<!DOCTYPE html>
<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>October </b></i></font></font><font
size="+2" face="Calibri"><i><b>9, 2023</b></i></font><font
face="Calibri"><br>
</font><br>
<i>[ Wildfire workers seeking recognition ]</i><br>
<b>Hotshots working under an ‘unsustainable system’</b><br>
Author Hunter Bassler <br>
October 8, 2023<br>
The first-ever review of the interagency hotshot crew program found
that hotshots have been working under an “unsustainable system” and
recommended 50 changes to improve current labor conditions.<br>
<br>
The review, requested by the National Interagency Hotshot Crew
Steering Committee, began on July 16, 2021, and the report was
finalized in August.<br>
“The hotshot program is at a crossroads. In a time where more
wildland firefighting capacity is needed, applicant lists for
hotshot crews are less robust and the workforce is diminishing,” the
report says. “If these challenges are not addressed in a timely
manner, the current unsustainable system may leave crews unable to
provide the leadership, expertise, and capabilities required in
today’s wildland fire environment.”<br>
<br>
The report summed up its recommendations in 12 points, which
included:<br>
<blockquote>
<ul>
<li>Develop a specific wildland firefighter job series and
increase pay</li>
<li>Provide a $40,000 minimum annual supply budget to each crew</li>
<li>Require a three-day rest and recuperation period</li>
<li>Allow crewmembers to attend personal events</li>
<li>Modify the hiring process</li>
<li>Start an outreach program to increase recruitment</li>
<li>Create a 30-day process to fill key vacancies</li>
<li>Update and clarify the Standards for Interagency Hotshot
Crew Operations (SIHCO) so they are no longer misinterpreted
by host units</li>
<li>Create an annual charter and program of work for the hotshot
crew program to further limit gaps between leadership and the
field</li>
<li>Update the repair and procurement processes for hotshot
vehicles</li>
<li>Develop a minimum facility standard for hotshot crew
facilities</li>
<li>Add housing, modify housing costs and create a consistent
housing policy</li>
<li>The review addressed potential challenges to meeting the
recommended changes, including lack of investment, systemic
pushback, and cultural norms. Hotshot crew superintendents
also said they’d prefer freedom and flexibility to make
decisions for their own crews.</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
Without the recommended changes, the committee said agencies may not
be able to sustain the current number of crews.<br>
<br>
“It is important to acknowledge that while the fundamental reasons
hotshot crews exist have not changed, the environment they operate
in has,” the report said. “Unprecedented environmental challenges
and increased social and political expectations contribute to IHCs
finding themselves in high demand and short supply.”<br>
<br>
The committee said similar reviews should be conducted by other
program managers before the recommendations are broadly applied.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://wildfiretoday.com/2023/10/08/hotshots-working-under-an-unsustainable-system/">https://wildfiretoday.com/2023/10/08/hotshots-working-under-an-unsustainable-system/</a><br>
<p><br>
<br>
</p>
<font face="Calibri"><i>[ interview with Al Gore </i></font><font
face="Calibri">The New Yorker Radio Hour </font><font
face="Calibri"><i>- - audio ]</i><br>
<b>Al Gore on the Climate Crisis: “We Have a Switch We Can Flip”</b><br>
October 6, 2023<br>
By David Remnick<br>
</font> -<br>
<font face="Calibri">Despite months of discouraging news about
extreme weather conditions, the former vice-president Al Gore
still believes that there is a solution to the climate crisis
clearly in sight. “We have a switch we can flip,” he tells David
Remnick. The problem, as Gore sees it, is that a powerful legacy
network of political and financial spheres of influence are
stubbornly standing in the way. “When ExxonMobil or Chevron put
their ads on the air, the purpose is not for a husband and wife to
say, ‘Oh, let’s go down to the store and buy some motor oil.’ The
purpose is to condition the political space so that they have a
continued license to keep producing and selling more and more
fossil fuels,” Gore says. He notes that the upcoming United
Nations climate conference is presided over by an oil executive.
