<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<font size="+2"><i><b>November 19, 2022</b></i></font><br>
<br>
<i>[ when and where will you retire? ]</i><br>
<b>‘Do You Really Want to Rebuild at 80?’ Rethinking Where to
Retire.</b><br>
It’s a small yet noticeable shift, experts say — but climate change
is causing retirees to start reconsidering moves to disaster-prone
dream locales.<br>
By Susan B. Garland<br>
Nov. 18, 2022<br>
For a decade, Melissa and Guy Hoagland, both retired physicians in
their 60s, had split their time between their homes on a barrier
island in Florida and in Half Moon Bay, a small coastal city in the
San Francisco Bay Area.<br>
<br>
But the intensifying drought and wildfires in Northern California
and escalating hurricanes and storm surges along the Southeastern
coastline drove the couple to sell both houses.<br>
<p>Mulling the idea of living permanently in Southern California,
the Hoaglands moved into a rental house in San Diego in 2019 after
selling their West Coast property. But climate risks there,
including drought and rising sea levels, put an end to that plan
as well...</p>
<p>The couple began to search for a safer place. They pored over
climate data, including projections of rising temperatures,
availability of fresh water and the northward expansion of
tropical diseases. In 2022, they moved to Asheville, N.C., hoping
to buy a house there.<br>
<br>
A small but growing number of older people like the Hoaglands are
taking climate change into account when choosing a retirement
destination, real estate agents and other experts say. Armed with
climate studies, many retirees are looking for communities that
are less likely to experience extreme weather events, such as
wildfires, drought and flooding.<br>
<br>
David Dew, a real estate broker who sells homes near the
Rappahannock River in and around White Stone, Va., said a larger
number of retired clients were voicing concerns about weather
patterns. With many waterfront properties in minimal danger of
flooding there, the area is attracting retirees from the
flood-ravaged Outer Banks of North Carolina as well as other
Atlantic Ocean communities, he said.<br>
<br>
“At first, they will say they want big views and deep water, but
then they ask whether a hurricane or a nor’easter will wipe out
the dock,” Mr. Dew said. “They want to be on the water but more
protected.”<br>
<br>
In an analysis of nearly 1.4 million home sales along Florida’s
coasts, for example, University of Pennsylvania researchers found
that the sales volume of homes in areas where 70 percent of
developed land was less than six feet above sea level dropped by
up to 20 percent between 2013 and 2018, while sales rose on
less-vulnerable coastal land. Prices on homes in riskier areas
declined between 2018 and 2020...<br>
</p>
“We loved living along the coast, but we knew that life there was
not sustainable for us in our old age,” Melissa Hoagland said.<br>
The lead researcher, Benjamin Keys, a professor of real estate and
finance at the university’s Wharton School, said the biggest sales
declines occurred in Florida coastal communities where retirees from
the Northeast — particularly those who lived in counties exposed to
Hurricane Sandy in 2012 — tended to move.<br>
<br>
“It seems like Northeast retirees were looking at retirement
differently,” Dr. Keys said. “On one hand, you have a strong
demographic pull of baby boomers who are looking for warmer climate,
and on the other hand, there is a newfound appreciation of climate
risks.”<br>
<br>
Florida coastal home sales and prices spiked during the pandemic as
buyers fled urban living for warmer climes. But Dr. Keys said he
expected the prepandemic trends would resume as fewer people feared
living in densely populated areas and as remote work declined.<br>
<br>
<b>Aging and Climate Change Collide</b><br>
Extreme weather can be particularly dangerous, and even deadly, for
the elderly, who are more likely to have chronic medical conditions
and disabilities, according to numerous studies.<br>
<br>
Three-quarters of residents who died in the 2018 Camp Fire, which
destroyed the Northern California community of Paradise, were 65 and
older. Well over half of the record-high 323 people who died from
heat-related causes in Arizona’s Maricopa County in 2020 were at
least 50. And two-thirds of the people who died in Florida during
Hurricane Ian in September were 60 and older.<br>
<br>
Frailty and cognitive impairments make it difficult for older people
to evacuate and prepare their homes for disasters. Older people are
also more likely than younger people to die from heat stroke.
