<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<font size="+2"><i><b>October 9, 2022</b></i></font><br>
<br>
<i>[ a pleasant view - flying the coast - see the erosion - 15 min
video - ]</i><br>
<b>Watch: Pacifica Coastal Erosion Oct 1st 2022</b><br>
77,487 views Oct 1, 2022 #FlyinCameras #Pacifica #CoastalErosion<br>
Pacifica Coastal Erosion 10.1.22<br>
In parts of the Bay Area, officials have already retreated from some
parts of the coast, removing homes from cliffs that have eroded and
areas that have flooded. San Francisco is taking steps to move the
Great Highway away from Ocean Beach because erosion is eating away
at the earth beneath it. Houses and apartments in Pacifica, south of
the city, were declared uninhabitable as cliffs that supported them
gave way to erosion.<i><br>
</i><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlYzRoClIU0">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlYzRoClIU0</a><i><br>
</i>
<p><i><br>
</i></p>
<p><i><br>
</i></p>
<i>[ Greta the Wise -- clips from her new book -- text from the
Guardian ] </i><br>
<b>Greta Thunberg on the climate delusion: ‘We’ve been greenwashed
out of our senses. It’s time to stand our ground’</b><br>
A sand timer with most of the sand, which is coloured to look like
Earth from space, in the bottom<br>
Governments may say they’re doing all they can to halt the climate
crisis. Don’t fall for it – then we might still have time to turn
things around<br>
<br>
Greta Thunberg <br>
Sat 8 Oct 2022<br>
<br>
Maybe it is the name that is the problem. Climate change. It doesn’t
sound that bad. The word “change” resonates quite pleasantly in our
restless world. No matter how fortunate we are, there is always room
for the appealing possibility of improvement. Then there is the
“climate” part. Again, it does not sound so bad. If you live in many
of the high-emitting nations of the global north, the idea of a
“changing climate” could well be interpreted as the very opposite of
scary and dangerous. A changing world. A warming planet. What’s not
to like?<br>
<br>
Perhaps that is partly why so many people still think of climate
change as a slow, linear and even rather harmless process. But the
climate is not just changing. It is destabilising. It is breaking
down. The delicately balanced natural patterns and cycles that are a
vital part of the systems that sustain life on Earth are being
disrupted, and the consequences could be catastrophic. Because there
are negative tipping points, points of no return. And we do not know
exactly when we might cross them. What we do know, however, is that
they are getting awfully close, even the really big ones.
Transformation often starts slowly, but then it begins to
accelerate.<br>
<br>
The German oceanographer and climatologist Stefan Rahmstorf writes:
“We have enough ice on Earth to raise sea levels by 65 metres –
about the height of a 20-storey building – and, at the end of the
last ice age, sea levels rose by 120 metres as a result of about 5C
of warming.” Taken together, these figures give us a perspective on
the powers we are dealing with. Sea-level rise will not remain a
question of centimetres for very long.<br>
<br>
The Greenland ice sheet is melting, as are the “doomsday glaciers”
of west Antarctica. Recent reports have stated that the tipping
points for these two events have already been passed. Other reports
say they are imminent. That means we might already have inflicted so
much built-in warming that the melting process can no longer be
stopped, or that we are very close to that point. Either way, we
must do everything in our power to stop the process because, once
that invisible line has been crossed, there might be no going back.
We can slow it down, but once the snowball has been set in motion it
will just keep going.<br>
<br>
“This is the new normal” is a phrase we often hear when the rapid
changes in our daily weather patterns – wildfires, hurricanes,
heatwaves, floods, storms, droughts and so on – are being discussed.