And yet Gore remains cautiously optimistic. Plus, the singer and
actor Rubén Blades tells The New Yorker’s Graciela Mochkofsky
about his unlikely journey from law school to Latin music icon.<br>
-<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/tnyradiohour/episodes/al-gore-climate-crisis-we-have-switch-we-can-flip">https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/tnyradiohour/episodes/al-gore-climate-crisis-we-have-switch-we-can-flip</a></font><br>
<p><font face="Calibri">- -<br>
</font></p>
<font face="Calibri"><i>[ New Yorker transcript text of the
interview -- article ]<br>
</i></font><font face="Calibri"><b>Al Gore Doesn’t Say I Told You
So</b><br>
The former Vice-President revisits his early advocacy for the
environment, assesses the impact of Elon Musk, and explains his
optimism about two existential crises.<br>
By David Remnick<br>
October 6, 2023<br>
-<br>
There was always the possibility that Al Gore, after making the
hideously painful decision to concede the contested 2000
Presidential election to George W. Bush, would have to live out
the remainder of his life as both a tragic loser and a tragic
hero—someone who stood down in the name of the orderly transition
of power. Gore resisted self-pity by projecting mordant good
humor. “Hi, I’m Al Gore,” he would tell audiences. “I used to be
the next President of the United States.” Or, in slightly darker
moods, he’d say, “You know the old saying: you win some, you lose
some—and then there’s that little-known third category.”<br>
<br>
In the years to come, Gore made targeted criticisms of the Bush
Administration—particularly of the war in Iraq—and became a kind
of evangelist on the issue of climate change. His interest in
ecological issues was evident as early as 1976, when he was
elected to Congress as a young Democrat from Tennessee; in 1992,
he published “Earth in the Balance,” which called for a “Global
Marshall Plan” to protect the environment.<br>
<br>
In 2006, instead of seeking some other political office, he
collaborated with the writer and director Davis Guggenheim on the
film “An Inconvenient Truth,” delivering a kind of
lecture-with-slides on the environmental disasters that the world
would face if people and governments remained indifferent to the
price of burning fossil fuels. In 2007, Gore and the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change were together awarded
the Nobel Prize for Peace, “for their efforts to build up and
disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change.”<br>
<br>
Gore is an investor in green-technology businesses—a fact that
regularly provokes criticism for alleged conflicts of interest—and
he continues to write about the threat of climate change; promote
the work of nonprofits, such as the Climate Reality Project and
Climate TRACE; and, generally, campaign for governments,
institutions, and individuals to act to prevent the worst.<br>
<br>
Recently, as the warmest summer in recorded history was coming to
an end, I spoke with Gore, who was in New York while the U.N.
General Assembly was meeting. During our conversation, which has
been edited for length and clarity, the former Vice-President
discussed the fossil-fuel industry’s influence in politics, the
U.N.’s climate efforts, and his hopes for America’s political
will. Gore is seventy-five and lives in Nashville and also, as he
put it, “on the road.” Our conversation also appears on The New
Yorker Radio Hour.<br>
<br>
Well, here we are. The last time I saw you, you came to The New
Yorker and Condé Nast to talk about climate—this was probably ten
years ago. And you were in the mode of warning, pushing, just as
you had even years before, with “An Inconvenient Truth.” And now
we’re through the summer of 2023, and anybody has to recognize
that this is not a matter of the future—this is a matter of now.
The climate crisis is now. We’re living in it. How do you assess
what you saw—what we all saw—in the summer, all across the world?<br>
<br>
Well, as you say, it now seems obvious to almost everyone that the
severity of the crisis has reached a new level of intensity.
Climate-related extreme events have become so common and so
dangerous that people who wanted to dismiss it are now waking up
to the reality that we’re facing. And, of course, the underlying
substance is shocking. We’re still using the sky as an open sewer
for the heat-trapping, gaseous pollution that we spew into it at
the rate of a hundred and sixty-two million tons every single day.
