<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<font size="+2"><font face="Calibri"><i><b>August 5</b></i></font></font><font
size="+2" face="Calibri"><i><b>, 2023</b></i></font><font
face="Calibri"><br>
</font> <font face="Calibri"> </font> <br>
<font face="Calibri"><i>[ Over-exuberant leader makes a moral
adjustment ]</i></font><br>
<font face="Calibri"><b>Harvard environmental law professor resigns
from ConocoPhillips after months of scrutiny</b><br>
Jody Freeman was a board member at the fossil fuel firm for over
10 years and received more than $350,000 a year in salary and
stocks<br>
</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">Dharna Noor<br>
Fri 4 Aug 2023<br>
</font> <br>
<font face="Calibri">Harvard environmental law professor resigns
from ConocoPhillips after months of scrutiny<br>
Jody Freeman was a board member at the fossil fuel firm for over
10 years and received more than $350,000 a year in salary and
stocks<br>
<br>
Jody Freeman, a renowned environmental lawyer at Harvard
University, has stepped down from a highly-paid role at the oil
and gas giant ConocoPhillips, following months of public scrutiny
and pressure from climate activists.<br>
</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">“I’ve stepped off the ConocoPhillips board to
focus on my research at Harvard and make space for some new
opportunities,” she wrote on her website on Thursday.<br>
<br>
Freeman, founding director of Harvard’s environmental and energy
law program and former advisor to President Obama’s
administration, served as a board member at the fossil fuel
company for more than a decade.<br>
<br>
She received more than $350,000 annually in combined salary and
stocks for the position at ConocoPhillips, a firm that has been in
the spotlight this year over the Biden administration’s
controversial approval of its massive $8bn drilling project in
Alaska, known as the Willow project.<br>
</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">In April, reporting from the Guardian and the
Bureau of Investigative Journalism revealed that Freeman lobbied
the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on behalf of the
company, intensifying criticism from climate activists including
Harvard students.<br>
<br>
Emails obtained via the Freedom of Information Act indicate she
helped set up a meeting between company top brass and an SEC
director as the agency worked to write new regulations on
companies’ emissions disclosure.<br>
<br>
In correspondence with her then Harvard colleague John Coates, who
was preparing to become acting director at the SEC, Freeman
praised two high-level ConocoPhillips officials. “They are hugely
knowledgeable, thoughtful, and interested in solving problems – I
can promise that you will get high value from this engagement,”
she said of the officials.<br>
<br>
Freeman added: “ConocoPhillips is widely recognized as the oil and
gas industry leader on climate related disclosure.” She did not
state her affiliation with the agency in the email, in potential
violation of Harvard policy. Freeman denied having initiated the
meeting, insisting her role at the oil and gas company was “common
knowledge” and that her actions were compliant with Harvard’s
conflict-of-interests rules.<br>
<br>
Fossil Fuel Divest Harvard, a student-led activist group who
provided the emails to the Guardian and Bureau of Investigative
Journalism, welcomed Freeman’s resignation.<br>
<br>
“Jody Freeman’s resignation from ConocoPhillips shows the power of
well-informed public pressure,” said Phoebe Barr, an organizer
with Fossil Fuel Divest Harvard, noting that the organization has
published research about industry links for years.<br>
</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">Freeman had previously come under scrutiny from
climate and campus activists when a Harvard Salata Institute for
Climate and Sustainability awarded Freeman a major research grant,
the Guardian reported in April. The institute had pledged to
eschew funding from, or partnerships with, “any company that does
not share the goal of moving our global economy away from fossil
fuels”.<br>
<br>
The move prompted widespread outrage on Harvard’s campus. A
climate-focused group of professors sent a letter to Harvard’s
president-elect and vice-provost for climate and sustainability
questioning the decision, and students held a protest calling on
Harvard to fire Freeman.<br>
<br>
Regina LaRocque, a professor at Harvard Medical School who signed
the faculty letter, applauded Freeman’s resignation.<br>
<br>
“Kudos to her for doing the right thing,” she said.<br>
<br>
A 2021 analysis by Carbon Tracker, an independent research group,
found that ConocoPhillips’ climate plans were less robust than