Extreme heat and wildfire smoke can worsen diabetes, heart disease
and lung conditions.<br>
<br>
“The ability to see a doctor during a king tide could be hard,” said
Mathew Hauer, an assistant professor of sociology at Florida State
University in Tallahassee, using a term for exceptionally high
tides. “And an ambulance may not be able to get to you.”<br>
<br>
These health-related dangers are certain to increase as rising sea
levels coincide with the growing elderly population along the
coasts, Dr. Hauer said.<br>
<br>
In an analysis of all coastal counties in the United States, Dr.
Hauer predicted that the proportion of people over 65 who lived in
coastal communities would steadily rise, to about 37 percent of the
population in 2100, compared with 16 percent today. That population
would comprise older people moving in and younger people remaining
into their later years.<br>
<br>
“Two trends we know are happening — the impact of climate change at
the same time the world is aging,” Dr. Hauer said. “Those two
trends, I’m afraid, will crash head-on, and we will see more
catastrophic impacts than if either one had happened.”<br>
<br>
The Hoaglands said their stress was mounting as the climate risks on
both coasts grew.<br>
<br>
They moved to Florida in 1992 to raise their four children and
practice medicine (Melissa, 64, as a pathologist and Guy, 65, as an
internist). In 2011, they bought a house in the Bay Area, where
Melissa had gone to medical school and had always dreamed of
returning. They retired early, living in California in the summers
and Florida in the winters.<br>
<br>
Over the years, in Florida, hurricanes and storm surges up the
Indian River threatened their home on a barrier island near
Melbourne. During one storm, water jumped over a road within several
feet of their house.<br>
<br>
“Drainage was a problem on the roads,” Guy said. “I noticed the
localized flooding was higher than it ever was.”<br>
<p>At the same time, wildfires, which were becoming more frequent,
were spreading smoke in the Bay Area. An avid hiker, Guy began
carrying an inhaler to help with exercise-induced asthma.</p>
<p>These health-related dangers are certain to increase as rising
sea levels coincide with the growing elderly population along the
coasts, Dr. Hauer said.<br>
<br>
In an analysis of all coastal counties in the United States, Dr.
Hauer predicted that the proportion of people over 65 who lived in
coastal communities would steadily rise, to about 37 percent of
the population in 2100, compared with 16 percent today. That
population would comprise older people moving in and younger
people remaining into their later years.<br>
<br>
“Two trends we know are happening — the impact of climate change
at the same time the world is aging,” Dr. Hauer said. “Those two
trends, I’m afraid, will crash head-on, and we will see more
catastrophic impacts than if either one had happened.”<br>
<br>
The Hoaglands said their stress was mounting as the climate risks
on both coasts grew.<br>
<br>
They moved to Florida in 1992 to raise their four children and
practice medicine (Melissa, 64, as a pathologist and Guy, 65, as
an internist). In 2011, they bought a house in the Bay Area, where
Melissa had gone to medical school and had always dreamed of
returning. They retired early, living in California in the summers
and Florida in the winters.<br>
<br>
Over the years, in Florida, hurricanes and storm surges up the
Indian River threatened their home on a barrier island near
Melbourne. During one storm, water jumped over a road within
several feet of their house.<br>
<br>
“Drainage was a problem on the roads,” Guy said. “I noticed the
localized flooding was higher than it ever was.”<br>
<br>
At the same time, wildfires, which were becoming more frequent,
were spreading smoke in the Bay Area. An avid hiker, Guy began
carrying an inhaler to help with exercise-induced asthma.<br>
</p>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/18/business/where-to-retire-climate-change.html">https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/18/business/where-to-retire-climate-change.html</a><br>
<p>- -</p>
<i>[ now, what about migration ]</i><br>
<b>Is the world ready for mass migration due to climate change?</b><br>
By Gaia Vince<br>
17th November 2022<br>
With up to three billion people expected to be displaced by the
effects of global warming by the end of the century, should it lead
to a shift in the way we think about national borders, asks Gaia
Vince?<br>
- -<br>
Meanwhile, most countries in the Global North are facing a
demographic crisis in which people are not having enough babies to
support an ageing population. Managed mass migration could thus help
with many of the world's biggest problems, reducing the number of
people living in poverty and climate devastation, and helping
northern economies build their workforce.<br>
<br>
But the main barrier is our system of borders – movement
restrictions either imposed by someone's own state or by the states
they wish to enter. Today just over 3% of the global population are
international migrants. However, migrants contribute around 10% of
global GDP or $6.7tn (£5.9tn) – some $3tn (£2.6tn) more than they
would have produced in their origin countries. Some economists,
such as Michael Clemens at the Center for Global Development in the
US, calculate that enabling free movement could double global GDP.