And we know how to solve it. We have the means to solve it. I’ve
used the metaphor of flipping a switch, and some people have
objected to that. But, really, we have a switch we can flip.<br>
<br>
Describe what the switch is, what the political means are, and
what stands in the way.<br>
<br>
The climate crisis is really a fossil-fuel crisis. There are other
components of it, for sure, but eighty per cent of it is the
burning of fossil fuels. And scientists now know—and this is a
relatively new finding, a very firm understanding—that, once we
stop net additions to the overburden of greenhouse gases, once we
reach so-called net zero, then temperatures on Earth will stop
going up almost immediately. The lag time is as little as three to
five years. They used to think that temperatures would keep on
worsening because of positive-feedback loops—and some things,
tragically, will. The melting of the ice, for example, will
continue, though we can moderate the pace of that; the extinction
crisis will continue without other major changes. But we can stop
temperatures from going up almost immediately, and that’s the
switch we need to flip. And then, if we can stay at true net zero,
half of all human-caused greenhouse-gas pollution will fall out of
the atmosphere in twenty-five to thirty years. So we can start the
long and slow healing process almost immediately, if we act.<br>
<br>
What’s required?<br>
<br>
We have to find a way to shift out of our dependence on fossil
fuels: coal, oil, and gas. And, of course, the fossil-fuel
industry, and the financial institutions that have grown
codependent on them—<br>
<br>
<b>The banks—</b><br>
<br>
The banks and the other large lenders, and associated industries,
have, for more than a hundred years, built up a legacy network of
political and economic influence. Shockingly, they have managed to
convert their economic power into political power with lobbying,
and campaign contributions, and the revolving-door
phenomenon—where fossil-fuel executives go into the government.<br>
<br>
I mean, the last President of the United States made the C.E.O. of
ExxonMobil the Secretary of State. It’s almost hard to believe,
but that is a symbol of how fossil-fuel companies have penetrated
governments around the world. When ExxonMobil or Chevron puts its
ads on the air, the purpose is not for a husband and wife to say,
“Oh, let’s go down to the store and buy some motor oil.” The
purpose is to condition the political space so that they have a
continued license to keep producing and selling more and more
fossil fuels.<br>
<br>
Well, you’re not only an evangelist for climate change; you also
are a politician, a seasoned politician.<br>
<br>
<b>I’m a recovering politician.</b><br>
<br>
You’re looking better already. Tell me, why is it impossible for
politicians to run on this successfully? What are the barriers
preventing a day-to-day politician, on the state or national
level, from making this an effective electoral cause?<br>
<br>
The polluters have gained a high degree of control over the
processes of self-government. I’ve often said that, in order to
solve the crisis, we have to pay a lot of attention to the
democracy crisis. Our representative democracy is not working very
well. We have a dual hegemonic ideology called democratic
capitalism, and the democracy part of our ideology has been
cannibalized, to some extent, by economic actors, who have found
ways to convert wealth into political influence. Wealth has always
had its usefulness in the political sphere, but much more so in an
era in which the candidate who raises the most money, and can buy
the most media presence, almost always wins the election. And
there’s been kind of evolutionary pressure as to people who go
into politics: people who don’t want to put up with that kind of
routine shy away from it now. Those who like it are more likely to
run and get elected.<br>
<br>
It seems to me that, until alternative energy sources are cheap
enough and ubiquitous enough to overcome the price and ubiquity of
fossil fuels, you’re always going to have a problem. Bill McKibben
will argue—as you do, I think—that those sources of energy are
around, and, no matter what you may think of Elon Musk as a matter
of character, that electric cars are on their way. How far away
are we, in technological and financial terms, from being able to
overwhelm fossil fuels?<br>
<br>
Well, we’re getting closer and closer. I’ll give you one
statistic. If you were asked what percentage of the new
electricity generation in the most populous country in the
world—India—came from solar and wind last year, you might be
surprised to hear that the answer was ninety-two per cent.
