begins. “But a real one. A story of the future,
Jack.” The adults were greedy, the world is imperiled, and (so far)
it’s only getting worse—you’ve heard this one before. But for Jack
it is new and heart-breaking. “Later he wiped his eyes and squared
his thin little shoulders,” Eve tells us. “My Jack was a brave boy.”<br>
<br>
The parents in this book, as might be expected, are terrible. They
drink and avoid the catastrophe unfolding before them; when
avoidance is no longer an option, they drink more and despair. A
hurricane hits, and it’s the kids who respond swiftly and smartly,
eventually bringing (almost) everyone to relative safety. It is, in
part, a parable, a story out of space and time. But A Children’s
Bible is also a painfully familiar representation of the pressure
young people feel to save the world—and the sense that adults have
failed to join the fight.<br>
<br>
A handful of picture books have emerged in recent years to help
parents and educators teach kids about the climate crisis, from The
Fog by Kyo Maclear (a metaphor for global warming) to The Polar
Bears’ Home by Lara Bergen (a straightforward Arctic explainer).
There’s also an expanding field of nonfiction writing to help adults
process their feelings—and support the next generation of climate
leaders. “As parents, we should be aware of this and try to repair
that sense of betrayal that young people have toward older
generations,” Britt Wray, the Human and Planetary Health Fellow at
Stanford University and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical
Medicine and author of the forthcoming book Generation Dread:
Finding Purpose in a Age of Climate Crisis, told me. “That’s why the
truth is so important.”<br>
<br>
Children today grow up knowing the stakes and mourning the
injustice. Adults need to supply them, at bare minimum, with the
means to act on those feelings.<br>
<br>
The difficulty of teaching children about climate change mirrors
this divide in the literature: Kids can get their hands on the raw
materials, but if parents and educators lack frameworks for
processing their own feelings about the crisis and channeling them
into substantive action, where can their children’s knowledge and
natural concern really go? While kids will be affected by climate
change for the rest of their lives, they can’t vote or, in most
cases, drive themselves to climate rallies, DeMocker says. As the
founder of 350 Eugene, a local chapter of Bill McKibben’s
international grassroots climate justice movement, DeMocker
organized events for community members about how to address these
problems locally. She found parents were uniquely suited to help, as
they are invested in a long-term future for their kids but have the
wisdom and legal rights their children lack—they just needed
actionable advice. So DeMocker decided to keep a list, which
ultimately grew to more than 100 items, all detailed in the The
Parents’ Guide to Climate Revolution.<br>
<br>
DeMocker’s morsels are many and varied, ranging from old standbys
like planting trees to more aggressive plans for suing
polluters—inspired, in part, by the plaintiffs in the Juliana v.
United States case, six of whom are from Eugene. While kids are sure
to encounter the climate crisis from friends, in classrooms and
museums, and through popular media, and their questions deserve
honest, age-appropriate answers, DeMocker believes parents should
initially place the emphasis on fostering inner strength. “We need
to protect [children’s] imaginations and we need to protect their
hearts until they’re strong enough, when they’re teens, to really
take on this crisis on this intellectual level,” she says.<br>
<br>
As kids get older, what they know about the crisis will multiply and
deepen. In the United States, many activists have been desperate
merely to get people to “listen to the science” on climate change.
