<!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>November </b></i></font></font><font
size="+2" face="Calibri"><i><b>21, 2023</b></i></font><font
face="Calibri"><br>
</font> <br>
<i>[ "There is now no credible pathway to avoiding dangerous climate
change." This is difficult to process ]</i><br>
<b>5 reasons why climate change may see more of us turn to alcohol
and other drugs</b><br>
November 19, 2023 <br>
Climate change will affect every aspect of our health and wellbeing.
But its potential harms go beyond the body’s ability to handle
extreme heat, important as this is.<br>
<br>
Extreme weather events, such as floods, droughts, storms and
wildfires, are becoming more frequent and severe. These affect our
mental health in a multitude of ways.<br>
<br>
Coping with climate change can be overwhelming. Sometimes, the best
someone can do is to seek refuge in alcohol, tobacco,
over-the-counter and prescription drugs, or other psychoactive
substances. This is understandable, but dangerous, and can have
serious consequences.<br>
<br>
We outline five ways climate change could increase the risk of
harmful substance use...<br>
<br>
<b>1. Mental health is harmed</b><br>
Perhaps the most obvious way climate change can be linked to harmful
substance use is by damaging mental health. This increases the risk
of new or worsened substance use.<br>
<br>
People with a mental disorder are at high risk of also having a
substance-use disorder. This often precedes their mental health
problems. Climate change-related increases in the number and nature
of extreme events, in turn, are escalating risks to mental health.<br>
<br>
For example, extreme heat is linked to increased distress across the
whole population. In extreme heat, more people go to the emergency
department for psychiatric problems, including for alcohol and
substance use generally. This is even true for a single very hot
day.<br>
<br>
Post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, anxiety and other mental
health problems are common at the time of extreme weather events and
can persist for months, even years afterwards, especially if people
are exposed to multiple events. This can increase the likelihood of
using substances as a way to cope...<br>
<br>
<b>2. Worry increases</b><br>
With increasing public awareness of how climate change is
endangering wellbeing, people are increasingly worried about what
will happen if it remains unchecked.<br>
<br>
Worrying isn’t the same as meeting the criteria for a mental
disorder. But surveys show climate change generates complex
emotional responses, especially in children. As well as feelings of
worry, there is anxiety, fear, guilt, anger, grief and helplessness.<br>
<br>
Some emotional states, such as sadness, are linked with long-term
tobacco use and also make substance use relapse more likely...<br>
<br>
<b>3. Physical injuries hurt us in many ways</b><br>
Physical injuries caused by extreme weather events – such as smoke
inhalation, burns and flood-related cuts and infections – increase
the risk of harmful substance use. That’s partly because they
increase the risk of psychological distress. If injuries cause
long-term illness or disability, consequent feelings of hopelessness
and depression can dispose some people to self-medicate with alcohol
or other drugs.<br>
<br>
Substance use itself can also generate long-term physiological harm,
disabilities or other chronic health problems. These are linked with
higher rates of harmful substance use...<br>
<br>
<b>4. Our day-to-day lives change</b><br>
A single catastrophic event, such as a storm or flood, can devastate
lives overnight and change the way we live. So, too, can the more
subtle changes in climate and day-to-day weather. Both can disrupt
behaviour and routines in ways that risk new or worsened substance
use, for example, using stimulants to cope with fatigue.<br>
<br>
Take, for example, hotter temperatures, which disrupt sleep,
undermine academic performance, reduce physical activity, and
promote hostile language and violent behaviour...<br>
<br>
<b>5. It destabilises communities<br>
</b>Finally, climate change is destabilising the socioeconomic,
natural, built and geopolitical systems on which human wellbeing –
indeed survival – depends.<br>
<br>
Damaged infrastructure, agricultural losses, school closures,
homelessness and displacement are significant sources of
psychosocial distress that prompt acute (short-term) and chronic
(long-term) stress responses.<br>
<br>
Stress, in turn, can increase the risk of harmful substance use and
make people more likely to relapse...<br>
<br>
<b>Why are we so concerned?</b><br>
Substance-use disorders are economically and socially very costly.