In addition, we would see an increase in cultural diversity, which
studies show improves innovation. At a time when we have to solve
unprecedented environmental and social challenges, it could be just
what is needed.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20221117-how-borders-might-change-to-cope-with-climate-migration">https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20221117-how-borders-might-change-to-cope-with-climate-migration</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<i>[ Now, about that climate anxiety we have, accept it and use it
]</i><br>
<b>How to use anxiety to your advantage</b><br>
By Tracy Dennis-Tiwary<br>
18th October 2022<br>
From "eco-anxiety" to "FOMO", modern life seems a stressful place to
be. But psychologist Tracy Dennis-Tiwary explains why the emotion
can be a good thing.<br>
Today, we seem to be living in the age of anxiety. Google Trends
shows that searches for the word anxiety have increased over 300%
since 2004. Anxiety is on our minds, with good reason. As much as
31% of the US population will experience an anxiety disorder at one
point in their lives, which can range from generalised anxiety
disorder to panic disorder and social anxiety disorder – which is
one of the most common types.<br>
<br>
Outside of medical diagnoses, the word also seems to have slipped
into our vernacular. It has usurped stress as our language
placeholder for feeling uncomfortable – anxious about giving a
presentation, about going on a blind date, about starting a new job.
The word has become ubiquitous and absorbed meaning, amoeba-like, to
encompass everything from dread to pleasant anticipation. Too often,
the mere use of it casts these experiences in a negative light,
infusing them with threat and a touch of the not-quite-right.<br>
<br>
Then there are anxiety disorders – they are the most common of the
mental health diagnoses, more common than depression and addiction.
Hundreds of millions of people across the world will be diagnosed
with an anxiety disorder in their lifetime. Rates of these
disorders, especially among the young, continue to rise, as they
have been for well over two decades. Yet, there are dozens of
validated therapies, 30 different anti-anxiety medications, hundreds
of excellent self-help books, and thousands of rigorous scientific
studies. While they certainly can help individuals, why have these
solutions failed to reduce the scale of the problem so
spectacularly?<br>
As I put forward in my book, Future Tense, one reason for this
failure is that mental health professionals, myself included, have
unintentionally misled people about the nature of anxiety in the
past – a misunderstanding that has harmed us. I propose a new, more
helpful and hopeful approach to understanding and living with
anxiety in the 21st Century – to use it to your advantage.<br>
Negative emotions like anxiety have long gotten a bad rap –
irrational at best, destructive at worst. The ancient Roman poet
Horace wrote over 2,000 years ago, anger is a short madness. But
over the course of the past 150 years, starting with Darwin's The
Expression of Emotion in Man and Animals, we have actually come to
understand that emotions like anger, fear, and anxiety are more
advantageous than dangerous. Like the opposable thumb and language,
emotions are tools for survival, forged and refined over hundreds of
thousands of years of evolution to protect and ensure that humans
can thrive. They do this by providing two things: information and
preparation...<br>
Anxiety is information about the uncertain future: something bad
could happen, but something good could still happen, too. Anxiety is
waiting for your Covid test to come back positive or negative, or
anticipating that difficult conversation with your boss that might
go well or might go completely sideways. Anxiety isn't, however,
information about certain and present threats – that's fear, like
seeing a shark fin rise out of the water mere yards away from where
you're swimming. Fear primarily prepares us to fight, take flight,
or freeze, whereas anxiety is a civilisation builder. It prepares us
to persist, remain vigilant, and act in ways that avert future
disaster but also can make positive possibilities into reality...<br>
- -<br>
Unlike an infectious disease or cancer, avoidance and suppression of
anxiety will almost certainly amplify it, while simultaneously
exacting an opportunity cost by preventing us from finding
productive ways to cope and to build skills of emotional resilience.
This is the vicious cycle of anxiety, spiralling it out of control:
feeling anxiety as dangerous, fearing it, and ultimately fleeing
from it through suppression and avoidance...<br>
- -<br>
The key problem for someone diagnosed with an anxiety disorder is
not that they experience intense anxiety, it's that the tools they
have at their disposal to turn down the dial on those feelings are
causing functional impairment. This gets in the way of self-care,
working, connecting with others, and living a fulfilling life.
