<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<font size="+2"><i><b>December 8, 2022</b></i></font><br>
<br>
<i>[ Powerful force of disinformation - NYTimes audio and text ]</i><br>
<b> The Texas Group Waging a National Crusade Against Climate Action</b><br>
The Texas Public Policy Foundation is shaping laws, running
influence campaigns and taking legal action in a bid to promote
fossil fuels.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/04/climate/texas-public-policy-foundation-climate-change.html">https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/04/climate/texas-public-policy-foundation-climate-change.html</a><br>
<p>- -<br>
</p>
<i>[ Big Tech is now bigger than Big Oil ]</i><br>
<b>Big Tech’s dirty secret</b><br>
How Big Tech’s toxic business model undermines action against
climate change.<br>
- -<br>
This paper should serve as a wake-up call to the<br>
climate movement. While there is much good<br>
work underway to expose and challenge climate<br>
mis- and disinformation online, addressing Big<br>
Tech’s multidimensional climate problem requires<br>
climate activists to turn their attention to the<br>
toxic business model that lies beneath: the twin<br>
pillars of algorithmic recommender systems and<br>
surveillance advertising...<br>
- -<br>
In the 21st century, Big Tech is outstripping oil and gas in terms
of global influence. Three tech<br>
companies – Apple, Microsoft and Amazon – now have higher market
valuations than the entire oil and<br>
gas sector in the US. And the environmental impact of Big Tech is no
less important. Tech companies like<br>
to appear to be climate friendly, but Big Tech has a dirty secret at
its heart that the climate movement<br>
cannot afford to ignore.<br>
The information, communications and technology (ICT) sector overall
produces between 2 and 3.9% of<br>
global emissions, more than the aviation industry’s emissions from
fuel worldwide. This is growing fast,<br>
with some models predicting that the electricity use of ICT could
exceed 20% of the global total in the<br>
next 10 years.<br>
The rapid rise of tech giants like Google, Facebook and Amazon is
based on their ability to extract and<br>
monetise data from users. The direct climate cost of processing that
data is growing exponentially,<br>
particularly with expansion of data hungry sectors like the Internet
of Things and machine learning.<br>
However, the direct climate cost is dwarfed by the indirect impact
of a business model that drives<br>
consumerism and division, simultaneously depleting the earth’s
resources and – crucially – undermining<br>
our ability to have the constructive conversations and debate we
need to fix the climate crisis...<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.globalactionplan.org.uk/news/big-tech-s-toxic-business-model-is-turbo-charging-the-climate-crisis">https://www.globalactionplan.org.uk/news/big-tech-s-toxic-business-model-is-turbo-charging-the-climate-crisis</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.globalactionplan.org.uk/files/big_tech_report.pdf">https://www.globalactionplan.org.uk/files/big_tech_report.pdf</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<i>[ video interview, break out of the trap of oil and gas ]</i><br>
<b>Why Scientists Must Rebel | Aaron Thierry</b><br>
Planet: Critical<br>
153 views Dec 7, 2022<br>
Aaron Thierry is an ecologist and environmental activist. After
spending years on the frontline of the climate crisis in the Arctic,
Aaron now researches the communication strategies of activist
organisations, examining the interplay between reason and emotion in
the climate emergency movement.<br>
<br>
Aaron joins me to discuss his research, explaining the positive
impact of scientists rebelling against government inaction, and why
all academics must broaden their understanding of their role as
educators to warn their students of the realities of the crisis.
Aaron explains the benefits of a decentralised activist movement
sharing one single coherent message—and, in doing so, reveals the
true sunken cost of fossil fuel infrastructure that will likely send
us well over the 1.5 degree limit.<br>
<br>
🔴 Read Aaron's paper:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-022-01461-y">https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-022-01461-y</a><br>
🔴 Aaron's Twitter: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://twitter.com/thierryaaron">https://twitter.com/thierryaaron</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVf1KvrgJl0">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVf1KvrgJl0</a><br>
<p>- -</p>
<i>[careful arguments urging strong activism -- from the journal <b>nature
climate change</b> ]</i><br>
<b>Civil disobedience by scientists helps press for urgent climate
action</b><br>
Published: 29 August 2022<br>
Stuart Capstick, Aaron Thierry, Emily Cox, Oscar Berglund, Steve
Westlake & Julia K. Steinberger <br>
Nature Climate Change volume 12, pages773–774 <br>
8805 Accesses<br>
1506 Altmetric<br>
Metricsdetails<br>
<b>Time is short to secure a liveable and sustainable future; yet,
inaction from governments, industry and civil society is setting
the course for 3.2 °C of warming, with all the cascading and
catastrophic consequences that this implies. In this context, when
does civil disobedience by scientists become justified?</b><br>
<br>
The scientific community is well aware of the grim trajectory on
which the Earth is headed; many of those working on climate change
experience anxiety, grief or other types of distress as a result.