Risky substance use that doesn’t meet the criteria for a formal
diagnosis can also harm.<br>
<br>
Aside from its direct physical harm, harmful substance use disrupts
education and employment. It increases the risk of accidents and
crime, and it undermines social relationships, intimate partnerships
and family functioning...<br>
<br>
<b>Politicians take note</b><br>
As we head towards the COP28 global climate talks in Dubai, climate
change is set to hit the headlines once more. Politicians know
climate change is undermining human health and wellbeing. It’s well
past time to insist they act.<br>
<br>
As we have seen for populations as a whole, there are multiple
possible ways for climate change to cause a rise in harmful
substance use. This means multidimensional prevention strategies are
needed. As well as addressing climate change more broadly, we need
strategies including:<br>
<blockquote>supporting vulnerable individuals, especially young
people, and marginalised commmunities, who are hit hardest by
extreme weather-related events<br>
<br>
focusing health-related policies more on broadscale health
promotion, for example, healthier eating, active transport and
community-led mental health support<br>
<br>
investing in climate-resilient infrastructure, such as
heat-proofing buildings and greening cities, to prevent more of
the destabilising effects and stress we know contributes to mental
health problems and harmful substance use.<br>
</blockquote>
There is now no credible pathway to avoiding dangerous climate
change. However, if increasing rates of climate protests are
anything to go by, the world may finally be ready for radical change
– and perhaps for reduced harmful substance use.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://theconversation.com/5-reasons-why-climate-change-may-see-more-of-us-turn-to-alcohol-and-other-drugs-217894">https://theconversation.com/5-reasons-why-climate-change-may-see-more-of-us-turn-to-alcohol-and-other-drugs-217894</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
<i>[ So the optimal Titanic life boat must be just as big as the
Titanic itself? ]</i><br>
<b>Why the Belief That Carbon Capture Technologies Can Work at
Gigaton-Scale Is a Gigantic Gamble</b><br>
Despite CCS’s track record of failure and glaring feasibility
issues, petrostates are expected to use it as cover to dismiss
fossil fuel phaseout at COP28.<br>
ANALYSIS<br>
By Dana Drugmandon<br>
Nov 17, 2023 <br>
With the start of the 28th annual United Nations climate summit,
COP28, just two weeks away, a battle is brewing over the role of
fossil fuels as nations try to stem the tide of climate change. <br>
<br>
A “high ambition” coalition of nations such as France, Tuvalu,
Ethiopia, and Ireland backed by climate scientists, climate and
civil society organizations, and the UN Secretary General, are
calling for commitments to phase out coal, oil, and gas. On the
other hand, many oil and gas producing countries, supported by the
politically potent fossil fuel lobby, are urging an approach that
allows continued fossil fuel extraction – and even expansion – under
the assumption that emissions mitigation technologies can largely
eliminate the climate pollution of business-as-usual,
emissions-intensive activities.<br>
<br>
Now, a new report shows that fossil fuel production by 2030 is set
to exceed the level that would be compatible with limiting warming
to 1.5°C by more than 110 percent. A second just-released report
reveals that to mitigate that growth, the use of carbon capture and
storage (CCS) and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies would
have to reach gigaton scale in less than 10 years, which might not
be possible. <br>
<br>
“That idea that we can build more fossil fuels but it’s ok because
we can mitigate the emissions, or we’ll be able to pull carbon out
of the air or out of the smokestacks, I think is incredibly
dangerous,” Collin Rees, U.S. program manager at Oil Change
International, said during a November 14 media briefing sponsored by
a coalition called Gas Exports Today, which was convened by the
Louisiana Bucket Brigade and held in advance of COP28.<br>
<br>
In remarks delivered at the UN Climate Ambition Summit in
September, COP28 president Sultan Al Jaber said that a “phase down,”
not a “phase out,” of fossil fuels is what’s needed to combat
climate change. He also referenced building “an energy system free
of all unabated fossil fuels.” The term “unabated” has become a
major reference in the climate diplomacy conversation in recent
years, starting with COP26 in Glasgow where governments agreed to
accelerate efforts “towards the phasedown of unabated coal power.”
