<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<font size="+2" face="Calibri"><i><b>March 18, 2023</b></i></font><font
face="Calibri"><br>
</font>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><font face="Calibri"><i>[ Must-see video of a crucially important
history that exposes political villainy ]</i><br>
</font><font face="Calibri"><b>Global Warming: The Decade We Lost
Earth</b><br>
Simon Clark<br>
13,548 views Mar 17, 2023<br>
The story of how one man cost us a world with less than 2°C of
warming in 1989. To try everything Brilliant has to
offer—free—for a full 30 days, visit
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.brilliant.org/simonclark">https://www.brilliant.org/simonclark</a><br>
This is a follow-up video to Global Warming: An Inconvenient
History, going into much more detail of events from 1979 to
1989. In particular this is the story of the "villain" of
climate change, a man you've likely never heard of before. But
is that a fair description? You be the judge.<br>
</font><font face="Calibri"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvGQMZFP9IA">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvGQMZFP9IA</a></font></p>
<p>- -</p>
<i>[ From the great journalist Nathaniel Rich]</i><br>
<b>Losing Earth: A Recent History –</b> March 17, 2020<br>
by Nathaniel Rich (Author)
<blockquote>By 1979, we knew nearly everything we understand today
about climate change―including how to stop it. Over the next
decade, a handful of scientists, politicians, and strategists, led
by two unlikely heroes, risked their careers in a desperate,
escalating campaign to convince the world to act before it was too
late. Losing Earth is their story, and ours.<br>
<br>
The New York Times Magazine devoted an entire issue to Nathaniel
Rich's groundbreaking chronicle of that decade, which became an
instant journalistic phenomenon―the subject of news coverage,
editorials, and conversations all over the world. In its emphasis
on the lives of the people who grappled with the great existential
threat of our age, it made vivid the moral dimensions of our
shared plight.<br>
<br>
Now expanded into book form, Losing Earth tells the human story of
climate change in even richer, more intimate terms. It reveals, in
previously unreported detail, the birth of climate denialism and
the genesis of the fossil fuel industry's coordinated effort to
thwart climate policy through misinformation propaganda and
political influence. The book carries the story into the present
day, wrestling with the long shadow of our past failures and
asking crucial questions about how we make sense of our past, our
future, and ourselves.<br>
<br>
Like John Hersey's Hiroshima and Jonathan Schell's The Fate of the
Earth, Losing Earth is the rarest of achievements: a riveting work
of dramatic history that articulates a moral framework for
understanding how we got here, and how we must go forward.<br>
</blockquote>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.amazon.com/Losing-Earth-History-Nathaniel-Rich/dp/1250251257/ref=asc_df_1250251257/">https://www.amazon.com/Losing-Earth-History-Nathaniel-Rich/dp/1250251257/ref=asc_df_1250251257/</a><br>
<br>
<p><br>
</p>
<font face="Calibri"><i>[ Democracy Now report on YouTube 21 min ]
</i><br>
</font> <font face="Calibri"><b>Climate Change & War: How U.S.
Military Emissions Factor into Costs of War & Shape Military
Policy</b><br>
Web Exclusive MARCH 17, 2023<br>
</font><font face="Calibri">- -</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"><b>AMY GOODMAN:</b> ...IAnd this goes back to
Part 1 of our discussion about the Costs of War Project, “Blood
and Treasure,” and the costs of war, the death toll, the expense.
If you could go through this? We’re talking about well over half a
million people, Iraqis and Syrians, you estimated, and could be
four to five times higher, and over $3 trillion?<br>
<br>
<b>NETA CRAWFORD:</b> Right. So, the largest single expense here
will be healthcare, going into the future. OK, it’s the many U.S.
servicemembers who were injured, sometimes very gravely, with
multiple amputations, traumatic brain injury, musculoskeletal
injuries and so on, exposure to toxics, people who will get cancer
in the future or who have gotten so already. So, that’s the
largest expenditure that’s ongoing.<br>
<br>
But what we see is, you know, there’s about more than $860 billion
were just spent on DOD operations, the so-called overseas
contingency operations in Iraq and Syria. Then there’s an
additional increase to the base military budget. So, the base
military budget is the non-war budget that covers healthcare
expenses for active-duty servicemembers and housing and all the
rest of it. So, that has also increased as a part of the long war.