But actually understanding that science—and being able to explain it
to others and formulate plans of action based on it—would be even
better, especially for kids who will never know a life without its
effects. Even so, this most basic education must be done with
sensitivity. One of Worth’s classroom visits, described in
Miseducation, is useful here. Amid numerous stories of children
failed by their schools, Worth describes how Kristen Del Real, a
sixth-grade science teacher in Chico, California, has designed a
resilience-minded course for her students. First, the 11- and
12-year-olds will learn about geological time. Then they observe how
legume sprouts turn nitrogen into nutrients. Units on atmosphere,
solar radiation, the greenhouse gas effect, and the weather system
follow. “Once all those pieces are in place,” Del Real said, “when
we get to global warming, the kids will just get it.”<br>
<br>
Crucially, Del Real’s lessons don’t stop there. The final month of
the school year in Del Real’s class is spent on “solutions
projects,” where small groups of students apply their knowledge to
develop proposals that will help solve the crisis—the most important
step of all. “Usually, by the time they get to the solutions
project, even the doubters understand the implications of a changing
atmosphere,” Worth writes, “and [they] are eager to dream up
answers.” The goal is to keep kids from getting crushed by the
weight of the world and to work to ensure they’re actually up to the
task of improving it. <br>
<br>
I first learned about climate change in middle school, when our
science teacher played a newly released documentary, An Inconvenient
Truth. But I didn’t feel the climate crisis for another decade, when
I began researching a project on changing rain patterns in the
northeastern U.S. It’s not an overstatement to say that seeing the
historic data change—and watching the projections extend out over
the twenty-first century—eventually changed the course of my life
and career. People younger than me don’t have the privilege of such
a long learning curve; with apocalypse around every corner, a
personal engagement with the science, let alone the history or
politics of climate change, now follows the feelings of fear and
grief prompted by the crisis. Children today grow up knowing the
stakes and mourning the injustice. Adults need to supply them, at
bare minimum, with the means to act on those feelings.<br>
<br>
As a childless 25-year-old, I look back on my own climate education
and feel as though I’m straddling two climate generations: those
older than me, for whom disastrous change has (incorrectly) felt
like a foregone conclusion, and the kids younger than me, for whom
any change is (rightly) treated as meaningful progress. On September
20, 2019, for example, at the climate strike in New York City, I
watched Jaden Smith and Willow perform and various speakers,
including Greta Thunberg, take the stage. At some point, someone—I
don’t remember who—spoke about how we, the crowd, would keep
fighting no matter what, because 1.5 Celsius was better than two,
but two was better than 2.5, and 2.5 was better than three. It was
an obvious scientific fact, and yet as someone raised to think of
even two degrees of warming as almost unthinkably catastrophic, I’d
never felt it. But the teenagers around me, in their bucket hats and
tank tops, nodded knowingly—they’d believed it all along. They’d
come of age knowing the world is probably going to overshoot 1.5
degrees of warming—maybe even two. And they have every reason to
fight for every fraction of a degree.<br>
<br>
What black-and-white, all-or-nothing thinking are you employing?
Where is fatalism about the future holding you back?<br>
<br>
To me, this moment revealed an important truth about what climate
education really requires. Supporting kids as they face an
endangered world requires adults to relocate their own optimism and
reengage in the fight. “I’ve seen a lot of these articles on ‘how to
help your kid with eco-anxiety,’ as if the parent isn’t also in the
world,” Wray tells me. But children and their caretakers feed off
each other’s emotions, and children rely on their caretakers to help
them process complex feelings. When it comes to parenting, teaching,
or otherwise supporting a child, “a key part of doing this well is
doing your own inner work and investigation,” Wray says. What
black-and-white, all-or-nothing thinking are you employing? Where is
fatalism about the future holding you back? What more can you be
doing to build community?<br>
<br>
These questions may, at times, be painful to ask. But Wray is
confident they can help everyone work toward a better future.
Parenting “with purpose and really committing to the joy of
it—rather than fearing what may come—has an effect on your
orientation toward what life is made of,” Wray tells me. If it takes
a village to raise a child, then holistic, heartfelt climate
education can and should change the village itself.<br>
<br>
[Eleanor Cummins is a freelance science journalist based in New
York. Eleanor Cummins @elliepses.]<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://portside.org/2022-04-14/were-failing-prepare-our-children-climate-fight">https://portside.org/2022-04-14/were-failing-prepare-our-children-climate-fight</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<i>{ this superb video has been taken down, it was quite disruptive
as it clearly explained how anyone with access to sunlight could
have full off-grid electric power. This video may return -- s</i><i>how
his other videos to your electrician ] </i><br>
<b>$1,585 MPP LV6548 Update and New Supplier: Is it a Clone?</b><br>
DIY Solar Power with Will Prowse<br>
Watts24/7 6548:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://watts247.com/product/lv6548-6-5kw-120v-solar-inverter-4kw-250v-mppt-bms-ul1741-built-in-wifi/">https://watts247.com/product/lv6548-6-5kw-120v-solar-inverter-4kw-250v-mppt-bms-ul1741-built-in-wifi/</a><br>
Other all-in-one systems:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.mobile-solarpower.com/all-in-one-122448v-packages.html">https://www.mobile-solarpower.com/all-in-one-122448v-packages.html</a><br>
0:00 LV6548 Discussion<br>
5:51 Clone Review<br>
<br>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<br>
Does off-grid solar confuse you? Check out my DIY friendly website
for solar system blueprints and packages, and much more!