Globally, eighty-eight per cent of all the new electricity
generation last year was from renewables—eighty per cent from
solar and wind. And yet we are still building more fossil-fuel
facilities. There is now more money going into renewables than
into fossil fuels, but the base of fossil-fuel generation is so
large that it continues.<br>
<br>
And, yes, Elon Musk single-handedly advanced the distribution of
electric vehicles by fifteen, twenty years. Really quite a
remarkable story.<br>
<br>
You give him a lot of credit.<br>
<br>
Oh, of course. As you said, whatever you think of him, he’s done a
lot of good things.<br>
<br>
But are you troubled by Elon Musk as a tribune for the cause?<br>
<br>
Well, sure, sure. I mean, I have known him for a long time, and
like some other of his longtime friends I have been puzzled and
concerned by the U-turn he’s taken on some very fundamental
issues. But electric vehicles made up nearly twenty per cent of
all the new vehicles sold last year, and all of the big auto
companies have long since shifted their R. & D. budgets and
their focus to trying to compete in the electric-vehicle space. It
will be a bumpy transition, but it is well under way.<br>
<br>
So, how do you do that from the White House, from Congress? What
do you want to see Joe Biden do? And can he do it—does he have the
political and rhetorical capacity to do it effectively?<br>
<br>
What Joe Biden did last year, in passing the so-called Inflation
Reduction Act, which is really a climate bill, was the most
extraordinary legislative achievement of any head of state and any
country in history. However, we are still permitting fossil-fuel
production on public lands. What would be the political cost for
him of bringing it to a halt on public lands? Significant—and it
can’t be blinked away, because of, again, the influence of the
fossil-fuel industry. They have taken over one of our two major
political parties, lock, stock, and oil barrel. It’s really quite
shocking. But, as someone wrote, Mother Nature is staging an
intervention, and I think we’re quite close to crossing a
political tipping point.<br>
<br>
Now, economists, to a person, will say that a carbon price is
essential, whether in the form of a tax, or a fee, or whatever,
but it’s seen as a political-</font><br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri"><b>Death.</b><br>
<br>
Death. I have the scars to prove it. I succeeded in January, 1993,
at persuading the incoming Clinton-Gore Administration to put a
carbon tax in our first budget proposal. And it passed the House
of Representatives, and then was killed in the Senate. A decade
and more later, Barack Obama succeeded in getting a so-called cap
and trade, which is an indirect price on carbon, passed by the
House, and again it died in the Senate.<br>
<br>
But we now have seen the European Union innovate, and come to
something called the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, which has
appeal in the U.S. as well. It can be a back door to a more global
carbon price. There are seventy-three jurisdictions around the
world that have already enacted a form of a carbon tax. Most of
them are too small and too weak, but they can be scaled up. I
think we’re close to seeing a carbon tax. Look, at the African
Climate Summit, the first ever, the leaders in Africa said, We
need to have a carbon tax. And we need to devote the money to
helping developing countries gain access to private capital
markets so that they can participate in this clean-energy
revolution; they’ve been walled off from it.<br>
<br>
Yet another climate summit is coming up, this time in the Middle
East. It seems odd who is leading it. How do you feel about that?<br>
<br>
Yeah, it’s absurd. This year, the annual United Nations Climate
Conference is in the United Arab Emirates, and they have named the
head of their national oil company, Sultan al-Jaber, as the
president of the conference. I think it’s—<br>
<br>
[Laughs.] What does that portend?<br>
<br>
Well, I think that it takes off a disguise that has masked the
reality for quite some time. It’s absurd to put the C.E.O. of one
of the largest and, by many measures, least responsible oil and
gas companies in the world in charge of the climate conference. At
last year’s conference, in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, the delegates
from oil and gas companies outnumbered the combined delegations of
the ten most climate-affected nations. The year before, in
Glasgow, the fossil-fuel delegates outnumbered the largest
national delegation. They have dominated this U.N. process the
same way they’ve dominated so many state governments in the U.S.,
and the national government much of the time.<br>
Advertisement<br>
<br>
It goes back to the weakness of the United Nations as an
institution. It has been that way since its creation. It’s the
best we’ve got, so we have to make the best of it. COP1, the first
of these annual conferences, took place three years after the
Earth Summit, in Berlin. The young environment minister of
Germany, Angela Merkel, was the president of COP1. The first order
of business was to adopt the rules, including for how the world
was going to make decisions. The default procedure was something
called consensus, which is the same as unanimity, unless the
president of the COP recognizes someone who is trying to object.<br>
<br>
And so the petrostates—and in effect the fossil-fuel industry—have
had a veto over anything the world community tried to do on fossil
fuels. Even the great Paris agreement, which was a genuine
achievement, could not use the phrase “fossil fuels.” Last year,
there was a movement by the European Union and others to phase out
fossil fuels—to begin the phaseout. And Saudi Arabia said, No, I’m
sorry, we won’t permit that—you have to have our permission, and
we will not grant you our permission. Sorry, world. We can’t even
talk about fossil fuels.<br>
<br>
<b>It’s insane.</b><br>
<br>
It’s insane. It’s utterly insane. Now, we can change those rules.
