CLIMATE CHANGE CORNER

Is it wrong to be hopeful about climate change?

BBC Future
by Diego Arguedas Oritz
9 January 2020

Image credit news.stanford.edu

In 2018, a 30-minute documentary was premiered in San José, Costa Rica’s capital and my hometown. The film followed the early efforts of a handful of marine biologists who are fighting coral bleaching. They grow tiny bits of coral in underwater nurseries and once they’re big enough move them back to the reef, hoping to restore it.

Their pace is slow, possibly too slow to keep up with bleaching due to climate change. Warming waters swipe entire reefs in a matter of weeks. The biologists need months to nurture enough corals to restore a couple of square meters. Reef restoration seems like an impossible task, but they are relentless. It must be done to give corals a chance, so they are doing it.

It’s the same principle guiding young climate activists, atmospheric scientists and climate essayists. As author Rebecca Solnit wrote in 2016: “We don’t know what is going to happen, or how, or when, and that very uncertainty is the space of hope.” Read the whole story here.

One thing you can do: Make your New Year's resolutions count

The New York Times
Climate Fwd:
5 January 2020

New Year’s resolutions suggest an abstract faith in the future. If we do this thing, we tell ourselves, our 2020 selves will look or act or feel better than our 2019 selves did. There’s an implicit acknowledgment that change is possible and that we are capable of making it happen (though just under half of us won’t hold on to our resolutions through February).

Talking about fighting climate change is a lot like that: Here’s what things look like if nothing changes. But if we reduce greenhouse gas emissions by a little — through the end of February, maybe — what happens? If we reduce them by a lot, what will the world look like and what will it take to make that happen?

At once we’re thinking about the present, modeling the future and thinking about how those models might differ depending on what we decide to do.

Climate change tends to scramble time, defying our sense of an orderly progression. As Robert Macfarlane, the chronicler of nature, climate, and the environment, has said, “We burn Carboniferous-era fossil fuels to melt Pleistocene-era ice to determine Anthropocene future climates.” Read the whole story here.



Behind the Forecast: Difference between climate change and global warming

Wave 3 News
27 December 2019

Climate change - Image credit www.naaa.gov

The terms "climate change" and "global warming" are often used interchangeably but have distinct definitions.

First, let's start with the term weather. Weather references conditions that occur in a localized area over a short time (from seconds to days). Rain, tornadoes, floods, and clouds are examples of weather.

Climate applies to long-term regional or global averages of temperatures, rainfall, and humidity across years or decades.

Global Warming:

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) defines global warming as the “long-term heating of Earth’s climate system observed since the pre-industrial period (between 1850 and 1900).”

Global warming focuses on the changes in global average surface temperatures caused by human activity, mainly the burning of fossil fuels, which increases the overall amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

Geochemist Wallace Broecker was the first to use the term in a 1975 article. Until that point, “global warming” was referred to as “inadvertent climate modification.”

Since the pre-industrial era, human activity has increased the planet's global average temperature by 1.8°F. While a few degrees does not seem like much, it can have significant impacts on our day-to-day weather. Read the whole story here.

CO2 levels in the atmosphere

The Guardian
16 December 2019

Weekly averages

1 December 2019: 411.07 ppm
This time last year: 408.47 ppm
10 years ago: 387.08 ppm
Pre-industrial base: 280
Safe level: 350

Atmospheric CO2 reading from Mauna Loa, Hawaii (part per million). Source: NOAA-ESRL

Scientists have warned for more than a decade that concentrations of more than 450ppm risk triggering extreme weather events and temperature rises as high as 2C, beyond which the effects of global heating are likely to become catastrophic and irreversible. Read more about The Guardian's weekly carbon count here.

5 of the biggest environmental and climate change stories over the last decade and what’s changed

ABC News
11 December 2019

A resident of Eita in the Republic of Kiribati watches as ocean water slowly floods his village, on the Tarawa atoll, Sept. 30, 2015.A resident of Eita in the Republic of Kiribati watches as ocean water slowly floods his village, on the Tarawa atoll, Sept. 30, 2015. (Photo credit: Jonas Gratzer/LightRocket via Getty Images)

Dire warnings on climate change from scientists warning about more severe consequences and less time to stop them.

Microplastics littering the ocean, the growing great Pacific garbage “patch” and dead marine animals found with plastic and other trash in their guts.

Concerns about drinking water tainted with lead and exposure to "forever" chemicals.

And a country once again leaning on fossil fuels for energy production despite a global push to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

The last decade has produced some startling climate and environmental headlines in the United States amid growing awareness of the problems faced around the world -- as well as potential solutions for some of them.

Here are some of the things biggest developments in climate change and some of other big environmental stories of the last decade. Read the whole story and watch the video here.



Fingerprints of climate change are increasingly appearing in extreme weather

Science News
10 December 2019

Flash flooding on May 27, 2018, turned Main Street in Ellicott City, Md., into a river. The heavy rains throughout much of 2018 that led to the mid-Atlantic region’s floods were made more likely by human-caused climate change, scientists say. (Photo credit: LIBBY SOLOMON/THE BALTIMORE SUN VIA AP)

Extremely low sea ice in the Bering Sea. Heavy rainfall in the mid-Atlantic United States. Wildfires in northeast Australia.

Examinations of these and 16 other extreme weather events that occurred in 2018 found that all but one were made more likely due to human-caused climate change, scientists reported December 9 at a news conference at the American Geophysical Union’s annual meeting. Insufficient observational data made it impossible to assess the influence of climate change on the one event, heavy rains in Tasmania.

The new report marks the third year in a row that scientists have identified specific weather events that they said would not have happened without human activities that are altering Earth’s climate.