Changing our approach to anxiety can help no matter where we are on
the spectrum of anxiety. And we're all on it somewhere.<br>
<br>
Over 180 years ago, the Danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard wrote:
"Whosoever learns to be anxious in the right way has learned the
ultimate." We are all born anxious. The work of being human is to
learn that although anxiety can be hard, sometimes terrifying, we
can learn to make it an ally, a benefit, and a source of ingenuity.
When we rescue anxiety, we will rescue ourselves.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20221017-how-to-use-anxiety-to-your-advantage">https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20221017-how-to-use-anxiety-to-your-advantage</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<i>[ DW News from COP27 - video report ] </i><br>
<b> </b><b>Climate summit: Germany demands China to pay into
climate damage fund | DW News</b><br>
DW News<br>
Nov 18, 2022<br>
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres on Thursday urged countries to
stop "finger pointing" as the COP27 climate talks draw to a close.
Egyptian negotiators said talks, which are due to end on Friday, are
likely to go on overnight, as diplomats struggle to reach an
agreement.<br>
<br>
Germany says China must contribute to a compensation fund rather
than benefiting from it.<br>
<br>
Developing countries are demanding that a "loss and damage" fund be
established to help poorer nations— which are responsible for a
significantly smaller share of global CO2 emissions — deal with the
consequences of climate change. The Group of 77+ developing
countries at the UN, alongside China, proposed the establishment of
a global loss and damage fund. <br>
<br>
Western countries have criticized China's position on the proposal,
as it does not see itself as a donor with responsibility, despite
being the highest greenhouse gas emitter in terms of sheer volume.<br>
<br>
German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock has demanded China pay
more money to help poorer countries deal with climate crises. "It
is true that we in Europe and North America as industrialized
countries bear the responsibility for the climate damage of the
recent past and also most of the present with our fossil-based
prosperity," Baerbock said. <br>
<br>
"But all the major emitters of today bear responsibility for the
climate damage of the future — all states can now show that they are
ready for more ambition and more solidarity," she added. EU climate
chief Frans Timmermans said the EU was open to the proposal, but
that it should be discussed among a "mosaic" of options that
includes existing financial instruments. A draft proposal on phasing
out fossil fuels presented at the COP27 also encourages a
"phase-out" of the use of coal, while avoiding mentioning oil and
gas.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wr6SxmwyDeE">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wr6SxmwyDeE</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<i>[new from the Pew Research Center ]</i><br>
<b>How Religion Intersects With Americans’ Views on the Environment</b><br>
Responsibility for the Earth is part of many U.S. Christians’
beliefs, but so is skepticism about climate change<br>
BY BECKA A. ALPER<br>
NOVEMBER 17, 2022 <br>
Most U.S. adults – including a solid majority of Christians and
large numbers of people who identify with other religious traditions
– consider the Earth sacred and believe God gave humans a duty to
care for it, according to a new Pew Research Center survey.<br>
<br>
But the survey also finds that highly religious Americans (those who
say they pray each day, regularly attend religious services and
consider religion very important in their lives) are far less likely
than other U.S. adults to express concern about warming temperatures
around the globe.<br>
<br>
The survey reveals several reasons why religious Americans tend to
be less concerned about climate change. First and foremost is
politics: The main driver of U.S. public opinion about the climate
is political party, not religion. Highly religious Americans are
more inclined than others to identify with or lean toward the
Republican Party, and Republicans tend to be much less likely than
Democrats to believe that human activity (such as burning fossil
fuels) is warming the Earth or to consider climate change a serious
problem.<br>
<br>
Religious Americans who express little or no concern about climate
change also give a variety of other explanations for their views,
including that there are much bigger problems in the world today,
that God is in control of the climate, and that they do not believe
the climate actually is changing. In addition, many religious
Americans voice concerns about the potential consequences of
environmental regulations, such as a loss of individual freedoms,
fewer jobs or higher energy prices.<br>
<br>
Finally, climate change does not seem to be a topic discussed much
in religious congregations, either from the pulpit or in the pews.