Three-quarters of the nations could vote to change the rules and
give a supermajority the political power to adopt binding
resolutions. It’s a tough challenge, for sure. But we have to do
it, and we have to find a way to do it. You’re right that, even if
a supermajority of the nations gained the ability to pass binding
resolutions, they’re not really binding if nations like Russia or
Saudi Arabia—or the U.S.—want to just ignore them. But we can
establish the so-called direction of travel. We can establish a
new and strong consensus in the world that in order to save
humanity’s future we have to phase out fossil fuels. I’m not
saying it’s easy. It’s not easy. It’s the toughest thing humanity
has ever tried to do.<br>
<br>
Aren’t we losing the race miserably?<br>
<br>
I would define it in different terms. Yes, we are. The crisis is
still getting worse, faster than we are implementing the
solutions. However, we are gaining momentum, and we’re gaining
momentum so rapidly that I’m convinced we will soon be gaining on
the crisis itself.<br>
<br>
Is that your natural optimism speaking, or is it the facts? Do
they back you up?<br>
<br>
Well, I am temperamentally optimistic.<br>
<br>
If I ask Elizabeth Kolbert, I get quite a different answer. She
does everything she can to prevent despair, which is the
unforgivable sin, but it creeps in.<br>
<br>
Well, the old cliché “Denial ain’t just a river in Egypt” should
be joined by “Despair ain’t just a tire in the trunk.” Despair is
just another form of climate denial. We don’t have time for it.
The stakes are so high.<br>
<br>
Just look at the climate migrants. There are many examples of this
already. People from Central America coming through Mexico to the
southern border of the U.S.—that’s driven by climate. You’ve got
Viktor Orbán, and you’ve got ultranationalism rising in so many
places. The Lancet Commission, which is widely respected, says
that in this century we may have one billion climate migrants
crossing international borders. That could threaten our capacity
for self-governance.<br>
<br>
So we have to act. We have no choice, really. There are obstacles
to move out of the way. It’s not fair, perhaps, to ask the
fossil-fuel companies to solve this crisis. They’re incentivized
to keep on burning more fossil fuels. But it is fair to ask them
to stop disrupting and blocking the efforts of everyone else to
solve it.<br>
<br>
You mentioned democracy early on. It is well known, at least to
people of a certain age, that after challenging the results in
2000 you painfully, elegantly, and with grace conceded. We saw
what we saw with January 6th. And now we face the possibility of
that being a permanent condition, something that could happen over
and over again, the way we’re now seeing impeachment as a kind of
political weapon being used in the Republican House. You were
prescient about the environmental crisis. Did the crisis of
democracy take you by surprise?<br>
<br>
No. Well, I wrote a book called “The Assault on Reason,” in 2007.
It began with a notation that many Americans were asking the
question, What has happened to America? It has been building for
quite some time. But I think that the love people have for
freedom, for self-determination, and for self-government is
reawakening, and people are—<br>
<br>
You think it’ll prevail?<br>
<br>
I do. Again, I’m temperamentally optimistic. We don’t have time to
wallow in despair. We’ve got work to do, and the stakes have never
been higher. It’s hard to find words adequate to this challenge. I
wish, so deeply, that I could find the words to inspire in others
the burning passion for saving our country and making it, in
Lincoln’s phrase, “the last best hope”; and revivifying the
promise that America has always held for the world, with all of
our contradictions and weaknesses and failures. But it relies upon
the willingness of the American people to wake up, and fight to
save our democracy, and to save the future of humanity. This all
sounds so dire—but it is. ♦<br>
</font><font face="Calibri"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/al-gore-doesnt-say-i-told-you-so">https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/al-gore-doesnt-say-i-told-you-so</a><br>
</font><br>
<p><font face="Calibri"><br>
</font></p>
<font face="Calibri"><i>[ A little bit of Tolkein Rings metaphor --
video - understanding our predicament - with humor, maybe ]<br>
</i> </font><font face="Calibri"><b>One Ring to Rule Them All |
Frankly #45</b><br>
Nate Hagens<br>
</font>Oct 6, 2023<br>
Recorded October 2 2023<br>
Description<br>
<blockquote>In this Frankly, Nate refers to a favorite timeless book
series, “The Lord of the Rings”, to describe ‘the nine rings for
mortal men’ - evolutionary behavioral tendencies that are common
among humans but become counterproductive within the context of
our modern culture. These traits combine to drive the growth of
the Superorganism - but they are pulled forward by the ‘one ring
to rule them all’, which today is the positive feedbacks of power
resulting from the synergy of agricultural surplus, fossil energy,
money, and now Artificial Intelligence accelerating it all. Can