The findings are part of a climate-attribution special issue, called “Explaining extreme events in 2018 from a climate perspective,” published online December 9 in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. Over the 11 years that BAMS has published the special issue, it’s included 168 studies examining specific weather events. Of those, 122, or 73 percent, found that climate change likely played some role in the event, the special issue’s editor Stephanie Herring said at the news conference. In some cases, that means the event was more likely to occur due to human actions; in a few studies, researchers have concluded that the event would not have occurred without climate change. 

Finding a role is becoming more common; the special issues tied to events in 2017 and 2016 found that climate change was linked to 95 percent of the events studied (SN: 12/14/17; SN: 12/11/18).

Rather than being a cause for despair, identifying humankind’s role in these events should be seen as a way to provide new data in the fight to prepare for climate change, BAMS Editor in Chief Jeff Rosenfeld said in the news conference. “Instead of stoking fear, I think having real quantifiable information like this puts that human fingerprint in terms that we can actually act [on] without getting overwhelmed.” Read the whole story here.


Countries are not doing enough to keep Earth's temperature from rising to near-catastrophic levels, a UN report says

CNN
26 November 2019

Image Credit: CarbonBrief.org

A new United Nations report paints a bleak picture: The commitments countries pledged to limit the climate crisis are nowhere near enough to stave off record-high temperatures. Delaying change any further will make it impossible to reach desired temperature goals.

The time for "rapid and transformational" change to limit global warming is now, the report says.The UN Environment Program (UNEP) 2019 Emissions Gap report calls on countries to strengthen the commitments made in the 2015 Paris Agreement to stall climate change.

Current measures will not keep global temperature increases within the 1.5-to-2-degree Celsius range (a "safe" level to which temperatures can rise and not cause devastation, though 1.5 degrees is preferable), according to the report issued Tuesday.

Greenhouse gases reached a record high in 2018 with no sign of peaking, according to a World Meteorological Organization report released Monday. Carbon dioxide levels reached 407.8 parts per million, a unit used to measure the level of a contaminant in the air. 

At the current rate, temperatures are expected to rise 3.2 degrees Celsius (5.8 degrees Fahrenheit) by 2100, the UNEP report states.

The changes the UNEP suggests are extreme: To get Earth back on track to the 1.5-degree goal, countries must multiply their commitment level, or the level at which they pledge to reduce their emissions, five times the current rates outlined in the Paris accords.

That means global greenhouse gas emissions must fall at least 7.6% every year to remove 32 gigatons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

Incremental change is no longer enough to stall off the potentially devastating effects of a changing climate, the report's authors write.

What the world needs now, they say, is "rapid and transformational action." Read the whole story here.

Wealth alone won't save countries from climate change

Reuters
20 November 2019

Storm over Chesil Beach, Portland, UK
(Image credit: Natural Environment Research Council)

LONDON (Thomson Reuters Foundation) - Wealth alone will not shield economies from the impact of climate change, researchers said on Wednesday, urging governments to build flood defenses and early warning systems to stem financial losses.

Climate research has shown that poor people in tropical countries are most vulnerable to economic loss caused by global warming.

But countries that aggressively prepare for climate impacts like hurricanes and heatwaves will fare drastically better financially than others with similar economies, according to a report by the Economist Intelligence Unit.

For example, by 2050, Russia’s economy will be 5% smaller than it would have been without the impact of climate change. 

Argentina, which has done more to prepare, will only contract by 2% despite having similar levels of economic development, said the study.

“Argentinean leadership recognizes that climate change represents a risk to Argentina’s long-term growth rate, most obviously through its impact on the important agriculture sector,” said the report.

It linked Russia’s estimated losses to “widespread climate change scepticism among much of the Russian business community and a lack of broader public engagement”. Read the whole story here.

Can carbon offsets tackle airlines’ emissions problem?

The Guardian
19 November 2019

Carbon emissions from commercial flights are growing up to 70% faster than predicted. Photograph: Roger Bamber/Alamy

Global carbon emissions from the aviation industry are growing faster than expected, and pose a serious risk to the world’s climate efforts if left to grow unchecked. The rise of flygskam, or “flight-shame”, has spurred airlines and travel companies to offer customers the option of offsetting the carbon emissions of their flights. But not everyone is convinced that climate sins can be absolved through projects based on simple carbon accounting.

What is carbon offsetting?

Offsetting involves calculating the emissions of a trip or activity and then purchasing “credits” from projects that prevent or remove the equivalent amount of greenhouse gases elsewhere. Many accredited carbon offsetting schemes involve planting trees to absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, which according to recent research could play a major role in helping to tackle the climate crisis. Other schemes invest in renewable energy projects which save carbon emissions by replacing fossil fuels alternatives. Growing awareness of the climate crisis, and the “Greta Thunberg effect”, has driven demand for carbon offset schemes. The amount of investment from people who hope to “cancel” their carbon footprints has climbed fourfold in recent years, according to the offsetting watchdog Gold Standard. Read the whole story here.

How has climate change affected you in 2019?

Grist
18 November 2019

Grist / PeopleImages / Westend61 / Getty Images

2019 sure has been a doozy of a year for climate change, huh? From wildfires to floods and cold snaps to heatwaves, people around the world have been seeing the effects of our sweltering planet in their own backyards. And it’s not just the weather — rising temperatures are reshaping every part of our life. It’s changing where we can grow food and how we get sick. It’s hitting some places — and people — worse than others, but most of us are feeling the heat one way or another. And accordingly, the topic of climate is starting to pop up in seemingly unrelated political conversations, like those about gentrification or foreign relations.

Here at Grist, we’re doing our best to cover all the trends and big events as they’re happening. But we also know that behind all the headlines and statistics are people living their lives. As the year wraps up, we want to know how climate change has affected you. Did you live through one of the big catastrophes of the year, like the flooding in the Midwest? Did you decide not to buy that house in California after seeing another season of wildfires? Did you have tomatoes in your garden through November?