Then there’s, in addition, some money that was spent to
reconstruct Iraq. Much less, about $60 billion, $62 billion, were
spent on reconstruction. What you see there is some of that was
wasted, a good portion of it, but some of it was effective at
reconstructing Iraq.<br>
<br>
And then there’s the money that’s already been spent on healthcare
and, in addition, interest on borrowing for these wars, because,
of course, the War in Iraq nor the War in Afghanistan, neither of
those conflicts were paid for through taxes that were raised
specifically for fighting, so the U.S. went into deficit. And with
that deficit comes interest, and we’re paying for it. We will be
paying for these wars for a long time. So, that’s why the costs
are so high — future health expenses, but the money we’ve already
spent.<br>
<br>
And then, when you talk about injuries, both in the region and
U.S. and its allies, those are hundreds of thousands of people who
are directly killed and injured. But then there’s also the
indirect harm that comes from a war. So, when water treatment
facilities were bombed and not repaired, or hospitals are bombed,
or physicians and nurses and other healthcare workers flee a
region, there’s a tremendous burden that’s placed on the remaining
healthcare system. And many people are suffering because they
don’t have access to preventive care or urgent or emergent care
when they need it. And those — that’s the extra death or the
indirect death or the extra morbidity and mortality that wouldn’t
have occurred if there had not been a war, and certainly a war of
this duration, which harmed the infrastructure and the ability of
people to get healthcare and clean drinking water, everything that
they need to have a decent life.<br>
<br>
<b>AMY GOODMAN:</b> Well, Neta Crawford, I want to thank you so
much for being with us, for producing the report and the book. And
you now can go back to your conference, where you are, in
Montreal, Canada. Neta Crawford is professor of international
relations at Oxford University and co-director of the Costs of War
Project at Brown University, where her new report is titled “Blood
and Treasure: United States Budgetary Costs and Human Costs of 20
Years of War in Iraq and Syria, 2003-2023,” also author of the
book The Pentagon, Climate Change, and War: Charting the Rise and
Fall of U.S. Military Emissions<. To see Part 1 of our
discussion, go to democracynow.org. I’m Amy Goodman. Thanks so
much for joining us.<br>
</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.democracynow.org/2023/3/17/climate_change_war_how_us_military">https://www.democracynow.org/2023/3/17/climate_change_war_how_us_military</a><br>
</font>
<p><font face="Calibri">- -</font></p>
<font face="Calibri"><i>[ from MIT Press ]</i><br>
</font><font face="Calibri"><b>The Pentagon, Climate Change, and
War: Charting the Rise and Fall of U.S. Military Emissions.</b><br>
</font><font face="Calibri">By Neta C. Crawford<br>
The MIT Press<br>
DOI: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/14617.001.0001">https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/14617.001.0001</a><br>
ISBN electronic: 9780262371933<br>
Publication date: 2022<br>
How the Pentagon became the world's largest single greenhouse gas
emitter and why it's not too late to break the link between
national security and fossil fuel consumption. The military has
for years (unlike many politicians) acknowledged that climate
change is real, creating conditions so extreme that some military
officials fear future climate wars. At the same time, the U.S.
Department of Defense—military forces and DOD agencies—is the
largest single energy consumer in the United States and the
world's largest institutional greenhouse gas emitter. In this
eye-opening book, Neta Crawford traces the U.S. military's growing
consumption of energy and calls for a reconceptualization of
foreign policy and military doctrine. Only such a rethinking, she
argues, will break the link between national security and fossil
fuels.<br>
<br>
The Pentagon, Climate Change, and War shows how the U.S. economy
and military together have created a deep and long-term cycle of
economic growth, fossil fuel use, and dependency. This cycle has
shaped U.S. military doctrine and, over the past fifty years, has
driven the mission to protect access to Persian Gulf oil. Crawford
shows that even as the U.S. military acknowledged and adapted to
human-caused climate change, it resisted reporting its own
greenhouse gas emissions.<br>
<br>
Examining the idea of climate change as a “threat multiplier” in
national security, she argues that the United States faces more
risk from climate change than from lost access to Persian Gulf
oil—or from most military conflicts. The most effective way to cut
military emissions, Crawford suggests provocatively, is to rethink
U.S. grand strategy, which would enable the United States to
reduce the size and operations of the militar7<br>
</font><font face="Calibri"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/14617.003.0002">https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/14617.003.0002</a><br>
</font><font face="Calibri"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://direct.mit.edu/books/book/5413/The-Pentagon-Climate-Change-and-WarCharting-the">https://direct.mit.edu/books/book/5413/The-Pentagon-Climate-Change-and-WarCharting-the</a><br>
</font>
<p><font face="Calibri"><br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Calibri"><br>
</font></p>
<i><font face="Calibri">[ An important conversation about the most
critical economics ]</font></i><br>
<font face="Calibri"><b>How big business sold America the myth of
the free market</b><br>
A conversation with Erik M. Conway about his new book with Naomi
Oreskes.<br>
</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">In 2010, historians of technology Erik M.