This language serves as a qualifier to suggest that fossil fuels can
be rendered ‘clean’ through carbon capture and storage and
engineered carbon dioxide removal, collectively termed “carbon
management.”<br>
<br>
While these technologies may seem promising in theory, in practice
they face substantial constraints and challenges. The two new
reports further underscore these limitations. <br>
Governments around the world are planning to produce more than
double the amount of fossil fuels in 2030 than is consistent with
limiting warming to 1.5 °C, which is the more stringent objective of
the Paris Agreement, according to the new Production Gap Report
(PGR) 2023, produced by the UN Environment Program and the Stockholm
Environment Institute, along with several other climate think tanks.
<br>
<br>
“There is overwhelming scientific evidence that we need to phase out
all fossil fuels as rapidly as possible,” Ploy Achakulwisut,
research fellow at the Stockholm Environment Institute and co-author
of the Production Gap Report, said during the report’s virtual
launch event on November 8. The report takes into account the
significant risks and uncertainties around CCS and CDR, warning that
the potential failure of these technologies to reach a
climate-relevant scale necessitates an even more urgent phaseout of
all fossil fuels. Given the feasibility concerns around scaling up
carbon management technologies, the report urges governments to
strive to phase out coal by 2040 and slash oil and gas production
and use by three-quarters (from 2020 levels) by 2050 at a minimum.<br>
<br>
Achakulwisut noted that even though the majority of modeled climate
mitigation scenarios from the latest Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) report assume that large amounts of CCS and
CDR facilities can be deployed successfully, there is little
evidence to back this assumption. In fact, annual capacity from
operating CCS projects resulting in dedicated storage currently
amounts to less than 0.1 percent of global annual CO2 emissions,
Achakulwisut said. When it comes to reducing overall global carbon
emissions, she noted, CCS is not making a dent.<br>
<br>
This is likely to be the case in 2030 too, with CCS deployment at
that point expected to still not move the needle on lowering
emissions. “Even if all CCS facilities planned and under development
worldwide become operational,” the Production Gap report explains,
“only around 0.25 [gigatons] of CO2 would be captured in 2030, less
than 1% of 2022 global CO2 emissions.” The report refers to an
International Energy Agency dataset which projects, as of March
2023, less than 350 million metric tons of CO2 capture capacity from
all of the global CCS projects planned, under construction, and
operational in 2030. <br>
<br>
The International Energy Agency’s updated Net Zero roadmap report
released in September references a slightly higher figure, saying
that around 400 million metric tons of CO2 could be captured by 2030
if all planned CCS projects get built, which, the agency said, is
still only 40 percent of the 1 gigaton-per-year capture capacity
needed by 2030 in its net zero emissions scenario. <br>
<br>
“There’s a huge range of evidence which is very clear that CCS and
CDR will not be able to scale fast enough to make a meaningful
contribution to cutting emissions this decade,” Neil Grant, climate
and energy analyst at Climate Analytics, said during the report’s
launch event. “And that means in this decade, the solution has to be
reducing fossil fuel production and use.”<br>
<br>
Carbon dioxide removal technologies, he added, “are very nascent.”
Most existing direct air capture (DAC) operations are small-scale
pilot projects. The world’s first commercial-scale DAC plant, called
Orca and based in Iceland, has a capacity to capture up to 4,000
tons of CO2 per year – equivalent to the annual emissions of about
800 cars worldwide, or approximately three seconds worth of global
CO2 emissions. <br>
<br>
<b>Is DAC Feasible?</b><br>
Yet, significant government subsidies and investment are flowing
into direct air capture, and plans to develop at least 130 DAC
facilities are now underway. But according to a new briefing paper
from the Center for International Environmental Law, even if all the
planned DAC projects in the world get built and operate at full
capacity, they would be capable of removing just 4.7 million metric
tons of CO2 in 2030, equivalent to a mere 0.01 percent of current
global energy sector emissions. Even assuming that DAC could
eventually reach a massive scale, the enormous quantities of
chemicals and energy inputs required to operate the machinery raises
further feasibility and sustainability questions.<br>
<br>
Essentially, the math just doesn’t add up in terms of the projected
scale up of the carbon management sector in what experts say is the
critical decade to curb planet-warming emissions by at least 50
percent. Experts say CCS and CDR would have to reach gigaton scale
in less than 10 years, and there is no assurance that it will get
there in time.<br>
<br>
A new report from the Global CCS Institute, a pro-CCS think tank and
advocacy group, actually affirms this. Although there has been
momentum in policies, financing, and proposed projects in the carbon
management sector, there is still a big, glaring question as to
whether scaling up to the gigaton level by 2030 is even feasible,
according to the Institute’s Global Status of CCS 2023 report
released last week.<br>
<br>
“The math also indicates that this past year’s impressive step-up
still has us near the bottom of the staircase, so to speak, and that
CCS must reach gigatonne per annum (Gtpa) scale in order to reach
our emission goals,” Global CCS Institute CEO Jarad Daniels said in
a media release accompanying the report.<br>
<br>
Only a few dozen CCS facilities are currently operational at the
global level, 14 of which are in the U.S., with a total capacity to
capture and store 49 million metric tons of CO2, the report states.