Big or small, widely reported or not, life-changing or inconvenient or just sort of weird, we want to hear your story. We’ll round up our favorites for a future Grist story. Click here to complete the survey.


US begins formal withdrawal from Paris climate deal

Loop Cayman
4 November 2019

President Donald Trump has been promising withdrawal for two years.

The United States has told the United Nations it has begun the process of pulling out of the landmark 2015 Paris climate agreement.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said Monday that he submitted a formal notice to the United Nations. That starts a withdrawal process that does not become official for a year. His statement touted America's carbon pollution cuts and called the Paris deal an "unfair economic burden" to the US economy.

Nearly 200 nations signed the climate deal in which each country provides its own goals to curb emissions of heat-trapping gases that lead to climate change...

...With a hand-delivered letter, the US is the first nation to pull out of the deal. Agreement rules prevented any country from pulling out in the first three years after the November 4, 2016, ratification.

President Donald Trump has been promising withdrawal for two years, but Monday was the first time he could actually do it.

Trump's decision was condemned as a reckless failure of leadership by environmental experts, activists and critics such as former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
"Donald Trump is the worst president in history for our climate and our clean air and water," said Michael Brune, the executive director of the Sierra Club. "Long after Trump is out of office, his decision to withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement will be seen as a historic error." Read the whole story here.


Former Exxon CEO Tillerson denies misleading investors in climate case

Reuters
30 October 2019

NEW YORK - Former Exxon Mobil Corp Chief Executive Officer Rex Tillerson on Wednesday denied misleading investors about how the oil major measured potential costs of climate change, as he testified in a closely watched civil lawsuit brought by New York’s attorney general.

The case, filed last October in Manhattan state court, last week became the first of several climate-related lawsuits against major oil companies to go to trial.

The attorney general alleges that Exxon caused investors to lose up to $1.6 billion by falsely telling them it had properly evaluated the impact of future climate regulations on its business. The company used a “proxy cost” of up to $80 per ton of carbon emissions in wealthy countries by 2040, but internally used figures as low as $40 per ton or none at all, the attorney general has said.

Exxon has assailed the claims as false and politically motivated. Read the whole story here.

A new estimate triples the number of people in the path of rising seas

Science News
29 October 2019

A new method for assessing coastal elevation suggests sea level rise could threaten areas now home to up to 480 million people by 2100. Most of those facing flood risks live in Asia, including in the Indonesian capital of Jakarta (shown).

Sea level rise this century could flood coastal areas that are now home to 340 million to 480 million people, researchers from Climate Central, a research and advocacy group, report. That’s roughly triple the number of people estimated to be at risk using previous coastal elevation data.

The new estimate, published October 29 in Nature Communications, comes from efforts to refine NASA satellite elevation data, and it illustrates the implications of elevation data having been overestimated in some places by up to 5 to 10 meters. The results are presented in terms of how many people, by today’s population numbers, could be affected, but don’t predict how many people will actually be living in those coastal areas in 2100.

“The global threat from sea level rise and coastal flooding is far greater than what we thought it was,” says Benjamin Strauss, who heads Climate Central in Princeton, N.J. Read the whole story here.


Why it's so hard to talk about climate change

Dame Magazine
28 October 2019

Photo credit: wired.com

As an African-American woman working in a predominantly white environmental space, I’ve had more than one engagement with white people who assume that just because I’ve worked in or with large environmental groups, I “get it” and must see solutions the way that they do. How very wrong. The “how” we talk about climate change is becoming more and more important to implementable solutions as communities of color recognize their value and importance to the answer. Truth is, privilege has always existed in the climate space just like it does everywhere else. But due to the urgency of the climate crisis and the small universe of climate groups, we no longer have the luxury of tolerating said privilege. Our planet requires climate action now, and it requires all of us.

Acting under the guise of white privilege denies groups the opportunity to learn from each other and enact culturally innovative ideas that can solve more than one problem at a time. Let’s face it, when I say the words “climate change” most Americans think vegan white people in Birkenstocks who care more about polar bears than people. While this perception of the environmentalist couldn’t be further from the truth, the practice of white privilege in our country and the resulting disconnect with communities of color is our present reality. Privilege interferes with our ability to understand why people reject certain solutions. It prevents people from hearing the real-time pain associated with being left out of a decision that will directly impact them and their families for generations to come. No one is denying a variety of solutions should be considered, but how we discuss it prevents the implementation. 

A glaring example is the conversation around food and its relations to climate change. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) United Nations Climate Report encourages the world to eat less meat in order to reduce the impacts of climate. The study shows that moving to a plant-based diet would be a positive adapter to a changing climate. However, when coupled with the message that in order to protect the Earth, we should search the grocery store for “sustainably fished, organic or “grain fed” products; communities of color, particularly those that are located in food deserts, laugh. The NAACP put it best: “Environmental injustice and climate change are about the fact that in many communities it is far easier to find a bag of Cheetos than a carton of strawberries and this only stands to get worse as drought and flooding impact the availability and affordability of nutritious food.” Read the whole story here.

Revealed: the 20 firms behind a third of all carbon emissions

The Guardian
9 October 2019

Chevron’s Kern River oil field in Bakersfield, California. Photograph: Guardian Design

The Guardian today reveals the 20 fossil fuel companies whose relentless exploitation of the world’s oil, gas and coal reserves can be directly linked to more than one-third of all greenhouse gas emissions in the modern era.

New data from world-renowned researchers reveals how this cohort of state-owned and multinational firms are driving the climate emergency that threatens the future of humanity, and details how they have continued to expand their operations despite being aware of the industry’s devastating impact on the planet.