Increasingly stark warnings and the gathering pace of climate
impacts stand in contrast to the persistent growth in global
emissions. Some scientists conclude that the discordance between the
evidence and lack of response constitutes a broken contract between
science and society. Others point to powerful vested interests and
systemic inertia obstructing significant emissions reduction.<br>
<br>
Although scientists are not to blame for the lack of an adequate
societal response, it is reasonable to ask what more can be done to
accelerate desperately needed change, beyond the further
accumulation and communication of evidence.<br>
<br>
Many already accept a role for scientists in advocacy; around
two-fifths of IPCC authors have signed petitions or letters calling
for action, and a quarter report having taken part in protests. To
press for more meaningful efforts, and to push back against the
negligence and bad faith tactics that frustrate this, a legitimate
next step for scientists is to participate in peaceful civil
disobedience.<br>
<br>
We argue that this is justified on the basis that it is effective as
a strategy for change, it strongly communicates the urgency of the
climate crisis, is a reasonable and ethical activity for scientists
to undertake, and is revealing of the barriers to climate action.<br>
<br>
<b>Civil disobedience works</b><br>
Civil disobedience involves public acts of conscience that seek to
disrupt and resist business as usual and/or to effect changes in
laws and practices; examples in relation to climate action include
the bodily obstruction of investment banks enabling new fossil fuel
exploration and the pasting without permission of scientific papers
to government buildings. In concert with international movements
such as youth strikes, a growing number of scientists are becoming
involved with this type of protest<br>
Practitioners of civil disobedience often refer to important
historical precedents such as the suffragettes or the civil rights
movement; its use within contemporary climate activism is based on
the linked claim that it is more effective than conventional
protest. In some cases, civil disobedience has prompted a direct
response from decision-makers; for example, following the 2019
Extinction Rebellion protests in London, the UK parliament supported
a motion to declare a climate emergency that called on the
government to increase its ambition9. More often, disruptive
protests are part of broader politics, such as campaigns against
coal extraction in South Africa and by indigenous-led coalitions
resisting new fossil fuel infrastructure in the United States.<br>
<br>
The IPCC concludes with ‘high confidence’ that collective action
connected to social movements has played a substantial role in
pressuring governments to create new laws and policy, noting that
the more confrontational tactics of civil disobedience and direct
action have become increasingly common in recent years.
Meta-analysis of social movements worldwide contesting fossil fuel
projects finds that civil disobedience makes a demonstrable
difference to their chances of success, over and above the use of
other tactics10.<br>
<b><br>
</b><b>Civil disobedience needs scientists</b><br>
The trusted position of scientists in society affords a respected
standpoint from which to demand change; for this reason alone, their
participation is valuable as part of social movements. At the same
time, the credibility of scientists is influenced by whether they
are seen to be acting in line with shared values and promoting the
well-being of others and, in the context of climate change,
according to whether their actions clearly align with their message.
More generally, studies on social influence and leadership show that
particular meaning and purpose tends to be ascribed to conduct that
incurs personal costs (for example, risk or discomfort) when carried
out with the intention of advancing collective goals.<br>
<br>
Civil disobedience by scientists has the potential to cut through
the myriad complexities and confusion surrounding the climate crisis
in a way that less visible and dispassionate evidence provision does
not, sending a clear signal that scientists believe strongly in the
evidence and its implications. When those with expertise and
knowledge are willing to convey their concerns in a more
uncompromising manner than through papers and presentations, this
affords them particular effectiveness as a communicative act. This
is the insight of Greta Thunberg when she calls on us to “act as you
would in a crisis”.<br>
<b><br>
</b><b>Civil disobedience is justifiable</b><br>
As an ‘ethical crisis’, the climate emergency warrants civil
disobedience under certain specific conditions. These include that
fundamental rights to life and well-being are being undermined in an
unjust manner; that the action has the potential to be effective and
avoids harm; and that such action is undertaken as a last resort,
other avenues having been pursued. More long-standing scholarship
has argued that civil disobedience is justified in the context of a
broader ‘fidelity to law’ that contests specific policies or
practices but not the legitimacy of the state in general terms;
central to this is the separation of the legal from the legitimate,
siding where necessary with the latter.<br>
We argue that the circumstances of the climate crisis more than
fulfil the ‘last resort’ criterion: for decades, scientists have
tried to sound the alarm through other means, but years of delay and
obfuscation by decision-makers mean that severe consequences are
already unfolding around the world, with little time remaining to
avoid even more far-reaching and long-lasting harm. The climate
crisis is epitomized by destructive impacts on large numbers of
people; it is pervaded by injustice, and exacerbated through
obstruction by powerful institutions, including the conditions set