Conway and Naomi Oreskes released Merchants of Doubt: How a
Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco
Smoke to Global Warming, a book about weaponized misinformation
that proved to be extraordinarily prescient and influential.<br>
<br>
Now Oreskes and Conway are back with a new book: The Big Myth: How
American Business Taught Us to Loathe Government and Love the Free
Market. It's about the laissez-faire ideology of unfettered,
unrestrained markets, which was invented and sold to the American
people in the 20th century through waves of well-funded propaganda
campaigns. The success of that propaganda has left the US
ill-equipped to address its modern challenges.<br>
<br>
Erik M. Conway<br>
On March 8, I interviewed Conway at an event for Seattle's Town
Hall, where we discussed the themes of the book, the hold
free-market ideology still has over us, and the prospects for new
thinking. The organizers were kind enough to allow me to share the
recording with you as an episode of Volts. Enjoy!<br>
</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.volts.wtf/p/how-big-business-sold-america-the?utm_source=podcast-email%2Csubstack&publication_id=193024&post_id=106715301&utm_medium=email#details">https://www.volts.wtf/p/how-big-business-sold-america-the?utm_source=podcast-email%2Csubstack&publication_id=193024&post_id=106715301&utm_medium=email#details</a><br>
</font><br>
<br>
<p><font face="Calibri"><br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Calibri"> </font></p>
<p><font face="Calibri"><i>[ a new and </i></font><font
face="Calibri"><i>praiseworthy </i></font><font face="Calibri"><i>
"</i>techno-fides" <i>idea ]</i><br>
</font><font face="Calibri"><b>Solar Panels Floating in
Reservoirs? We’ll Drink to That</b><br>
Floating photovoltaic systems, or “floatovoltaics,” provide
electricity and reduce evaporation. Plus, you don’t need to
clear land for a solar farm.<br>
</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">“That’s remarkable, this
9,434-terawatt-hours-per-year potential,” says J. Elliott
Campbell, an environmental engineer at the University of
California, Santa Cruz and coauthor of the paper, which was
published today in Nature Sustainability. “It’s about 10 times
today’s generation from solar. And solar is growing like crazy.
If there was ever a time to ask where to put all this stuff,
it’s now.”<br>
<br>
Floatovoltaics work just like solar panels on land, only they’re
… floating. Each one is a cluster or “island” of panels, built
atop a buoyant mounting platform and anchored to the bottom of
the water body by cables. Every other row of panels is a walkway
for crews to do electrical maintenance or inspections. <br>
<br>
The systems are of course built to resist rust, but so are
terrestrial panels, which are exposed to rain. “The electrical
system is really no different than a rooftop system or a ground
mount system,” says Chris Bartle, director of sales and
marketing at Ciel & Terre USA, which deploys floatovoltaic
projects around the world. “We’ve taken essentially old
technology from the marina world—docks and buoys and whatnot—and
applied that to building a structure that an array of solar
panels can be mounted to. It’s really as simple as that.”<br>
<br>
They have an added engineering challenge, though, in that a
reservoir’s water level can change dramatically during storms or
droughts. There may be strong currents, as well as winds. So
while the system is anchored to the lake bottom, there must be
slack in the anchoring lines. “It allows the island to move
around with the nature of the wind and the waves and water level
variation,” says Bartle.<br>
<br>
These islands shade water that would otherwise be exposed to
relentless sunlight; if implemented worldwide, the study found
that all those panels would save enough water to supply 300
million people each year. The reservoir water, in turn, actually
makes the floatovoltaics more efficient at harvesting the sun’s
energy. It cools them—like a human, solar cells can overheat. <br>
<br>
In 2021, Campbell published another paper based on the same
principle: If California spanned 4,000 miles of its canal system
with panels, it would save 63 billion gallons of water from
evaporation each year and provide half the new clean energy
capacity the state needs to reach its decarbonization goals. <br>
<br>
Because the US has so many reservoirs—some 26,000 in varying
sizes, totaling 25,000 square miles of water—it would especially
benefit from wide-scale floatovoltaics, the new study finds. If
the country covered 30 percent of its reservoir area with
floating panels, it could generate 1,900 terawatt hours of
energy—about a fifth of the potential global total—while saving
5.5 trillion gallons of water a year.<br>
<br>
China could manage 1,100 terawatt hours annually, followed by
Brazil and India at 865 and 766, respectively. Egypt could
deploy 100 square miles of floatovoltaics and generate 66
terawatt hours of electricity while saving over 200 billion
gallons of water annually.<br>
<br>
The study further found that 40 economically developing
countries—including Zimbabwe, Myanmar, and Sudan—have more
capacity for floatovoltaic power than current energy demand.