The analysis, by Richard Heede at the Climate Accountability Institute in the US, the world’s leading authority on big oil’s role in the escalating climate emergency, evaluates what the global corporations have extracted from the ground, and the subsequent emissions these fossil fuels are responsible for since 1965 – the point at which experts say the environmental impact of fossil fuels was known by both industry leaders and politicians.

The top 20 companies on the list have contributed to 35% of all energy-related carbon dioxide and methane worldwide, totalling 480bn tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (GtCO2e) since 1965. Read the whole story here.


'We're looking for common ground': Canadian scientist and 'Champion of the Earth' on talking to climate skeptics

CBC What on Earth?
3 October 2019

Katharine Hayhoe is a Canadian climate scientist with a big voice. A professor at Texas Tech University’s department of political science and director of the university’s Climate Center, Hayhoe has been fervent in communicating the challenges and reality of climate change, as well as the solutions to limiting global warming to 2 C above the pre-industrial average.

Hayhoe's work recently earned her the United Nations 2019 Champions of the Earth award. Nicole Mortillaro spoke to her about the challenges of communicating the realities of climate change.

What are the biggest hurdles for you in getting the message out about climate change?

There is a massively funded and very intelligent disinformation campaign that is trying to muddy the waters on everything that we do. So it is really kind of like the Girl Guides trying to fight the Marines here.

When we first started, we [were] naive. We thought, well, surely the truth will win if we just tell people the truth. But it’s such a highly politically polarized topic. And sadly, it isn't just limited to the U.S. anymore. In Canada, it's becoming increasingly politically polarized as well. 

Why do you think it's become politicized?

It’s become politicized because, if you go to Wikipedia and you just run your eyes down the list of the richest corporations in the world, No. 1 is Walmart. After Walmart, you have petroleum, petroleum, petroleum, energy, energy, petroleum, petroleum, energy, petroleum. So, we are talking about solutions that are overall beneficial for almost everybody on this planet, with one exception. And the one exception are the industries that currently hold the balance of power and wealth in this world.

Can you change people's minds with facts?

Facts are not what change people's minds because people have made the rejection of climate change part of their personal identity. And so changing their mind about climate change would require them to change their idea of who they are… 

People don't truly have a problem with basic science, because if they did, they would also be rejecting stoves and fridges and airplanes. What they have a problem with is not the actual science. They have a problem with the perceived solution. We see the solution to be liberal, to be socialist, to be — as [former prime minister Stephen] Harper famously put it — the economy versus the environment. We see the only solutions to be harmful and punitive and potentially even worse than the impact, especially in Canada, where many people feel, “Isn’t warmer better?”

But the reality is, there are many solutions that are extremely beneficial, that help us improve air quality, reduce our water use, grow the economy, grow local jobs. 

What bothers you the most about climate change science communication?

If we want to have constructive, positive conversations that move the dialogue along, we have to begin that conversation with what we most agree with, with that person, or those people or that organization, rather than what we disagree with her about. Not the Bill Nye approach, but rather the approach where we're looking for common ground.

Those of us who are doing it, it is not part of our job description. It is not part of our daily routine, it is something that we're doing … above and beyond what we're actually doing in terms of our teaching and our research and our service. And it is a woefully, woefully under-supported and underfunded initiative.

This interview has been edited and condensed.

Sea level rise threat growing, says UN

Cayman News Service
1 October 2019

In its latest report on the impact of climate change on the world, a UN panel laid bare the severe risk to coastal cities and low-lying islands from the sea, which is rising faster than scientists have ever predicted. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said the threat to hundreds of millions of people from the acceleration in the rate that sea levels are rising is due to a combination of melting ice in the polar regions and ocean expansion caused by warmer water.

While other elements of climate change, such as increasingly intense storms, potential drought and coral bleaching, are going to impact Cayman, sea level rise is perhaps one of the biggest threats to these islands. The impact on coastal property, the erosion of our beaches and increased flooding will wreak havoc in the next few decades.

Researchers have warned that extreme floods, the likes of which have historically only occurred once per century, are likely to happen at least once per year by 2050 in many regions, especially the tropics, even if global warming is limited to 1.5°C — and that remains a big ‘if’. Despite pledges from world leaders to cut greenhouse gas emissions, the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is still rising.

Global warming has already reached 1°C above pre-industrial levels, with overwhelming evidence that this is resulting in profound consequences for ecosystems and people. The ocean is warmer, more acidic and less productive. While the sea level has risen globally by around 15cm during the 20th century, it is currently rising more than twice as fast — 3.6mm per year — and accelerating, the report showed. Read the whole story here.

UN Climate Action Summit rejects talk, demands plans

Cayman Compass
23 September 2019

Environmental activist Greta Thunberg, of Sweden, addresses the Climate Action Summit in the United Nations General Assembly, at the UN headquarters, on Monday. - Photo: AP

United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres opened Monday’s Climate Action Summit with a call to action: “The climate crisis comes from us and the solutions must come from us.”

Speaking from UN headquarters in New York City, Guterres rejected talk on climate change and insisted world leaders go beyond words.

“This is not a climate negotiation summit because we do not negotiate with nature. This is a climate action summit,” he said.

Guterres described alarming signs of climate change that are already in play, from expansion of deserts to acidification of oceans.

He described increasingly frequent and more deadly storms, such as Hurricane Dorian in the Bahamas, where he called the destruction “apocalyptic”.

“Make no mistake, when we see these images, we are not just seeing damage, we are seeing the future if we do not act,” he said.

In the Polynesian island nation of Tuvalu, he described “an entire country fighting for its very existence against the rising seas”. Read the whole story here.

The carbon budget: What it is, why it matters

CBC: What on Earth?
19 September 2019

“If we are to have a 67 per cent chance of limiting the global temperature rise to below 1.5 degrees [C], we had, on Jan. 1, 2018, 420 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide left in our CO2 budget. And of course, that number is much lower today. We emit about 42 gigatonnes of CO2 a year. At current emission levels, that remaining budget is gone within 8 1/2 years.”