by legislators. Carefully targeted and peaceful civil disobedience
is able to align with overall fidelity to law, where scientists
accept the risk of arrest for conscientious but potentially unlawful
acts.<br>
<br>
<b>The trouble with scientific neutrality</b><br>
A familiar counter argument to scientist involvement in civil
disobedience is that this risks undermining the integrity of
science. The legitimacy of scientists is said to rest on their
status as impartial, objective or ‘neutral’ observers, and the idea
that science and politics should remain separate. However, these
ways of linking science and society are not founded on absolute
principles; rather, they exist as partially applied assumptions
based on historical precedent. We need to ask how well these
inherited norms are serving us in a time of existential
environmental crisis.<br>
<br>
Moreover, no dialogue between science and society can ever be value
neutral, and it should not aim to be. The widespread notion that
sober presentation of evidence by an ‘honest broker’ to those with
power will accomplish the best interests of populations is itself
not a neutral perspective on the world; it is instead conveniently
unthreatening to the status quo and often rather naive.<br>
<p>Misgivings about how civil disobedience by scientists may be
perceived by the wider public may also be misplaced. In general
terms, studies have found the credibility of scientists is not
undermined by advocacy; on the contrary, many members of the
public expect scientists to use their knowledge to advocate for
the public good.</p>
<b>Think then act</b><br>
While historical evidence can offer pointers, there is no
one-size-fits-all approach to civil disobedience. With respect to
climate action, it entails an ongoing experiment; scientists might
best consider themselves participatory action researchers, fully
cognisant and transparent about the value-based concerns that enable
their involvement. At the same time, participation can lead to
deeper understanding of the social and political structures that
surround the climate crisis and the processes by which change can
occur.<br>
<br>
It is important to be clear that the personal risks associated with
civil disobedience vary dramatically with people’s circumstances. We
recognize that there are many frontline activists who have lost
their lives protesting and resisting in defence of people and
planet. To be able to engage in disruptive protest in relative
safety is a privilege held by citizens living in comparatively
liberal societies. For those in such a fortunate position, the
opportunity exists to press for action, while helping to shape the
nature of protest activity and reducing the barriers to
participation by others.<br>
By engaging with the subject matter of this article, the authors —
and, we hope, our readers — are pushed into difficult territory
concerning a fundamental question: are our traditional modes of
research and communication failing in the face of the climate crisis
and, if so, what can we do about it? An unflinching engagement with
this question requires us to move beyond our comfort zone, in ways
which might challenge but also energize the position of scientists
in society.<br>
<br>
In addition to documenting the climate crisis in ever greater
detail, we are obliged to consider how we might act in new ways to
help bring about a necessary and urgent transformation.<br>
<br>
In the meantime, we have long since arrived at the point at which
civil disobedience by scientists has become justified.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-022-01461-y">https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-022-01461-y</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<i>[ race for the great battery - audio interview ]</i><br>
<b>Working on the cheapest possible lithium-ion battery</b><br>
A conversation with scientist and entrepreneur Charlotte Hamilton<br>
DEC 7 <br>
When I was working on my series about lithium-ion batteries (LIBs),
one thing I heard from several experts stuck in my head: As
production of LIBs scales up and costs continue coming down,
eventually the cost of batteries will fall to near the cost of the
materials that compose them. That means that the long-term winner of
the LIB race will be the battery chemistry composed of the cheapest
materials that can perform adequately.<br>
<br>
However, as Keynes reminded us, in the long run we are all dead. In
between now and that nebulous future are many challenges and
uncertainties.<br>
<br>
Currently, the leading battery chemistries involve cobalt, nickel,
magnesium, and lithium itself. All of those minerals are currently
mined and processed in socially, economically, and environmentally
harmful ways, and with demand rapidly expanding, supply chain
shortages loom in the short- to mid-term.<br>
<br>
There is one alternative that's coming on strong lately,
particularly in China — lithium-iron-phosphate (LFP) batteries,
which use iron. However, LFP batteries lack the energy density of
their competitors and are not suitable for the high-end electric
vehicles that comprise most of the US market today.<br>
<br>
The true holy grail for LIBs is sulfur. As Purdue University’s
Rebecca Ciez told me for my battery story, “the true least-cost
system for a lithium-based, rechargeable battery is lithium metal
[as the anode] and a sulfur cathode.” Sulfur is cheap, ubiquitous,
abundant, and already produced to the tune of 77 million tons a
year. The US is the world’s second largest producer.<br>
<br>
What’s more, sulfur’s “specific capacity” (energy it can hold per
unit of weight) is higher than its competitors’, so in theory it
could compete with or even best other LIBs in energy density. Of
course, this has been well known for a while, and people have been
pursuing it, but the engineering challenges remain substantial.