(Though as they develop, that energy demand will go up.) <br>
<br>
An additional upside of floatovoltaics is that many reservoirs
are equipped with hydroelectric dams, so they already have the
electrical infrastructure to ferry solar power to cities. The
two power sources complement each other well, says Zhenzhong
Zeng, of China’s Southern University of Science and Technology,
a coauthor of the new paper. “The intermittency of solar energy
is one of the main obstacles to its development. Hydroelectric
power, which tends to be controlled, can make up for the
shortfall at night when solar power does not work,” says Zeng.
“Moreover, it can be combined with wind power, which is usually
well-complemented to solar.”<br>
<br>
Water savings will be all the more important as climate change
supercharges droughts, like the historic one that’s been
gripping the Western states. But even if a reservoir’s water
level declines severely and hydroelectric generation begins to
dip, floatovoltaics would still generate electricity. (However,
more remote reservoirs without hydroelectric systems would need
to connect their solar panels to the larger grid, which would
increase costs.)<br>
<br>
Floatovoltaics could also interface nicely with microgrids, says
Sika Gadzanku, an energy technology and policy researcher at the
National Renewable Energy Laboratory. These are divorced from a
larger grid and use solar power to charge up batteries, which
can, for example, power buildings at night. “If you maybe had a
huge pond in a remote area, deploying floatovoltaics could look
similar to just applying a solar-plus-battery project in some
other remote area,” says Gadzanku, who wasn’t involved in the
new paper but peer-reviewed it. <br>
<br>
And it could benefit small communities in other ways, Gadzanku
says: Installing a floating system on a local pond could save
its water and might be cheaper than trying to connect a remote
area to a bigger grid. “Expanding the grid is very expensive,”
she says.<br>
<br>
Putting panels over canals or reservoirs would make use of space
that’s already been modified by people, and it wouldn’t require
clearing additional land for huge solar farms. (Floatovoltaics
can also be deployed on polluted water bodies, like industrial
ponds.) “It takes about 70 times more land for solar than it
does for a natural gas plant, for equal capacity,” says
environmental engineer Brandi McKuin of the University of
California, Merced, who coauthored the canal paper with Campbell
but wasn’t involved in this new work. “If we’re going to reach
these ambitious climate goals while also protecting
biodiversity, we really need to look at these solutions that use
the built environment.”<br>
<br>
In recent years, floatovoltaics have graduated from
smaller-scale projects to sprawling solar farms, like in
Singapore’s Tengeh Reservoir, where the panels occupy an area
equal to 45 football fields. As the systems scale up, “we really
need additional research on what some of the potential impacts
are, thinking about these water ecosystems,” says Gadzanku. For
example, the shade might prevent the growth of aquatic plants,
or the panels might cause problems for local waterfowl and
migrating birds that rely on reservoirs as pitstops. It might be
useful to determine, for instance, if there’s an optimal spacing
of panels to allow species to freely move about the water. <br>
<br>
While these projects alone won’t be able to provide whole
metropolises with juice, they’ll help diversify the generation
of power, making the grid more resilient as the renewables
revolution gains speed. “Energy is such a big problem, we’re not
going to have one silver bullet,” says Campbell. “We need
floating photovoltaics and about a hundred other things to
satisfy our energy needs.”<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.wired.com/story/solar-panels-floating-in-reservoirs-well-drink-to-that/amp">https://www.wired.com/story/solar-panels-floating-in-reservoirs-well-drink-to-that/amp</a></font>
</p>
<br>
<p><font face="Calibri"><br>
</font> </p>
<font face="Calibri"><i>[The news archive - looking back at
Hurricane Katrina ]</i><br>
<font size="+2"><i><b>March 18, 2013</b></i></font> <br>
March 18, 2013: <br>
USA Today reports: "Could the USA deal with a Hurricane Katrina
every two years? Such a scenario is possible by the end of the
century due to climate change, according to a study published
Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences."<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2013/03/18/storm-surge-hurricane-climate-change-global-warming/1997113/">http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2013/03/18/storm-surge-hurricane-climate-change-global-warming/1997113/</a>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</font>
<p><font face="Calibri">======================================= <br>
</font> <font face="Calibri"><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>
</font> <font face="Calibri"><br>
=========================================================<br>
</font> <font face="Calibri"><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>
</font> <font face="Calibri"><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>
</font> <font face="Calibri"><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>
</font> </p>
<font face="Calibri">
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------/
<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>
</font>
</body>
</html>