These weather events aren’t just increasing in frequency, they are
becoming more and more extreme. The weather seems to be on steroids,
and natural disasters increasingly appear less and less natural. But
this is not the “new normal”. What we are seeing now is only the
very beginning of a changing climate, caused by human emissions of
greenhouse gases. Until now, Earth’s natural systems have been
acting as a shock absorber, smoothing out the dramatic
transformations that are taking place. But the planetary resilience
that has been so vital to us will not last for ever, and the
evidence seems to suggest more and more clearly that we are entering
a new era of more dramatic change.<br>
<br>
Climate change has become a crisis sooner than expected. So many of
the researchers I’ve spoken to have said that they were shocked to
witness how quickly it is escalating. But since science is very
cautious when it comes to making predictions, maybe this should not
come as a big surprise. One result of this, however, is that very
few people actually knew how to react when the signs started
becoming obvious in recent years. And fewer still had planned how to
communicate what is happening. It seems like the vast majority of
people were preparing for a different, less urgent scenario. A
crisis that would take place many decades into the future. And yet
here we are. The climate and ecological crisis is not happening in
some faraway future. It’s happening right here and right now.<br>
<br>
f everyone lived like we do in Sweden, we would need the resources
of 4.2 planet Earths to sustain us. And the climate targets set in
the Paris agreement would be but a very distant memory – a threshold
that we would have crossed many, many years ago. The fact that 3
billion people use less energy, on an annual per capita basis, than
a standard American refrigerator gives you an idea of how far away
from global equity and climate justice we currently are.<br>
<br>
The climate crisis is not something that “we” have created. The
worldview that largely dominates the perspective from Stockholm,
Berlin, London, Madrid, New York, Toronto, Los Angeles, Sydney or
Auckland is not so prevalent in Mumbai, Ngerulmud, Manila, Nairobi,
Lagos, Lima or Santiago. People from the parts of the world that are
most responsible for this crisis must realise that other
perspectives do exist and that they have to start listening to them.
Because when it comes to the climate and ecological crisis – just
like most other issues – many people living in rich economies still
act as if they rule the world. By using up the remains of our carbon
budgets – the maximum amount of CO2 we can collectively emit to give
the world a 67% chance of staying below 1.5C of global temperature
rise – the global north is stealing the future as well as the
present. It is stealing not only from its own children but, above
all, from those who live in the most affected parts of the world,
many of whom are yet to build much of the most basic modern
infrastructure that others take for granted. And still this deeply
immoral theft does not even exist in the discourse of the so-called
developed world.<br>
<br>
Saving the world is voluntary. You could certainly argue against
that statement from a moral point of view, but the fact remains:
there are no laws or restrictions in place that will force anyone to
take the necessary steps towards safeguarding our future living
conditions on planet Earth. This is troublesome from many
perspectives, not least because – as much as I hate to admit it –
Beyoncé was wrong. It is not girls who run the world. It is run by
politicians, corporations and financial interests – mainly
represented by white, privileged, middle-aged, straight cis men. And
it turns out most of them are terribly ill suited for the job. This
may not come as a big surprise. After all, the purpose of a company
is not to save the world – it is to make a profit. Or, rather, it is
to make as much profit as it possibly can in order to keep
shareholders and market interests happy.<br>
<br>
This leaves us with our political leaders. They do have great
opportunities to improve things, but it turns out that saving the
world is not their main priority, either.<br>
<br>
Approaching the issues of the climate and ecological crisis
inevitably involves confronting numerous uncomfortable questions.
Taking on the role of being the one who tells the unpleasant truth,
and thereby risking one’s popularity, is clearly not on any
politician’s wishlist. So they try to stay clear of the subject
until they absolutely cannot avoid it any longer – then they turn to
communication tactics and PR to make it seem as if real action is
being taken, when in fact the exact opposite is happening.<br>
<br>
It gives me no pleasure whatsoever to keep calling out the bullshit
of our so-called leaders. I want to believe that people are good.
But there really seems to be no end to these cynical games. If your
objective as a politician truly is to act on the climate crisis,
then surely your first step would be to gather accurate figures for
our actual emissions to get a complete overview of the problem, and
from there start looking at real solutions? That would also give you
a rough idea of the changes needed, the scale of them and how
quickly they need to be put in place. This, however, has not been
done – or even suggested – by any world leader. Or, to my knowledge,
by any one single politician.<br>
<br>
Journalist Alexandra Urisman Otto describes how she started
investigating Swedish climate policies and found that only a third
of our actual emissions of greenhouse gases were included in our
climate targets and the official national statistics. The rest were
either outsourced or hidden in the loopholes of international
climate accounting frameworks. So whenever the climate crisis is
debated in my “progressive” home country, we conveniently leave out
two-thirds of the problem. An investigation by the Washington Post
in November 2021 has shown that this phenomenon is far from unique
to Sweden. Though the figures vary from case to case, this process
and the overall mentality of constantly trying to sweep things under
the carpet and blame others is the international norm.<br>
<br>
So when our politicians say that we must solve the climate crisis,
we should all ask them which climate crisis they are referring to.