However, the total capacity is not the same as the amount actually
captured and sequestered, as CCS facilities often do not operate at
their maximum potential. When considering the additional energy
required to power CCS operations, and given that the vast majority
of existing projects use the captured CO2 to extract more oil and
gas – a process called enhanced oil recovery – the net result is
generally more, not less, greenhouse gas emissions.<br>
<br>
As far as CCS projects that are proposed or “in the pipeline” as the
report calls it, that number is 392 as of July this year. But as
Daniels noted in the Institute’s report launch event on November 9,
most of the facilities in development would be aiming to begin
operating starting in 2030, at the earliest. There are many hurdles,
such as permitting and securing financing, that projects have to
overcome before they start capturing any carbon molecules. The lag
time between when projects are announced and when they become
operational is typically around seven years or more, the report
says, acknowledging that “relatively few [new CCS projects] have yet
advanced to operation.”<br>
<br>
These delays have in the past been due, at least in part, to local
opposition and unsuccessful community engagement, which have
resulted in some project cancellations, according to the report.
“Lack of community support, coupled with permitting challenges, has
become a barrier for some early development stage CCS projects in
the U.S.,” the report states.<br>
Community opposition and public pushback to CCS projects, as DeSmog
recently reported, appears to be growing across the U.S., and it
demonstrates that “meaningful” community engagement rhetoric from
CCS proponents does not often match the reality on the ground. One
major proposed CCS infrastructure project in the U.S. – a
1,300-mile-long CO2 pipeline traversing five Midwestern states that
was planned by a developer called Navigator CO2 Ventures – was
canceled last month in the face of overwhelming grassroots
opposition along with permitting challenges.<br>
<br>
<b>“Unmet Expectations” </b><br>
The barriers and significant questions around the feasibility of CCS
technologies to even scale up at any climate-relevant level are on
top of an existing track record that, at best, is not very promising
and at worst could be viewed as largely a failure. Analyses from
DeSmog and from IEEFA, among others, show that most large-scale CCS
projects underperform or fail to meet their capture targets. As the
new Production Gap Report points out, “the track record for CCS has
been very poor to date, with around 80% of pilot projects over the
last 30 years ending in failure.”<br>
<br>
“The U.S. has been publicly subsidizing carbon capture projects
since the early 1980s,” Rees of Oil Change International said during
the November 14 Gas Exports Today media briefing. “We have over 40
years of evidence that it doesn’t work.”<br>
<br>
The IEA and IPCC both recognize that carbon capture technologies
have underperformed or made slower-than-expected progress. In its
updated Net Zero roadmap report for example, the IEA states that
“the history of [carbon capture] has largely been one of unmet
expectations.” And in its Working Group III report on climate
mitigation issued last year as part of the Sixth Assessment cycle,
the IPCC cautions that CCS “currently faces technological, economic,
institutional, ecological-environmental, and socio-cultural
barriers” and notes that global deployment rates are “far below
those in modeled pathways limiting global warming to 1.5°C or 2°C.”<br>
<br>
Given this context, it is reasonable to doubt the promises made by
carbon capture proponents. The numbers make it clear, as Climate
Analytics’ Grant explained during the Production Gap Report launch
event, that CCS and CDR technologies “are not going to be the
solutions for cutting emissions in this critical decade.”<br>
<br>
A new Global Witness analysis further substantiates this point. The
organization calculated, based on petroleum production data from
Rystad, that it would take the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company
(ADNOC) 340 years to capture the carbon it had produced from the
company’s planned ramp up of oil and gas extraction between now and
2030. ADNOC is headed by Al Jaber, the controversial COP28
president, and new data shows the oil major’s planned output would
result in the largest overshoot of the 1.5° C goal out of any fossil
fuel company in the world. The Global Witness analysis also finds