this out of control power dynamic be broken and redirected away
from the influence of this “One Ring”? How do we strategize and
prepare for the future given this cultural compulsion to amass
power as we approach the Great Simplification? Can ‘wisdom’
counter 'intelligence'?<br>
</blockquote>
<font face="Calibri"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXgIAQZu3I4">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXgIAQZu3I4</a><br>
</font><br>
<p><font face="Calibri"><br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Calibri"><i>[ Dave Roberts - talks with up-and-coming
power providers ]</i></font><br>
<font face="Calibri"><b>A super-battery aimed at decarbonizing
industry</b><br>
A conversation with Andrew Ponec of Antora Energy.<br>
David Roberts </font><br>
<font face="Calibri">Oct 6, 2023</font><font face="Calibri">
<br>
Back in March, I did a podcast on the possibility of using wind
and solar electricity to decarbonize industrial heat, which
represents fully a quarter of all human final energy
consumption. The trick is to transform the variable energy from
wind and solar into a steady, predictable stream of heat by
using some form of heat battery.<br>
<br>
The idea is that heat batteries will charge when renewables are
cheap or negatively priced, around midday when all the solar is
online, and then use the stored heat to displace natural gas
boilers and other fossil fuel heat sources in industrial
facilities.<br>
<br>
Among other things, this vision represents a huge opportunity
for renewable energy developers — industrial heat is effectively
a brand new trillion-dollar market for them to play in. And they
can often enter that market without waiting in long
interconnection queues to connect to the grid.<br>
<br>
Andrew Ponec<br>
<br>
Anyway, that episode, which I highly encourage you to listen to
at some point, was with the CEO of a thermal battery company
call Rondo. In it, I mentioned another thermal storage company
whose technology caught my eye: Antora Energy.<br>
<br>
Like Rondo, Antora is part of the broad “box of rocks” category,
but its tech can do some things that, for the time being, no
other thermal battery can do.<br>
<br>
I don’t want to say much more here — discovery is half the fun —
but I will say I’m as geeked about this technology as I have
been about anything in ages. I’ve been thinking about it ever
since I first heard about it three or four years ago. Now the
company has launched its first commercial-scale system! So I’ve
brought Antora co-founder and CEO Andrew Ponec on the pod to
talk through how it works, what it can do, and how it could
transform industrial heat markets.<br>
</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.volts.wtf/p/a-super-battery-aimed-at-decarbonizing?utm_campaign=email-post&r=e3p5r&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email#details">https://www.volts.wtf/p/a-super-battery-aimed-at-decarbonizing?utm_campaign=email-post&r=e3p5r&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email#details</a><br>
</font> </p>
<p><font face="Calibri">- -<br>
</font></p>
<font face="Calibri"><i>[ Anora Energy is the company ]</i></font><br>
<font face="Calibri"><b>We deliver zero-carbon industrial heat and
power</b><br>
Antora Energy is electrifying heavy industry with thermal energy
storage for zero-carbon heat and power. Our mission is to stop
climate change for the future of humanity.<br>
</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"><b>We’re turning sunshine and wind into 24/7
heat and power, cheaper than fossil fuels.</b><br>
We make it possible and profitable to fully rely on renewable
energy for industrial processes. Antora’s thermal batteries soak
up excess solar and wind electricity and use it to heat blocks of
carbon so they glow like inside a toaster. This thermal energy is
then delivered to customers as electricity or industrial process
heat up to 1500°C, on demand.<br>
</font><font face="Calibri"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://antoraenergy.com/">https://antoraenergy.com/</a><br>
</font>
<p><font face="Calibri"><br>
</font></p>
<font face="Calibri"><br>
<i>[The news archive - looking back at Al Gore in 1996 ]</i><br>
<font size="+2"><i><b>October 9, 1996</b></i></font> <br>
October 9, 1996: Vice President Al Gore and former Representative
Jack Kemp discuss the environment in the Vice Presidential debate,
with Kemp bizarrely accusing Gore of promoting "fear of the
climate" and embracing an "anti-capitalistic mentality," while
Gore defends the Clinton administration's first-term environmental
accomplishments. <br>
(60:13--70:50)<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/74250-1">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/74250-1</a><br>
<br>
<br>
</font>
<p><font face="Calibri"> <br>
</font><font face="Calibri"><br>
=== Other climate news sources
===========================================<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 -- and carries no
images or attachments which may originate from remote servers.
Text-only messages 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>