Is it the crisis that contains all our emissions or the one that
contains only a part of them? When politicians go a step further and
accuse the climate movement of not offering any solutions to our
problems, we should ask them what problems they are talking about.
Is it the problem that is caused by all our emissions or just by the
ones they didn’t manage to outsource or hide in the statistics?
Because these are completely different issues.<br>
<br>
If your objective as a politician is to act on the climate crisis,
surely your first step would be to gather accurate emissions figures<br>
It will take many things for us to start facing this emergency –
but, above all, it will take honesty, integrity and courage. The
longer we wait to start taking the action needed to stay in line
with our international targets, the harder and more costly it will
get to reach them. The inaction of today and yesterday must be
compensated for in the time that lies ahead.<br>
<br>
For us to have even a small chance of avoiding setting off
irreversible chain reactions far beyond human control, we need
drastic, immediate, far-reaching emission cuts at the source. When
your bathtub is about to overflow, you don’t go looking for buckets
or start covering the floor with towels – you start by turning off
the tap, as soon as you possibly can. Leaving the water running
means ignoring or denying the problem, delaying doing anything to
resolve it and downplaying its consequences.<br>
<br>
Our politicians do not need to wait for anyone else in order to
start taking action. Nor do they need conferences, treaties,
international agreements or outside pressure. They could start right
away. They also have – and have had for a long time – endless
opportunities to speak up and send a clear message about the fact
that we must fundamentally change our societies. And yet, with very
few exceptions, they actively choose not to. This is a moral
decision that will not only cost them dearly in the future, it will
put the entire living planet at risk.<br>
<br>
<br>
According to the United Nations’ emissions gap report, the world’s
planned fossil fuel production by the year 2030 will be more than
twice the amount that would be consistent with keeping to the 1.5c
target. This is science’s way of telling us that we can no longer
reach our targets without a system change. because meeting our
targets would literally require tearing up contracts, valid deals
and agreements on an unimaginable scale. This should, of course, be
dominating every hour of our everyday news feed, every political
discussion, every business meeting and every inch of our daily
lives. But that is not what is happening.<br>
<br>
The media and our political leaders have the opportunity to take
drastic and immediate action, and still they choose not to. Perhaps
it is because they are still in denial. Maybe it is because they do
not care. Maybe it is because they are unaware. Maybe it is because
they are more scared of the solutions than of the problem itself.
Maybe it is because they are afraid of causing social unrest. Maybe
they are afraid of losing their popularity. Maybe they simply did
not go into politics or journalism to uproot a system they believe
in – a system they have spent their lives defending. Or maybe the
reason for their inaction is a mixture of all these things.<br>
<br>
We cannot live sustainably within today’s economic system. Yet that
is what we are constantly being told we can do. We can buy
sustainable cars, travel on sustainable motorways, powered by
sustainable petroleum. We can eat sustainable meat and drink
sustainable soft drinks out of sustainable plastic bottles. We can
buy sustainable fast fashion and fly on sustainable aeroplanes using
sustainable fuels. And, of course, we are going to meet our short-
and long-term sustainable climate targets, too, without making the
slightest effort.<br>
<br>
Our so-called leaders still think they can bargain with physics and
negotiate with nature. They speak to flowers in the language of
economics<br>
“How?” you might ask. How can that be possible when we don’t yet
have any technical solutions that can fix this crisis alone, and the
option of stopping doing things is unacceptable from our current
economic standpoint? What are we going to do? Well, the answer is
the same as always: we will cheat. We will use all those loopholes
and all the creative accounting that we have conjured up in our
climate frameworks since the very first conference of the parties,
the 1995 Cop1 in Berlin. We will outsource our emissions along with
our factories, we will use baseline manipulation and start counting
our emission reductions when it suits us best. We will burn trees,
forests and biomass, as those have been excluded from the official
statistics. We will lock decades of emissions into fossil gas
infrastructure and call it green natural gas. And then we will
offset the rest with vague afforestation projects – trees that might
be lost to disease or fire – while we simultaneously cut down the
last of our old-growth forests at a much higher speed.<br>
<br>
Don’t get me wrong. Planting the right trees in the right soil is a
great thing to do. It eventually sequesters carbon dioxide from the
atmosphere and we should do it wherever it is suitable for the soil
and suitable for the people living there who care for that land. But
afforestation should not be confused with offsetting or climate
compensation, because that is something completely different. You
see, the main problem is that we already have at least 40 years of
carbon dioxide emissions to “compensate” for. It is all up there, in
the atmosphere, and that is where it will stay, probably for many
centuries to come. This historic CO2 is what we should be focusing
on when we are using our present – very limited – ways of removing
CO2 from the atmosphere, in various projects such as planting trees.