most other fossil fuel giants’. During Freeman’s board tenure,
ConocoPhillips expanded its fossil fuel production, according to
the Washington Post.</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">On her website, Freeman said leaving
ConocoPhillips will allow her to prioritize her work on Harvard’s
environmental law program. “I’m also excited about the prospect of
writing a book on our environmental challenges and how we can make
faster progress,” she wrote.<br>
<br>
She said she did not regret her longterm board membership.<br>
<br>
“I learned a lot from my decade-long board service, think I made a
positive difference, and am glad I did it,” she wrote.<br>
<br>
Jake Lowe, director of Fossil Free Research, an advocacy group
focused on eliminating oil and gas company funding for academic
endeavors, said the news shows that “organizing works”.<br>
<br>
“Jody Freeman’s resignation from the ConocoPhillips board is a
testament to the tireless efforts of student organizers to expose
and dismantle big oil’s toxic influence on Harvard,” he said.<br>
<br>
Hannah Story Brown, senior researcher at the Revolving Door
Project, said student activists “deserve major credit” for pushing
Freeman to leave her lucrative role, but noted that many other
high-profile academics, including at Harvard, have similar
corporate roles which raise questions about conflicts of
interests.<br>
<br>
“She’s a symptom of a larger issue,” Brown said.<br>
<br>
Student activists are intent on taking on the problem at large,
said Barr.<br>
<br>
“We will continue our work to expose and dismantle the ties
Harvard retains to the fossil fuel industry, through individual
conflicts of interest, research funding policies, career
recruitment and more,” she said. “Our organizing won’t stop until
Harvard is truly fossil free.”<br>
</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/aug/04/harvard-professor-resigns-conocophillips-board">https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/aug/04/harvard-professor-resigns-conocophillips-board</a><br>
</font>
<p><font face="Calibri"><br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Calibri"><br>
</font></p>
<font face="Calibri"><i>[ lectures video -- 28 min the 4 options -
Green growth, Mordor, Great simplification and Mad Max. This is
an important presentation ] </i><br>
</font><font face="Calibri"><b>Just Stop Oil !? Part 3 - 10 Pathways
to Post-Growth | Frankly #40</b><br>
Nate Hagens</font><font face="Calibri"> Aug 4, 2023 #natehagens
#thegreatsimplification<br>
In Part 3 of this Frankly Series, Nate (just after watching the
movie Oppenheimer!) breaks down the logic of how we COULD arrive
at a post-growth future. Our global situation is complex and not
static - IF we somehow are able to shrink the global economic
output (which would imply significantly less oil use) we first
have to navigate ‘the 4 Horsemen of the 2020s’. Nate outlines 10
possible avenues for how this could happen, not as a prescription
but as a description of various possible scenarios. The
implications of the complexity of our global systems means a path
to a world without our current dependence on growth will not be an
easy one. Yet understanding these hurdles between our current
situation and an eventual post-growth future is essential to
shifting the initial conditions of such a global transformation
towards ‘better-than-the-default’ outcomes. How do impending and
converging risks narrow our options for ways to move towards a
different global system - and can we manage to protect the things
that make life worth living? <br>
</font><font face="Calibri"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhOhfRrvYI0">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhOhfRrvYI0</a><br>
</font>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><font face="Calibri"><br>
</font></p>
<font face="Calibri"> <i>[ If wildfire was a country, it would be
the 4th largest emitter of carbon ]</i></font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font> <b>Fighting Canada’s Unending Fires</b><br>
New York Times Podcasts<br>
Aug 4, 2023 The Daily<br>
The wildfires sweeping Canada have become the largest in its modern
history. Across the country, 30 million acres of forest have burned
— three times as much land as in the worst American fire in the past
50 years.<br>
<br>
The scale has forced an international response and a re-evaluation
of how the world handles wildfires.<br>
<br>
Firefighters on the front lines discuss the challenges they face,
and David Wallace-Wells, a climate columnist for The Times, explores
how climate change has shifted thinking about wildfires.<br>
<br>
Guest: David Wallace-Wells <br>
<br>
For more information on today’s episode, visit