that even if ADNOC reaches the 10 million metric tons per year of
CO2 capture by 2030, as it promises, that would result in mitigation
of just two percent of the company’s projected 492 million metric
tons of carbon emissions in 2030. <br>
<br>
“If Al Jaber is serious – if we are serious – we must immediately
reject the CCS false solution and tackle the existential oil and gas
problem head on,” Global Witness’s Jonathan Noronha Gant said in a
statement. <br>
<b><br>
“CCS Is Not the Answer”</b><br>
CCS critics also point to environmental, health, and safety risks
that the technologies pose to communities where projects are
targeted, which are often communities already overburdened by
industrial pollution. Residents from these areas, such as the Texas
and Louisiana Gulf Coast, are voicing their opposition to the
buildout of carbon capture in their communities.<br>
<br>
“CCS is not the answer,” Roishetta Ozane, founder of the Vessel
Project and resident of southwest Louisiana, said at the November 14
briefing. “We don’t need any more false solutions. We need real
solutions with community voices and community input.”<br>
<br>
Ozane will be taking this message to COP28 in Dubai, where she will
join other advocates on the frontlines of the fossil fuel and
petrochemical industries’ expansion in calling for an end to this
buildout and a phase out of fossil fuels. Competing with this call,
however, is the narrative that emissions – not fossil fuels
themselves – are the problem, and that it can be fixed through
so-called “abatement” technologies – which provides cover for the
continued production of coal, oil, and gas that is so clearly at
odds with the rules of physics that govern the climate system.<br>
<br>
During the Production Gap Report launch event, Grant emphasized that
carbon capture technologies “do not replace the need for rapid and
permanent reduction of fossil fuels.”<br>
<br>
“And they therefore really can’t be used as a justification for
continued expansion of fossil fuel extraction,” he added, “which is
a narrative we’re seeing being pushed around the world, particularly
as we come towards COP28.”<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.desmog.com/2023/11/17/carbon-capture-storage-cop28-al-jaber-global-ccs-institute-global-witness/">https://www.desmog.com/2023/11/17/carbon-capture-storage-cop28-al-jaber-global-ccs-institute-global-witness/</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<i>[ really? Did we forget this much in 7 years? ]</i><br>
<b>Will we begin to fear the ocean?</b><br>
Miami, Florida is already feeling the impacts of climate change -
how will a city deal with the rising seas?<br>
June 30, 2016<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/-we-as-a-people-will-become-afraid-of-the-ocean-716414531989">https://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/-we-as-a-people-will-become-afraid-of-the-ocean-716414531989</a><br>
- - <br>
<i>[ video from 8 years ago, that back in the 1970's Exxon knew.
MSNBC removed comments]</i><br>
<b>On MSNBC's "All In with Chris Hayes,"</b> Democratic presidential
candidate Bernie Sanders discusses ExxonMobil's reckless disregard
of the consequences of human-caused climate change.<br>
Sanders calls for federal probe into ExxonMobil<br>
The presidential candidate wrote a letter to Attorney General
Loretta Lynch asking her to form a task force to examine whether
Exxon lied to the public about its role in climate change.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://on.msnbc.com/1LGi4oj">http://on.msnbc.com/1LGi4oj</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<font face="Calibri"> <i>[The news archive - not that long ago.
Just 8 years ]</i></font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> <font size="+2"><i><b>November 21, 2015 </b></i></font>
</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font> October 21, 2015: On MSNBC's "All In
with Chris Hayes," Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders
discusses ExxonMobil's reckless disregard of the consequences of
human-caused climate change.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://on.msnbc.com/1LGi4oj">http://on.msnbc.com/1LGi4oj</a><br>
<strike><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/10/20/3714390/bernie-sanders-investigate-exxon-climate-denial/">http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/10/20/3714390/bernie-sanders-investigate-exxon-climate-denial/</a></strike><br>
<br>
<p><font face="Calibri"> </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>