But offsetting, as we have conceived it, is not meant to do that. It
was never created for us to clean up our mess. Far too often it has
been used as an excuse for us to continue emitting CO2, maintain
business as usual and meanwhile send a signal that we have a
solution and therefore we do not have to change.<br>
<br>
Words matter, and they are being used against us. These are lies.
Dangerous lies that will cause further, disastrous delay.
Predictions by the UN conclude that our CO2 emissions are expected
to rise by another 16% by 2030. The time we have left to avoid
creating increasing climate catastrophes in many places around the
world is rapidly running out.<br>
<br>
We are currently on track to have a world that is 3.2C hotter by the
end of the century – and that’s if countries fulfil all the policies
they have in place, policies that are often based on flawed and
under-reported numbers. But in many cases they are nowhere near
doing even that. We are “seemingly light years away from reaching
our climate action targets”, to quote UN secretary general António
Guterres in the autumn of 2021. And there is also the matter of our
previous track record of failure when it comes to delivering on all
those non-binding pledges and promises. Let’s just say it is not so
impressive or convincing.<br>
<br>
Even if we carried out all of our climate action plans, we’d still
be in trouble. Net zero by 2050 is simply too little, too late.
There is just too much at stake for us to place our destiny in the
hands of undeveloped technologies. We need real zero. And we need
honesty. At the very least, we need our leaders to start including
all our actual emissions in our targets, statistics and policies.
Before they do that, any mention of vague, future goals is nothing
but a distracting waste of time. They say that we should not let the
perfect be the enemy of the good. But what exactly do we do when the
“good” not only fails to keep us safe but is also so far away from
what is needed that it can only be described as comedy material.
Very dark comedy, but still.<br>
<br>
<br>
They say we must be able to compromise. As if the Paris agreement
were not already the world’s biggest compromise. A compromise that
has already locked in unimaginable amounts of suffering for the most
affected people and areas. I say: “No more.” I say: “Stand your
ground.” Our so-called leaders still think they can bargain with
physics and negotiate with the laws of nature. They speak to flowers
and forests in the language of US dollars and short-term economics.
They hold up their quarterly income reports to impress the wild
animals. They read stock-market analysis to the waves of the ocean,
like fools.<br>
<br>
We are approaching a precipice. And I would strongly suggest that
those of us who have not yet been greenwashed out of our senses
stand our ground. Do not let them drag us another inch closer to the
edge. Not one inch. Right here, right now, is where we draw the
line.<br>
<br>
This is an edited extract from The Climate Book created by Greta
Thunberg and published on 27 October by Allen Lane (£25). To support
the Guardian and Observer, buy your copy from guardianbookshop.com.