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/04/podcasts/canada-wildfires-climate-change.html?rref=vanity">https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/04/podcasts/canada-wildfires-climate-change.html?rref=vanity</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOwILlYwcQ4">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOwILlYwcQ4</a><br>
- -<br>
[ duplicate ]<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/04/podcasts/canada-wildfires-climate-change.html?rref=vanity">https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/04/podcasts/canada-wildfires-climate-change.html?rref=vanity</a>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<i><font face="Calibri">[ M</font></i><i><font face="Calibri">ainstream
</font></i><i><font face="Calibri">economists have not even begun
to understand the implications of ecological systems collapse. ]</font></i><br>
<font face="Calibri"><b>The economics of systems collapse</b><br>
James Meadway <br>
</font><font face="Calibri">Ecologist - EPC July-Sept 23<br>
We may be seriously underestimating the possibility of “ecosystem
collapse” over the next few decades, according to some new
research published recently in the scientific journal Nature
Sustainability. <br>
</font>
<p><font face="Calibri"> This article is a transcript from Dr
Meadway's Macrodose podcast. Listen to the episode online
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.patreon.com/posts/episode-33-and-86220286">https://www.patreon.com/posts/episode-33-and-86220286</a></font><br>
</p>
<font face="Calibri"> Read the paper in Nature Sustainability. - <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-023-01157-x">https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-023-01157-x</a><br>
<br>
The world’s ecosystems are already changing rapidly. Rainforests
are being turned into savanna. Savanna is turning into desert.
Tundra is thawing out and of course the polar ice-caps are
melting.<br>
<br>
What the research indicates, using computer models of global and
some major regional ecosystems, is that this combination of
multiple existing ecological stresses are all working together to
make the collapse of ecosystems far more likely and at dates much
closer to us than has been previously predicted. <br>
<b><br>
</b><b> Irreversible</b><br>
It’s the combination of factors that make the difference – we
often reduce the ecological crisis to only climate change, but the
threat to systems is also coming from damaging biodiversity
losses, resource overuse, and all the other anthropogenic
pollutants.<br>
<br>
Once these additional factors are accounted for, the ecosystem
models go haywire. Systems that were previously expected to
collapse in the 2090s from a single factor, like rising
temperatures, will, in the worst case scenario, fall apart as
early as the 2030s. <br>
<br>
This is the importance of taking a holistic view of these changes
- understanding each of these stresses together, rather than as
individual issues.<br>
<br>
As the authors of this new report say, these collapses are
essentially irreversible events. Pushing an ecosystem beyond the
tipping point is not something that can be patched up – once it’s
gone, it’s gone. <br>
<br>
And once you have multiple collapses happening, the interactions
between them also start to pull the wider system into chaos. This
will be a point of no return for the planet, and for all of us who
have to live here – an irreversible breach in human and natural
history. <br>
<br>
<b>Negative</b><br>
If all of this wasn’t pleasant enough - there’s a growing case for
saying some of these tipping points have already been breached. We
have already passed into a new period in the Earth’s history as a
result of human activity, which geologists refer to as the
“Anthropocene”. <br>
<br>
Rapid climate change is the best-known element in this new
geological period, but massive biodiversity loss in what is likely
to be the world’s sixth known mass extinction event is a major
element. Worsening chaos and instability are not some passing
crisis, but a fundamental reality for all of us from this point
onwards. <br>
<br>
Pushing an ecosystem beyond the tipping point is not something
that can be patched up – once it’s gone, it’s gone. <br>
It’s an extremely bleak picture. But it’s not one that
conventional economic thinking takes much account of – or even is
able to take much account of. The conventional economic models of
climate change, the “Integrated Assessment Models”, are built
around the fundamental idea that everything is reversible in some
sense – or, at the very least, some sum of money could be paid to
compensate for loss.<br>
<br>
That is combined with a doctrinal belief in the power of