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.mobile-solarpower.com/">http://www.mobile-solarpower.com/</a><br>
<br>
Join our DIY solar community! #1 largest solar forum on the internet
for beginners and professionals alike: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.diysolarforum.com">https://www.diysolarforum.com</a><br>
<br>
Check out my best-selling, beginner-friendly 12V off-grid solar book
(affiliate link):<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://amzn.to/2Aj4dX4">http://amzn.to/2Aj4dX4</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykwnzYESPwQ">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykwnzYESPwQ</a> <i> [keep checking this
link or try his channel ]</i><br>
<br>
<p><br>
</p>
<i>[The news archive - looking back]</i><br>
<font size="5"><b>April 15, 2013</b></font><br>
<br>
InsideClimate News wins the Pulitzer Prize for national reporting.<br>
<blockquote>ICN is the third web-based news organization to win
national reporting honors, and the smallest among a trio that
includes ProPublica and Huffington Post.<br>
<br>
By David Sassoon<br>
April 15, 2013<br>
nsideClimate News reporters Elizabeth McGowan, Lisa Song and David
Hasemyer are the winners of this year’s Pulitzer Prize for
national reporting.<br>
<br>
The trio took top honors in the category for their work on “The
Dilbit Disaster: Inside the Biggest Oil Spill You’ve Never Heard
Of,” a project that began with a seven-month investigation into
the million-gallon spill of Canadian tar sands oil into the
Kalamazoo River in 2010. It broadened into an examination of
national pipeline safety issues, and how unprepared the nation is
for the impending flood of imports of a more corrosive and more
dangerous form of oil.<br>
<br>
The Pulitzer committee commended the reporters for their “rigorous
reports on flawed regulation of the nation’s oil pipelines,
focusing on potential ecological dangers posed by diluted bitumen
(or “dilbit”), a controversial form of oil.”<br>
The recent ExxonMobil pipeline spill in Arkansas, which also
involved heavy Canadian crude oil, underscores the continuing
relevance of this ongoing body of work, as the White House
struggles with reaching a decision on the controversial Keystone
XL pipeline.<br>
<br>
“It is enormously gratifying to have our work recognized with such
a high honor, and I’m very proud of our entire team,” said David
Sassoon, founder and publisher of InsideClimate News. “It’s a
watershed moment for our non-profit news organization, a good day
for environmental journalism, and a hopeful signal for the future
of our profession.”<br>
<br>
InsideClimate News’ executive editor Susan White, who conceived
and edited the project, said it succeeded because of the combined
talents of the three reporters.<br>
<br>
“Elizabeth, Lisa and Dave believed deeply in these stories and
were determined to do everything they could to make them clear and
accessible to our readers,” White said. “Elizabeth’s ability to
persuade people to talk, Lisa’s science background and Dave’s
doggedness made it all work.”<br>
<br>
“The need to tell this story trumped all else,” said Stacy
Feldman, co-founder and managing editor. “So we figured out how to
successfully balance the daily demands of an online news
organization with a deep dive and commitment of resources to this
long-term project.”..<br>
</blockquote>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://insideclimatenews.org/news/20130415/insideclimate-news-team-wins-pulitzer-prize-national-reporting">http://insideclimatenews.org/news/20130415/insideclimate-news-team-wins-pulitzer-prize-national-reporting</a><br>
<br>
<p>======================================= <br>
<b class="moz-txt-star"><span class="moz-txt-tag">*</span>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>
<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>
<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>
</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>