Delivery charges may apply<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/08/greta-thunberg-climate-delusion-greenwashed-out-of-our-senses">https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/08/greta-thunberg-climate-delusion-greenwashed-out-of-our-senses</a><br>
<br>
<p><br>
</p>
<i>[ Air Force announcement ]</i><br>
<b>Department of the Air Force rolls out plan addressing climate
change</b><br>
Oct. 5, 2022<br>
Secretary of the Air Force Public Affairs<br>
WASHINGTON (AFNS) -- he Department of the Air Force released its
Climate Action Plan Oct. 4, which defines how it will preserve
operational capability, increase resiliency, and do its part to help
mitigate future climate impacts through specific and measurable
objectives and key results. It lays out its enterprise-wide approach
to ensuring policies, technology innovation, and evolving operations
remain relevant in a changing climate.<br>
<br>
“Make no mistake – the department’s mission remains to fly, fight,
and win, anytime and anywhere. We are focused on modernization and
improving our operational posture relative to our pacing challenge:
China. We remain ready to respond and achieve air and space
dominance when and where the nation needs us,” said Secretary of the
Air Force Frank Kendall. “Our mission remains unchanged, but we
recognize that the world is facing ongoing and accelerating climate
change and we must be prepared to respond, fight, and win in this
constantly changing world.”<br>
<br>
The plan outlines three major priorities that ensure the Department
of the Air Force maintains the ability to operate under a changing
climate, preserves operational capability, protects its systems, and
contributes toward enhancing climate change mitigation.<br>
<br>
1. Maintain air and space dominance in the face of climate risks:
Invest in climate-ready and resilient infrastructure and facilities
so our installations are better able to project air and space combat
power.<br>
<br>
2. Make climate informed decisions: Develop a climate-informed
workforce, integrate security implications of climate change into
Department strategy, planning, training, and operations, and
incorporate climate considerations into Department requirements,
acquisition, logistics, supply chain processes, and wargaming.<br>
<br>
3. Optimize energy use and pursue alternative energy sources: Expand
operational capability and power projection to support operations
globally while simultaneously reducing greenhouse gas emissions and
adopting cost-competitive alternative energy sources.<br>
<br>
The department will provide updates as necessary to address new
policies, technology innovation and evolving missions that answer
emerging climate concerns.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3178524/department-of-the-air-force-rolls-out-plan-addressing-climate-change/">https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3178524/department-of-the-air-force-rolls-out-plan-addressing-climate-change/</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<i>[ 3 Podcasts so far ]</i><br>
<b>The Big Burn: How To Survive the Age of Wildfires</b><br>
As the world enters a new age of wildfires, science reporter Jacob
Margolis dives deep into personal stories that illuminate the
history of how we got here, why we keep screwing things up, and what
we can do to survive and maybe even thrive while the world around us
burns.<br>
Episodes -- <br>
<b>About the Show</b><br>
It’s easy to feel like we’re in a dark timeline. Waking up to smoke
and flames, staring down a future of burned homes, lost forests, and
orange skies. Over the past decade, California has been hit by nine
out of ten of its largest fires on record. And even if you don't
live in the state, you’re likely impacted by the fire crisis. A
combination of climate change and poor policy decisions got us here.<br>
<br>
So, is there anything we can do about this new age of devastating
wildfires? Science reporter Jacob Margolis goes on a journey to
figure out how we got here, why we keep screwing things up, and what
we can do to survive and even thrive while the world around us
burns. From LAist Studios, the creators of The Big One, this next
installment of The Big Disaster series will provide you with a
wildfire survival guide that includes not just tangible safety tips
— but hope for our future.<br>
<br>
Support for this podcast is made possible by Gordon and Dona
Crawford, who believe that quality journalism makes Los Angeles a
better place to live, the Strelow Family, and by the Corporation for
Public Broadcasting, a private corporation funded by the American
people.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://laist.com/podcasts/the-big-burn">https://laist.com/podcasts/the-big-burn</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<i>[The news archive - looking back at early mention of carbon
capitalism ]</i><br>
<font size="+2"><i><b>October 9, 1996</b></i></font> <br>
October 9, 1996: Vice President Al Gore and former Representative
Jack Kemp discuss the environment in the Vice Presidential debate,
with Kemp bizarrely accusing Gore of promoting "fear of the climate"
and embracing an "anti-capitalistic mentality," while Gore defends
the Clinton administration's first-term environmental
accomplishments. <br>
<br>
(60:13--70:50)<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/74250-1">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/74250-1</a><br>
<blockquote>
<p><b>Jack French Kemp</b><br>
Jim, Al has to hear one more time. Every time in this century
we've lowered the tax rates across-the-board on employment, on