technological progress. The process of invention and technological
change will eventually come up with radically better ways of
securing economic growth.<br>
<br>
You can see this most obviously in the main IPCC forecasting
models for Net Zero, which include an incredibly efficient
“negative emissions technology” that can magically remove carbon
from the atmosphere - such a technology or technologies doesn’t
yet exist. <br>
<br>
<b>Instability</b><br>
Dealing with climate change in this worldview - in the worldview
of mainstream economics - becomes an issue only of trade-offs: how
much expense and growth do we sacrifice today, given our forecasts
of damage from climate change tomorrow?<br>
<br>
But if tipping points are real – and they seem to be – and
ecological damage is irreversible, the basis for this form of
economic thinking is destroyed. There is no “trade-off” possible
when something has been irreversibly lost – you can’t trade off an
extinct species or a collapsed ecosystem. They’re gone. <br>
<br>
Instead of thinking about essentially marginal changes to the
system, you need to think about big, fundamental shifts in how the
economy is organised – and not only to reduce future harm as far
as possible, to build a world where the very real costs and misery
of future ecosystem collapse and ecological instability is fairly
managed, protecting people as far as possible. <br>
<br>
<b>Fiscal</b><br>
At present, we are sort-of doing the first, with various
agreements on reducing greenhouse gas emissions globally, but we
are barely scratching the surface of the second. The real and
serious crisis of adaptation is not being mentioned in the
mainstream discussions of the economic crisis.<br>
<br>
To pick just the British example, the Bank of England here
continues to jam up interest rates when confronted with ecological
shock inflation, pushing the costs onto everyday people instead of
facing up to the real issues and the new economic and ecological
reality.<br>
<br>
The British Labour Party is another illustration of the problem.
Labour’s original plans for ecological investment were for a world
of low interest rates and inflation – if they want to get serious
about climate change now, they need to talk about redistribution
and adaptation. We need massive investments, and substantial tax
reform to equip or at least partially insulate our economies from
the worst impacts of ecosystem collapse. <br>
<br>
But as Labour seemingly won’t do that, they’re steadily working
their way through abandoning every commitment they’ve made thus
far, big or small, - under the auspices of the infamous fiscal
rules - and are unable to adapt their thinking to these new
realities.<br>
<br>
<b>Huggers</b><br>
We are left with institutions that were drawn up in a world where
climate change was not a direct and pressing global issue. It was
a threat for the future, only making its presence felt at the
edges – harsh on small island states, but for the developed world,
something that could be largely ignored. <br>
<br>
Now, the ecological collapse is here - and getting worse with
every passing day. And existing strategies built around state
investment and technology-lead decarbonisation are already under
strain. <br>
<br>
This is a new world. If our institutions don’t catch up soon, it
will be the rest of us that are left to suffer in permanently
higher inflation and the doom loop of higher interest rates as the
accompaniment to wider ecological collapse. <br>
<br>
Prime minister Keir Starmer, if that’s where we’re headed, might
find he has more than tree huggers to worry about if Labour
doesn’t get its act together. <br>
<br>
<b>This Author</b><br>
Dr James Meadway is an economist and former political advisor.
This article is a transcript from his Macrodose podcast
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.patreon.com/posts/episode-33-and-86220286">https://www.patreon.com/posts/episode-33-and-86220286</a><br>
</font><font face="Calibri"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://theecologist.org/2023/aug/02/economics-systems-collapse">https://theecologist.org/2023/aug/02/economics-systems-collapse</a><br>
</font><br>
<p><font face="Calibri"><br>
</font></p>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><font face="Calibri"> <i>[The news
archive - looking back at an early climate science martyr ]</i></font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> <font size="+2"><i><b>August 5, 1996</b></i></font>
</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">August 5, 1996: The New York Times profiles
climate scientist Ben Santer, who had just become the target of a
lavishly-financed defamation campaign by the fossil fuel industry.