Those words were delivered by youth climate activist Greta Thunberg to the French parliament on July 23, 2019. She said she has not heard much on the subject of a "carbon budget," either from politicians or the media. But what's left in our carbon budget is of utmost importance if we hope to limit global warming. 

Simply put, this budget refers to how much carbon — which includes CO2 and other greenhouse gases like methane — we can emit into the atmosphere before we pass the point of warming the Earth to 1.5 C or 2 C.

The carbon budget was discussed in the first of three special reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), released in October 2018. The final instalment, the Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate (SROCC), will be discussed in Morocco this weekend, with a summary due to be released next Wednesday.

The Paris Agreement seeks to limit a global temperature rise to 2 C above pre-industrial levels this century (with a goal of keeping it to 1.5 C). The key to understanding the carbon budget is that even if countries keep in line with the Paris accord, if the budget is depleted by then, it won’t matter. The damage will already be done. And it will be irreversible.

“If you think about annual emissions and reducing emissions without thinking about the carbon budget, you could really blow past the Paris Agreement,” said Brenda Ekwurzel, director of climate science at the U.S.-based Union of Concerned Scientists. “That’s the trouble."

After a few years of stable global CO2 emissions, they rose in 2018, and there are concerns they may rise again in 2019.

If we don't pay attention to the carbon budget, it increases the chance of a host of global problems: the loss of coral reefs, no summer sea ice in the Arctic, more severe weather events and changes in crops that could lead to further food scarcity. 

If it sounds dire, Ekwurzel said we have the power to change the trajectory. Read the whole story here.

Ancient crystal growths in caves reveal seas rose 16 meters in a warmer world

Science News
9 September 2019

Giant rock formations inside Spain’s Artà Caves reveal how high seas once rose. Bulbous formations grew onto stalactites where brackish water lapped at the rock 4.39 million years ago. (Photo credit: ANTONI MERINO)

The future of sea level rise may be written into the walls of coastal Spanish caves.

Mineral “bathtub rings” deposited inside the limestone Artà Caves on the Balearic island of Mallorca show how high seas rose during the Pliocene Epoch — a time when Earth was about as warm as it’s expected to get by 2100. Those mineral deposits suggest the planet’s seas were around 16 meters higher on average than they are today, researchers report August 30 in Nature.

That measurement provides the most precise peek yet into what may come as climate change causes ice sheets to melt and ocean waters to rise — a process that could happen over hundreds to thousands of years. Previous estimates of Pliocene sea levels gave similar results, but relied on more indirect dating methods or failed to incorporate information about the subsequent rise and fall of the Earth’s crust. The Artà analysis, however, takes that rise and fall into account.

The new study’s combination of precision dating and corrected sea levels also may help answer a crucial question: How much of Earth’s biggest ice sheet melted during the Pliocene? Read the whole story here.

One thing we can do: eat a bit less meat

The New York Times
Climate Fwd:
21 August 2019

This week, we’re trying something different. Usually, our One Thing You Can Do feature highlights an idea for reducing your climate footprint. For a change, we decided to look at an individual action and talk about what would happen if everybody in the United States actually adopted it.

Here’s the question: What if everybody in the United States ate less meat? We don’t mean going vegetarian. Just less.

Is that realistic? “There is historical precedent,” said Richard Waite, an associate in the food program at the World Resources Institute. Overall, Americans eat about a third less beef than they did in the 1970s, he noted. It’s conceivable that we could make such a dietary shift again.

So, according to a study this month in the journal Scientific Reports, if everyone in the country reduced their consumption of beef, pork, and poultry by a quarter and substituted plant proteins, we’d save about 82 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions per year. That would be a reduction of a little more than 1 percent.

Just for comparison: If everyone in the country did go vegetarian, cutting meat out completely and replacing it with plant proteins of the same nutritional value, we’d save 330 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions per year. In that case, the savings would be about 5 percent.

Keep in mind, studies like this one necessarily include some assumptions about farming practices, dietary choices and even market forces. The numbers here are an estimate based on the average American diet and agricultural emissions data.

The average American, by the way, consumes almost 215 pounds of meat per person per year, according to 2016 data from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and the Food and Agriculture Organization. That includes beef, pork, poultry and lamb. Read the whole story here.

July confirmed as hottest month on record

Cayman News Service
16 August 2019

Like much of the planet, the Caribbean experienced warmer or much warmer temperatures last month, as July 2019 has been officially confirmed as the hottest month globally across land and sea since records began around 140 years ago. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) said Thursday that the average temperature last month was 1.71°F above the 20th century average.

The record warmth also shrank Arctic and Antarctic sea ice to historic lows, the scientists from NOAA stated.

July 2019 was 0.05°F hotter than the previous record, set in 2016, and followed the hottest June ever recorded. According to NOAA, the January-July temperature across global land and ocean surfaces was 1.71°F above the 20th century average of 56.9°F. Over the last 140 years only 2016 was hotter over that period. 

The news comes as a regional Pacific climate conference ended badly, as leaders from islands in the region on the front-line of the consequences of climate change accused the Australian government of watering down the current climate crisis in the final communique.

Fiji Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama, who leads one of those nations that is already feeling the impact, tweeted, “Watered-down climate language has real consequences — like water-logged homes, schools, communities, and ancestral burial grounds.” Read the whole story here.

Climate change food calculator: What's your diet's carbon footprint?

BBC News
9 August 2019

Avoiding meat and dairy products is one of the biggest ways to reduce your environmental impact, according to recent scientific studies.

Switching to a plant-based diet can help fight climate change, according to a major report by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which says the West's high consumption of meat and dairy is fuelling global warming.