And few Americans view efforts to conserve energy and limit carbon
emissions as moral issues...<br>
- -<br>
The new survey, conducted April 11-17, 2022, finds that about
three-quarters of religiously affiliated Americans say the Earth is
sacred. An even greater share (80%) express a sense of stewardship –
completely or mostly agreeing with the idea that “God gave humans a
duty to protect and care for the Earth, including the plants and
animals.” Two-thirds of U.S. adults who identify with a religious
group say their faith’s holy scriptures contain lessons about the
environment, and about four-in-ten (42%) say they have prayed for
the environment in the past year.<br>
<br>
These views are common across a variety of religious traditions. For
example, three-quarters of both evangelical Protestants and members
of historically Black Protestant churches say the Bible contains
lessons about the environment. Upward of eight-in-ten members of
those two groups say God gave humans a duty to protect and care for
the Earth. And about eight-in-ten U.S. Catholics and mainline
Protestants, as well as 77% of members of non-Christian religions,
say the Earth is sacred.<br>
<br>
But Christians, and religiously affiliated Americans more broadly,
are not as united in their views about climate change. While
majorities of all the large U.S. Christian subgroups say they think
global climate change is at least a somewhat serious problem, there
are substantial differences in the shares who consider it an
extremely or very serious problem – ranging from 68% of adults who
identify with the historically Black Protestant tradition to 34% of
evangelical Protestants. And half or fewer people surveyed in all
major Protestant traditions say the Earth is getting warmer mostly
because of human activity, including 32% of evangelicals...<br>
- -<br>
These activities tend to be reported by similar shares of Americans
across religious traditions and among the religiously unaffiliated,
save for eating less meat. More than half of Americans (57%) who
identify with non-Christian religions say they eat less meat to help
the environment, compared with fewer than half of Christians and
religious “nones.” Evangelicals are the least likely to say they eat
less meat to help protect the environment (31%). Members of
non-Christian religions also are the most likely to say they use
less plastic to help the environment (83%).<br>
<br>
When it comes to participating in activities that help address
climate change, a quarter of Americans say they have done at least
one of the following activities in the past 12 months (prior to when
these questions were asked in April 2021): donated money to an
organization focused on addressing climate change; contacted an
elected official to urge them to address climate change; volunteered
for an activity focused on addressing climate change; or attended a
protest or rally to show support for addressing climate change.<br>
<br>
Religiously unaffiliated adults (31%) are more likely than those who
are affiliated with a religion (22%) to report having performed any
of these activities in the name of climate change, although members
of non-Christian religions are most likely to have done at least one
of these things (41%). There also is variance across Christian
traditions, with members of the historically Black Protestant
tradition (28%) more likely than evangelicals (13%) to engage in
these activities.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2022/11/17/how-religion-intersects-with-americans-views-on-the-environment/">https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2022/11/17/how-religion-intersects-with-americans-views-on-the-environment/</a><br>
<p>- -</p>
<i>[ more info ]</i><br>
<b>Other findings from the new survey include:</b><br>
<blockquote>U.S. congregations appear to be more likely to focus on
other – perhaps more personal – ways of helping the community,
rather than cleaning up public places or protecting the
environment. Among all U.S. adults who attend religious services
at least once or twice a month, a large majority (85%) say their
congregation has a group that helps people who need food, clothing
or shelter, and just over half (55%) say their house of worship
helps people with alcohol or drug problems. Fewer (41%) say their
congregation has a group dedicated to helping clean up public
places or protecting the environment, and just 17% say they are
personally involved in that group.<br>
<br>
Among U.S. adults who attend religious services at least monthly,
46% say their congregation has recycling bins, 43% say their house
of worship takes steps to be more energy efficient and 8% say it
uses solar power.<br>
<br>
Fully seven-in-ten Americans say they find meaning in nature
(71%), including 38% who find a great deal of meaning from
spending time outdoors. There is relatively little variation by
religious affiliation on this question. For example, 74% of
mainline Protestants, 71% of Catholics and religious “nones,” and
70% of evangelical Protestants say they draw meaning from nature
and the outdoors. But members of historically Black Protestant
churches, who are among the most concerned about climate change,
are the least likely to derive at least quite a bit of meaning
from spending time outside (56%).<br>
</blockquote>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2022/11/17/how-religion-intersects-with-americans-views-on-the-environment/">https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2022/11/17/how-religion-intersects-with-americans-views-on-the-environment/</a>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<i>[ Rap artist Baba Brinkman 3:38 min </i><a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N76TBVpZkT0">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N76TBVpZkT0</a>
<i>]</i><br>
<b>Offsetters – Baba Brinkman Music Video</b><br>
Baba Brinkman<br>
Sep 28, 2022<br>
When organizations go "carbon neutral", the hardest emissions to
curb are generally 'offset' with carbon removal and pollution
reduction projects where cuts can be made more affordably, leading
to a massive 'carbon market' trading in credits of various kinds.