saving, investment, and risk-taking in this economy, revenues
went up, not down. Now, if the purpose of the tax code is to
raise revenue. We ought to think, as John F. Kennedy did, about
lowering the rates. We can't go to zero. They can't go too low,
because there's not enough revenue, but President Clinton
apologized in Houston for saying, whoops, I raised your taxes
and they're too high. President Bush apologized for raising
taxes. Bob Dole knows that the rates have to come down
across-the-board and then we'll get to the most important part,
to repeal this code and go to a new system for the 21st Century.<br>
<br>
01:00:13<br>
<b>Jim Lehrer</b><br>
Mr. Vice President, some Democrats have charged that the
environment would be in jeopardy if Mr. Kemp and Senator Dole
are elected. Do you share that fear?<br>
<br>
01:00:25<br>
<b>Al Gore Jr.</b><br>
I certainly do. In citing John F. Kennedy's tax cut in the
1960s, I want to also remind you that, Mr. Kemp, pointed out in
the past, Bob Dole was in the Congress then. He was one of those
who voted against John F. Kennedy's tax cut. The environment
faces dire threats from the kind of legislation that Senator
Dole and Speaker Newt Gingrich tried to pass by shutting down
the government and attempting to force President Clinton to
accept it. They invited the lobbyists for the biggest polluters
in America to come into the Congress and literally rewrite the
Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act. President Clinton stopped
them dead in their tracks. We have a positive agenda on the
environment because we believe very deeply that it's about our
children and our future. Clean air and clean water, cleaning up
toxic waste sites, when millions of children live within one
mile of them. That's important. We have a plan to clean up
two-thirds of the toxic waste sites in America over the next
four years. We've already cleaned up more in the last three
years than the previous two administrations did in 12. The
President just set aside the Utah National Monument. He is
protecting the Everglades here in Florida. Bob Dole is opposed
to that plan. President Bill Clinton will protect our
environment and prevent the kind of attacks on it that we saw in
the last Congress and are included in the Republican platform.<br>
<br>
01:02:12<br>
<b>Jack French Kemp</b><br>
And so will Bob Dole. I mean, Al, get real. Franklin Roosevelt
said in 1932 that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself.
The only thing, Jim, they have to offer is fear. Fear of the
environment, fear of the climate, fear of Medicare, fear of
Newt, fear of Republicans, fear of Bob, and probably fear of
cutting tax rates. They ain't seen nothing yet. Look, we
recognize that this country has to live in balance with our
environment. Every one of us who have children and grandchildren
recognize how we have to reach a balance. It is not jobs versus
our environment. Both are important. This is the most
overregulated, overly litigated economy in our nation's history.
And to call a businessman or woman who sits down and has a
chance to express his or her interest in how to make these laws
work and call them a polluter is just outrageous. It is typical
of the anti-capitalistic mentality of this administration. That
will change, because we believe in democratic capitalism for
everybody.<br>
<br>
01:03:28<br>
<b>Al Gore Jr.</b><br>
There are lots of jobs to be created in cleaning up the
environment. All around the world we're seeing problems that
people want to solve because they love their children. They want
them to be able to drink clean water and breathe clean air. They
don't want them to live next to toxic waste sites. When the
United States of America takes the lead in protecting the
environment, we do right by our children, and we also create new
business opportunities, new jobs, new sources of prosperity for
the United States of America, and we're going about it in a
common sense way.<br>
</p>
</blockquote>
<p><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/74250-1">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/74250-1</a><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>======================================= <br>
<b class="moz-txt-star"><span class="moz-txt-tag">*Mass media is
lacking, here are a few </span>daily summaries<span
class="moz-txt-tag"> of global warming news - email delivered*</span></b>
<br>
<br>
=========================================================<br>
<b>*Inside Climate News</b><br>
Newsletters<br>
We deliver climate news to your inbox like nobody else. Every day
or once a week, our original stories and digest of the web’s top
headlines deliver the full story, for free.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://insideclimatenews.org/">https://insideclimatenews.org/</a><br>
--------------------------------------- <br>
*<b>Climate Nexus</b> <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>
*T<b>he Daily Climate </b>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 at <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.dailyclimate.org/originals/">https://www.dailyclimate.org/originals/</a>
<br>
<br>
</p>
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------/
<br>
/Archive of Daily Global Warming News <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/">https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/</a><br>
<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. 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">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>
</body>
</html>