But what is the difference between beef and chicken? Does a bowl of rice produce more climate warming greenhouse gases than a plate of chips? Is wine more environmentally friendly than beer?

To find out the climate impact of what you eat and drink, choose from one of the 34 items in our calculator and pick how often you have it. Click here.

Climate change threatening food security

Cayman News Service
8 August 2019

A new report published by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has found that the rise in global temperatures is already impacting food security. With more than a quarter of the ice-free land we inhabit already degraded, some 820 million people are undernourished, not just because of war, poverty and disease but because of climate change. But scientists are also warning that humans must drastically alter food production to prevent the most catastrophic effects of global warming.

“Today 500 million people live in areas that experience desertification,” said French climate scientist Valérie Masson-Delmotte, who is Co-Chair of the IPCC Working Group, at a press conference. “People living in already degraded or desertified areas are increasingly negatively affected by climate change.”

Food production is being impacted by the changes in climate, while at the same time making climate change worse. Soil degradation has a direct impact on the amount of carbon the earth is able to contain, which, together with food waste and contamination, is making our ability to feed ourselves increasingly precarious.

“Food security will be increasingly affected by future climate change through yield declines – especially in the tropics – increased prices, reduced nutrient quality, and supply chain disruptions,” said Priyadarshi Shukla, also Co-Chair of the IPCC Working Group, who specialises in energy and environment modelling and policies. “We will see different effects in different countries, but there will be more drastic impacts on low-income countries in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean,” he added. Read the whole story here.

Climate Could Be an Electoral Time Bomb, Republican Strategists Fear

The New York Times
2 August 2019

Benjamin Backer, 21, on Capitol Hill last month. He founded the American Conservation Coalition, a conservative group that advocates for environmental policies.CreditCreditTing Shen for The New York Times

WASHINGTON — When election time comes next year, Will Galloway, a student and Republican youth leader at Clemson University, will look for candidates who are strong on the mainstream conservative causes he cares about most, including gun rights and opposing abortion.

But there is another issue high on his list of urgent concerns that is not on his party’s agenda: climate change.

“Climate change isn’t going to discriminate between red states and blue states, so red-state actors have to start engaging on these issues,” said Mr. Galloway, 19, who is heading into his sophomore year and is chairman of the South Carolina Federation of College Republicans. “But we haven’t been. We’ve completely ceded them to the left.”

While Donald Trump has led the Republican Party far down the road of denying the scientific consensus of human-caused climate change, Mr. Galloway represents a concern among younger Republicans that has caught the attention of Republican strategists.

In conversations with 10 G.O.P. analysts, consultants and activists, all said they were acutely aware of the rising influence of young voters like Mr. Galloway, who in their lifetimes haven’t seen a single month of colder-than-average temperatures globally, and who call climate change a top priority. Those strategists said lawmakers were aware, too, but few were taking action. Read the whole story here.

Moody’s Buys Climate Data Firm, Signaling New Scrutiny of Climate Risks

The New York Times
24 July 2019

A damaged home in Mexico Beach, Fla., after Hurricane Michael last October. Photo Credit: Hector Retamal/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Moody’s Corporation has purchased a controlling stake in a firm that measures the physical risks of climate change, the latest indication that global warming can threaten the creditworthiness of governments and companies around the world.

The rating agency bought a majority share in Four Twenty Seven, a California-based company that measures a range of hazards, including extreme rainfall, hurricanes, heat stress and sea level rise, and tracks their impact on 2,000 companies and 196 countries. In the United States, the data covers 761 cities and more than 3,000 counties.

“We are taking these risks very seriously,” said Myriam Durand, global head of assessments at Moody’s Investors Service, who said the purchase would allow its credit analysts to be more precise in their review of climate related risks. “You can’t mitigate what you don’t understand.”

The purchase is the latest in a series of moves by rating agencies to better account for the effects of climate change on the ability of governments to pay back the money they borrow by issuing bonds. Global warming can threaten that ability in a variety of ways. Read the whole story here.

Climate change: Current warming 'unparalleled' in 2,000 years

BBC News
24 July 2019

Photo Credit: Getty Images

The speed and extent of current global warming exceeds any similar event in the past 2,000 years, researchers say.
They show that famous historic events like the "Little Ice Age" don't compare with the scale of warming seen over the last century.

The research suggests that the current warming rate is higher than any observed previously.

The scientists say it shows many of the arguments used by climate sceptics are no longer valid.

When scientists have surveyed the climatic history of our world over the past centuries a number of key eras have stood out.

These ranged from the "Roman Warm Period", which ran from AD 250 to AD 400, and saw unusually warm weather across Europe, to the famed Little Ice Age, which saw temperatures drop for centuries from the 1300s.

The events were seen by some as evidence that the world has warmed and cooled many times over the centuries and that the warming seen in the world since the industrial revolution was part of that pattern and therefore nothing to be alarmed about.

Three new research papers show that argument is on shaky ground. Read the whole story here.

'No doubt left' about scientific consensus on global warming, say experts

The Guardian
24 July 2019

The scientific consensus that humans are causing global warming is likely to have passed 99%, according to the lead author of the most authoritative study on the subject, and could rise further after separate research that clears up some of the remaining doubts.

Three studies published in Nature and Nature Geoscience use extensive historical data to show there has never been a period in the last 2,000 years when temperature changes have been as fast and extensive as in recent decades.

It had previously been thought that similarly dramatic peaks and troughs might have occurred in the past, including in periods dubbed the Little Ice Age and the Medieval Climate Anomaly. But the three studies use reconstructions based on 700 proxy records of temperature change, such as trees, ice and sediment, from all continents that indicate none of these shifts took place in more than half the globe at any one time. Read the whole story here.