Lithium-sulfur batteries have not reached the market in any
appreciable numbers. Is there a pot of gold at the end of this
rainbow?<br>
<br>
Today I'm talking with someone who believes that there is. Charlotte
Hamilton is the CEO of Conamix, a company that is working to
commercialize lithium batteries with sulfur cathodes. The company
was founded in 2014 using technology from Cornell, Stanford,
Berkeley Lab, and elsewhere; last year it emerged from stealth,
closed a B round of funding, and secured an $8.6 million dollar
contract from the federal Intelligence Advanced Research Projects
Activity.<br>
<br>
I'm excited to talk to Hamilton about why lithium-sulfur batteries
are needed, how close they are to commercialization, how easily they
could fit into current LIB production infrastructure, and what kinds
of technological advances they could bring in their wake...<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.volts.wtf/p/working-on-the-cheapest-possible?utm_source=podcast-email%2Csubstack&publication_id=193024&post_id=88139857&utm_medium=email#details">https://www.volts.wtf/p/working-on-the-cheapest-possible?utm_source=podcast-email%2Csubstack&publication_id=193024&post_id=88139857&utm_medium=email#details</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<i>[ See this video, get your acreage, set up your solar power, plan
for decades ]</i><br>
<b>Solar Saves Soil: Experts Explain</b><br>
greenmanbucket<br>
17 views Dec 7, 2022<br>
Solar fields are in fact a primary path to save farmland, and
farmers, who are stewards of that land. Solar gives farmers a path
to diversify their income, to insure 30 years of drought-proof,
recession-proof, flood-proof income in uncertain times, pass their
land on to their children, and maintain an income while allowing
soil to rebuild.<br>
Solar racking has an extremely light footprint on the land, and
typically solar developers plant native grass species around panels,
which have deep roots, and bring water and nutrients deeper into the
soil.<br>
This helps revitalize soil, recharge aquifers, and store carbon and
other nutrients. It creates habitat for ground nesting birds and
smaller creatures at the bottom of the food chain.<br>
At the end of a project's life, if the farmer chooses, he can return
the land to production, and it will be much more fertile and
productive than it formerly was.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gR_Pfk-wU4E">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gR_Pfk-wU4E</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
<i>[The news archive - looking back]</i><br>
<font size="+2"><i><b>December 8, 2014</b></i></font> <br>
December 8, 2014:<br>
• The Washington Post reports:<br>
<br>
"Oil, gas and coal interests that spent millions to help elect
Republicans this year are moving to take advantage of expanded GOP
power in Washington and state capitals to thwart Obama
administration environmental rules.<br>
<br>
"Industry lobbyists made their pitch in private meetings last week
with dozens of state legislators at a summit of the American
Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), an industry-financed
conservative state policy group.<br>
<br>
"The lobbyists and legislators considered several model bills to be
introduced across the country next year, designed to give states
more power to block or delay new Obama administration environmental
standards, including new limits on power-plant emissions.<br>
<br>
"The industry’s strategy aims to combat a renewed push by President
Obama to carve out climate change as a top priority for his final
two years in office. The White House has vowed to continue using
executive authority to enact more environmental limits, and the
issue is shaping up to be a major flash point heading into the 2016
presidential election.<br>
<br>
"With support from industry lobbyists, many Republicans are planning
to make the Environmental Protection Agency a primary political
target, presenting it as a symbol of the kind of big-government
philosophy they think can unify social and economic conservatives in
opposition."<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/fossil-fuel-lobbyists-bolstered-by-gop-wins-work-to-curb-environmental-rules/2014/12/07/3ef05bc0-79b9-11e4-9a27-6fdbc612bff8_story.html">http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/fossil-fuel-lobbyists-bolstered-by-gop-wins-work-to-curb-environmental-rules/2014/12/07/3ef05bc0-79b9-11e4-9a27-6fdbc612bff8_story.html</a>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<p>======================================= <br>
<b class="moz-txt-star"><span class="moz-txt-tag">*Mass media is
lacking, many </span>daily summaries<span class="moz-txt-tag">
deliver global warming news - a few are 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 </b><span class="moz-txt-star"><a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/newsletter-sign-up">https://www.carbonbrief.org/newsletter-sign-up</a></span><b
class="moz-txt-star"><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 personal 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>