<br>
</font>
<blockquote><font face="Calibri"><b>Believer Finds Himself At Center
of Hot Debate</b><br>
By WILLIAM K. STEVENS<br>
LIVERMORE, CALIF. -- Dr. Benjamin D. Santer, a shy, even-spoken,
41-year-old American climatologist who climbs mountains, runs
marathons and enjoys a reputation for careful and scrupulous
work, is the chief author of what may be the most important
finding of the decade in atmospheric science: that human
activity is probably causing some measure of global climate
change, as environmentalists have long assumed and skeptics have
long denied.<br>
<br>
The finding, issued for the first time in December 1995 by a
panel of scientists meeting under United Nations sponsorship in
Madrid, left open the question of just how large the human
impact on climate is. The question is perhaps the hottest and
most urgent in climatology today.<br>
<br>
Dr. Santer is in the forefront of a rapidly unfolding effort to
answer it..<br>
<br>
Dr. Santer graduated with top honors in 1976 from the University
of East Anglia in Britain with a degree in environmental
sciences.<br>
<br>
To his dismay, his British education availed him little in the
job market when he returned to his parents' home, then in the
Baltimore area. He bounced around for the next few years,
working at various times as a soccer teacher, a German teacher
for Berlitz and an assembler in a zipper factory, at which
point, he says, he found himself "down and out in Seattle." He
made two stabs at a doctorate at East Anglia, abandoning both.<br>
<br>
He soon made a third attempt to earn a doctorate at East Anglia,
which boasts one of the world's top climatology departments, and
this time he succeeded.<br>
<br>
"I found it fascinating," he said, "the idea that humans could
have a potentially large impact on climate." In his
dissertation, Dr. Santer used statistical techniques to
investigate the accuracy with which computerized models of the
climate system simulated regional climates.<br>
<br>
He soon moved to another leading climatological laboratory, the
Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg, where he worked
for the first time on the problem of detecting the signal of
human-caused climate change, especially global warming -- the
"greenhouse fingerprint." He also met his wife, Heike, in
Hamburg, and they now have a 3-year-old son, Nicholas.<br>
<br>
Since moving to Livermore in 1992, Dr. Santer has grappled with
the related problems of testing the validity of climate models
and searching for the greenhouse fingerprint. His strategy is to
examine observed patterns of temperature change to see whether
they matched the unique patterns expected to result from the
combination of growing industrial emissions of heat-trapping
gases like carbon dioxide, on one hand, and sulfate aerosols
that cool some parts of the planet, on the other. According to
this reasoning, the pattern produced by the combination of
greenhouse gases and aerosols would be markedly different from
that produced by any natural cause.<br>
<br>
Climate models have been widely criticized for, among other
things, failing to adequately represent natural variability. One
critic, Dr. Richard S. Lindzen of the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, says the models are so flawed as to be no more
reliable than a Ouija board.<br>
<br>
"I think that's garbage," said Dr. Santer, part of whose job is
to assess how good the models are. "I think models are credible
tools and the only tools we have to define what sort of
greenhouse signal to look for. It's clear that the ability of
models to simulate important features of present-day climate has
improved enormously." He says that if the models are right --
still a big if -- the human imprint on the climate should emerge
more clearly in the next few years. All in all, he says, he
expects "very rapid" progress in the search for the greenhouse
fingerprint.<br>
<br>
When might it become clear enough to be widely convincing?<br>
<br>
"Even if New York were under six feet of water, there would be
people who would still say, 'Well, this is a natural event,' "
he said.<br>
</font></blockquote>
<font face="Calibri"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://partners.nytimes.com/library/national/120197believe.html">http://partners.nytimes.com/library/national/120197believe.html</a></font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> <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. </font><font
face="Calibri"><br>
</font>
</body>
</html>