Cayman experiences dry year and a half

Cayman Compass
22 July 2019

The Cayman Islands built up a rainfall deficit of 6.21 inches over an 18‑month period, according to data provided by the National Weather Service.

Measurements taken from January 2018 to June 2019 show Grand Cayman has fallen below the 30‑year rainfall average for 11 of the past 18 months. That brings Cayman 8% below the 30‑year average of 74.47 inches for an 18‑month period.

The cumulative rainfall over that time span was 68.26 inches.

For 14 of those months, at least one third of the total monthly rainfall came in one day. During five of those months, more than half of the total rainfall came in one day.

The wettest single day over the past 18 months was 21 May 2018 with 3.84 inches, followed by 9 Sept. 2018 with 3.41 inches and 6 Jan. 2019 with 3.33 inches.

In the long term, the Cayman Islands can expect shorter but heavier rain events, explained Winston Gall, a Cayman Islands National Weather Service forecaster. He described the projection as an anticipated effect of climate change. Read the whole story here.

Air travellers may have to pay carbon charge to offset emissions

The Guardian
22 July 2019

Air passengers may have to pay an extra “carbon charge” on flights as part of a government initiative to reduce CO2 emissions and tackle the climate crisis.

Passengers could choose to pay more for travel tickets, which would then be used to offset greenhouse gas emissions. Or the scheme could work on an “opt-out” basis and also be applied to trains, buses and ferries.

Ministers hope the plans will raise awareness about the effects of public transport on the environment. The extra funds could be used to spearhead eco-friendly projects such as planting trees to reduce the carbon footprint.

The government said it hoped the initiative would “drive consumer choices towards less polluting journey options”. Read the whole story here.

Can Africa's Great Green Wall combat climate change and mass migration?

Mother Nature Network
16 July 2016

The Great Green Wall is rooted in Africa's Sahel region, which is the southern border of the Sahara. (Photo: Great Green Wall)

The Great Green Wall may be the most aptly named thing ever. It's great, stretching nearly 5,000 miles across the continent of Africa. It's green, consisting of millions of trees. And it's a wall — not a solid wall, but a wall of trees meant to keep the Sahara from encroaching further into communities as a result of climate change and desertification.

It has been under construction for a decade and is about 15 percent done. Once completed, it will be the largest living structure on the planet at three times the size of the Great Barrier Reef.

The Great Green Wall is rooted in Africa's Sahel region, which is the southern border of the Sahara. It stretches through at least 20 nations, some of them among the poorest in the world. Read the whole story here.

Climate change made last month’s European heatwave at least five times more likely

Yale Enviornment 360
5 July 2019

This article was originally published by The Guardian and was reproduced by Yale Enviornment 360 as part of their Climate Desk collaboration.

Europe had its hottest June on record, around 1 degree Celsius above the previous record set in 1999, and more than 2 degrees C above normal. WMO/TWITTER

The record-breaking heatwave that struck France and other European nations in June was made at least five — and possibly 100 — times more likely by climate change, scientists have calculated.

Such heatwaves are also about 4 degrees Celsius hotter than a century ago, the researchers say. Furthermore, the heatwaves hitting Europe are more frequent and more severe than climate models have predicted...

...The searing heat led to wildfires in Spain and Germany, and widespread disruption across the continent. It is inevitable that the heatwave will have caused many premature deaths, particularly as it occurred outside the usual holiday months when people are more able to take shelter. But these figures take time to compile. The heatwave of 2003 caused more than 70,000 premature deaths across Europe. Read the whole story here.


Morse: Climate change — Does Cayman care?

Cayman Compass
3 July 2019
by Graham Morse

A London black cab stops at an electric recharging station.

I have just returned from a month in London. It is hard not to pick up a newspaper or watch the news on radio or TV without getting drawn into the climate change debate and the problem of air pollution.

But things are changing. The buses are electric, as are many of the iconic black cabs. One cab driver told me he was making so much more money by buying a fully electric cab that he could take a month off and still make the same take-home money. Charging was no problem. An overnight charge and a plug-in while he was having his lunch was all that he needed.

The UK government has committed to net zero carbon emissions by 2050, and a ban on all gasoline and diesel fuelled vehicles by 2040.

The all-party Climate Change Committee has set out a detailed report on how to achieve net zero emissions. Much progress has already been made, with 50% of the UK electric supply now being generated from non-carbon sources.

New technology will play an increasing part in achieving the government’s goals. Hydrogen will come into the picture and a hydrogen train is being tested. Developing technology will allow machines to capture and store carbon dioxide, and planting more trees is part of the solution.

Climate deniers have been drowned out by the overwhelming scientific evidence, and even they are conceding, not that it is not happening, but challenging how fast it is happening and how catastrophic the outcomes could be.

The debate now has moved on to estimating the cost of change to net zero emissions. What will people be prepared to give up to become carbon neutral? Would they give up eating beef? Would they take fewer flights or pay more?

Back here in Cayman, it feels very different. Two years have passed since our National Energy Policy was passed into law with a target of 70% of our power to be generated from renewable sources by 2037. But little appears to have been done. Read the whole story here.

What climate scientists do at home to save the planet

The Guardian
29 June 2019

‘As a rule of thumb, a vegetarian meal is going to have a substantially lower carbon footprint than a meat one.’ Illustration: Steve Caplin/The Guardian

What changes have the experts made to their own lives to tackle the climate emergency?

Tom Bailey, head of sustainable consumption at C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group:

Month after month, there is research showing that climate change is happening faster than we thought. We’re in a car hurtling towards the edge of a cliff, we’ve got our foot on the accelerator, and we’re just talking to each other, faffing about. If anything, some of us are even putting the foot further down. What we need to do is stop the car and get out. That has become increasingly clear to me in the last couple of years, which is why I’ve made changes to my own lifestyle.