Can we trust it? And does it actually make net emissions go down, or
is it the ultimate greenwash? <br>
<br>
Whatever you believe about the industry, the offsetters are not
backing down.<br>
Further reading:<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.greenbiz.com/article/are-carbon-offsets-joke-response-comedian-john-oliver">https://www.greenbiz.com/article/are-carbon-offsets-joke-response-comedian-john-oliver</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N76TBVpZkT0">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N76TBVpZkT0</a><br>
<p> - -</p>
<i>[ possibly my favorite ]</i><br>
<b>Control Systems – Baba Brinkman Music Video</b><br>
Baba Brinkman<br>
Aug 30, 2022<br>
Understanding mental health requires a clear view of how the brain
was designed by natural selection, and what it was designed to
accomplish. Consultant Randolph M. Nesse<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5-LrrVP4gI">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5-LrrVP4gI</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><i><br>
</i></p>
<i>[ showing the importance of field scientists! ]</i><br>
<b>Climate change: Melting glaciers could release tonnes of bacteria</b><br>
By Steffan Messenger<br>
BBC Wales Environment Correspondent<br>
Vast amounts of bacteria could be released as the world's glaciers
melt due to climate change, scientists have warned.<br>
<br>
Potentially harmful pathogens are among the thousands of microbes
that could leak into rivers and lakes.<br>
<br>
Researchers at Aberystwyth University said their study highlighted
the need to act quickly to curb global warming.<br>
<br>
They studied meltwater from eight glaciers across Europe and North
America and two sites in Greenland.<br>
<br>
Glaciers are huge bodies of slowly moving ice that have formed over
hundreds or thousands of years. As the planet heats up, they are
melting at a worrying rate - causing sea levels to rise.<br>
<br>
The team at Aberystwyth University estimated the situation could
result in more than a 100,000 tonnes of microbes, such as bacteria,
being released into the environment over the next 80 years - a
number comparable to all the cells in every human body on earth<br>
Microbiologist Dr Arwyn Edwards said the study showed clearly for
the first time the "vast scale" of micro-organisms living on the
surface or locked inside Earth's glaciers.<br>
<br>
"The number of microbes released depends closely on how quickly the
glaciers melt, and therefore how much we continue to warm the
planet," he said.<br>
The team's calculations are based on a "moderate" warming scenario,
as developed by the IPCC, an international panel of climate experts.<br>
<br>
This would see global temperatures rise by between 2C and 3C on
average by 2100.<br>
<br>
As the flow of microbes into rivers, lakes, fjords and seas
increases, there could be "significant" impacts for water quality,
Dr Edwards explained.<br>
<br>
But this would be followed within decades by the microbe tap being
turned off, as the glaciers disappear completely.<br>
<br>
He said: "Globally there are 200,000 catchments of note that are fed
by glacial meltwater and some of these are very sensitive
environments that are poorly developed in terms of organic carbon
and nutrients.<br>
<br>
"In others there's a lot of economic activity and billions of human
beings whose livelihoods depend on water that ultimately comes from
those glaciers.<br>
<br>
"We think of glaciers as a huge store of frozen water but the key
lesson from this research is that they are also ecosystems in their
own right."<br>
<br>
Thousands of different micro-organisms are found growing on
glaciers, or stored inside, he said, with some that may be harmful
to humans.<br>
<br>
"The risk is probably very small, but it requires careful
assessment."<br>
Glaciologist Dr Tristram Irvine-Fynn said more research was needed:
"Over the coming decades, the forecast 'peak water' from Earth's
mountain glaciers means we need to improve our understanding of the
state and fate of (these) ecosystems.<br>
<br>
"With a better grasp of that picture, we could better predict the
effects of climate change on glacial surfaces and catchment
biogeochemistry."<br>
<br>
The Aberystwyth academics' findings are published in the journal
Nature Communications Earth & Environment this month.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-63655140">https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-63655140</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<i>[The news archive - looking back]</i><br>
<font size="+2"><i><b>November 19, 2010 </b></i></font> <br>
November 19, 2010: In a Washington Post article, former Rep.
Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY) asks, "Can the party of Reagan accept the
science of climate change?"<br>
<blockquote>
<p>By Sherwood Boehlert<br>
Friday, November 19, 2010<br>
Watching the raft of newly elected GOP lawmakers converge on
Washington, I couldn't help thinking about an issue I hope our
party will better address. I call on my fellow Republicans to
open their minds to rethinking what has largely become our
party's line: denying that climate change and global warming are
occurring and that they are largely due to human activities.<br>
<br>
National Journal reported last month that 19 of the 20 serious
GOP Senate challengers declared that the science of climate
change is either inconclusive or flat-out wrong. Many newly
elected Republican House members take that position. It is a
stance that defies the findings of our country's National
Academy of Sciences, national scientific academies from around
the world and 97 percent of the world's climate scientists.<br>
<br>
Why do so many Republican senators and representatives think
they are right and the world's top scientific academies and
scientists are wrong? I would like to be able to chalk it up to
lack of information or misinformation.<br>
<br>
I can understand arguments over proposed policy approaches to
climate change. I served in Congress for 24 years. I know these
are legitimate areas for debate. What I find incomprehensible is
the dogged determination by some to discredit distinguished
scientists and their findings.<br>
<br>
In a trio of reports released in May, the prestigious and
nonpartisan National Academy concluded that "a strong, credible
body of scientific evidence shows that climate change is
occurring, is caused largely by human activities and poses
significant risks for a broad range of human and natural
systems." Our nation's most authoritative and respected
scientific body couldn't make it any clearer or more conclusive.<br>
<br>
When I was chairman of the House Committee on Science, top
scientists from around the world came before our panel. They
were experts that Republicans and Democrats alike looked to for
scientific insight and understanding on a host of issues. They
spoke in probabilities, ranges and concepts - always careful to
characterize what was certain, what was suspected and what was
speculative. Today, climate scientists - careful as ever in
portraying what they know vs. what they suspect - report that
the body of scientific evidence supporting the consensus on
climate change and its cause is as comprehensive and exhaustive
as anything produced by the scientific community.<br>
<br>
While many in politics - and not just of my party - refuse to
accept the overwhelming scientific evidence of climate change,
leaders of some of our nation's most prominent businesses have
taken a different approach. They formed the U.S. Climate Action
Partnership. This was no collection of mom-and-pop shops
operated by "tree huggers" sympathetic to any environmental
cause but, rather, a step by hard-nosed, profit-driven
capitalists. General Electric, Alcoa, Duke Energy, DuPont, Dow
Chemical, Ford, General Motors and Chrysler signed on. USCAP,
persuaded by scientific facts, called on the president and
Congress to act, saying "in our view, the climate change
challenge will create more economic opportunities than risks for
the U.S. economy."<br>
<br>
There is a natural aversion to more government regulation. But
that should be included in the debate about how to respond to
climate change, not as an excuse to deny the problem's
existence. The current practice of disparaging the science and
the scientists only clouds our understanding and delays a
solution. The record flooding, droughts and extreme weather in
this country and others are consistent with patterns that
scientists predicted for years. They are an ominous harbinger.<br>
<br>
The new Congress should have a policy debate to address facts
rather than a debate featuring unsubstantiated attacks on
science. We shouldn't stand by while the reputations of
scientists are dragged through the mud in order to win a
political argument. And no member of any party should look the
other way when the basic operating parameters of scientific
inquiry - the need to question, express doubt, replicate
research and encourage curiosity - are exploited for the sake of
political expediency. My fellow Republicans should understand
that wholesale, ideologically based or special-interest-driven
rejection of science is bad policy. And that in the long run,
it's also bad politics.<br>
<br>
What is happening to the party of Ronald Reagan? He embraced
scientific understanding of the environment and pollution and
was proud of his role in helping to phase out ozone-depleting
chemicals. That was smart policy and smart politics. Most
important, unlike many who profess to be his followers, Reagan
didn't deny the existence of global environmental problems but
instead found ways to address them.<br>
<br>
The National Academy reports concluded that "scientific evidence
that the Earth is warming is now overwhelming." Party
affiliation does not change that fact.<br>
<br>
The writer, a Republican, represented New York's 24th District
in Congress from 1983 to 2007. He is a special adviser to the
Project on Climate Science.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/18/AR2010111805451.html">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/18/AR2010111805451.html</a><br>
</p>
<br>
<br>
<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>