These all come from the research we’ve been doing at my work, and it’s all based on climate science. The first – and the hardest for many people – is flying. The evidence is clear that, as far as the climate is concerned, we should keep to one return short-haul flight every two to three years. So it’s not that I can’t see the world – I could still go abroad at least another 10 times in my life – it’s just that I can’t go to Istanbul for the weekend. Read the whole story here.

'We can go on the offence': A more positive way to look at climate action

CBC What on Earth?
20 June 2019

According to a recent survey of 14,000 respondents in 14 countries, people basically fall into four groupings when it comes to tackling climate change: "optimists," "supporters," "disempowered" and "skeptical." The optimists and supporters generally feel they can have an impact and are doing their part to mitigate rising emissions and temperatures.

The disempowered, however, think it’s too late to stop the damage and feel, well, paralyzed. But Per Espen Stoknes, a psychologist who has also served as a member of Norway’s parliament, has ideas about how to change that.

Stoknes is the author of a 2015 book called What We Think About When We Try Not to Think About Global Warming, which focuses on the barriers that keep people from making change — and offers ideas to overcome them. Read the whole story here.

G20 environment and energy ministers meet in Japan 

The Economic Times
16 June 2019

The spotlight is on innovations in energy.

Environment and energy ministers from G20 countries are meeting over the weekend in the Japanese resort town of Karuizawa. Ministers will focus on energy security, low carbon energy sources, plastic waste, marine litter, and innovation in these areas.

The meeting in Karuizama comes close on the heels of the attack on two oil tankers, one operated by a Japanese shipping company, in the Gulf of Oman on Thursday. 

The spotlight is on innovations in energy. Japan is focusing on hyhydrogen and carbon capture storage and use (CCS/CCUS). It signed agreements with the European Union and United States of America to partner on research and innovation in hydrogen and fuel cell technologies. 

Japan, the current chair of the G-20, is of the view that virtuous cycle of environmental protection and growth will be driven by the breakthrough innovations. Read the whole story here.

Trump and Prince Charles, polar opposites on the environment, have tea

NBC News
3 June 2019

Prince Charles greets President Trump on Monday at the start of a three-day state visit.Mandel Ngan / AFP - Getty Images

Whatever else happens on President Donald Trump’s state visit to the U.K., one of the more fraught meetings might end up being his Monday afternoon tea with heir to the British throne, Prince Charles.

While smiles and pleasantries were in abundance, the two men have vastly different stances on the environment.

For over 40 years, the Prince of Wales has been outspoken about a number of environmental issues facing the planet.

Meanwhile, President Trump has previously publicly accused climate experts of having a “political agenda.” And, before taking office, he called the concept of human-caused warming “a con job” and a “hoax.”

Whether the two actually engaged in any kind of environmental talk during their meeting is unclear. But many media outlets in the U.K. speculated about just how uncomfortable the encounter might get, considering Trump would not be likely to stay quiet if the issue were brought up. Read the whole story here.

Are Electric Vehicles Really Better For The Environment?

Forbes
20 May 2019

Elon Musk, co-founder and chief executive officer of Tesla Inc., speaks during an unveiling event for the Tesla Model Y crossover electric vehicle in Hawthorne, California. Musk said the cheaper electric crossover sports utility vehicle (SUV) will be available from the spring of 2021. The vehicle's price will start at $39,000, a longer-range version will cost $47,000. © 2019 BLOOMBERG FINANCE LP

Since the first modern electric vehicles (EV) took to the roads in the 2000s, critics have been quick to question the ‘clean’ label attached to them. From manufacturing concerns to battery power sources as well as overall autonomy, EVs have been under scrutiny from sceptics. With the amount of debate and misinformation troubling the waters, the facts behind the efficiency of electric vehicles have become somewhat clouded - so just how clean are these vehicles?

An argument that is routinely put forward to contrast the clean image of electric cars is the pollution behind the manufacturing process of their batteries. There is indeed a range of rare earth metals that make up the composition of the battery, and their extraction and manipulation can contribute to carbon emissions. However, as a 2018 International Council on Clean Transportation (ICTT) report illustrates, the country in which the batteries are being produced as well as the battery composition has a much higher level of impact on emissions...

...Electric vehicles as they currently stand are far less polluting than their combustion engine counterparts despite the carbon emissions from the manufacturing process and its imperfect energy sources. As the technology becomes more mainstream, it is likely to become even more efficient and sustainable. Economies of scale will benefit EV manufacturing by providing better infrastructure, more efficient manufacturing techniques, recycling options and reduce the need for the mining of new materials. Electric vehicles are not a panacea but combined with greater deployment of renewables and the decarbonization of the electricity grid they offer a pathway to greatly reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Read the whole story here.

Letter: Environment vs. economy is a false choice

The Salt Lake Tribune
By Gerald Elias | The Public Forum
20 May 2019



Image Credit: moma.org

When I was a kid, there was an ad for Campbell’s Chunky Soups, where they asked, “Is it soup or is it a meal?”

I found that question perplexing, wondering why couldn’t it be both. Likewise, the conundrum about climate change: Is it good for the environment or is it good for the economy?

It’s really a false choice, because indeed there is a way for it to be both; to reconcile progressive Democrats with moderates, and even Democrats with Republicans.

I’m referring to the Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act (HR763), which would place a fee on the production of fossil fuels and have all the revenue returned to us, the consumers. As legislation with bipartisan congressional co-sponsorship and supported by Citizens Climate Lobby, HR763 would reduce emissions by at least 40 percent in the first 12 years, improve health and save lives by reducing pollution Americans breathe, create over two million new jobs, and because it is a free market non-regulatory solution, would not grow government. Read the whole story here.

CO2 Concentrations Rising Past 400 Parts Per Million

Climate Central.org
1 May 2019

As May begins, we are nearing the annual peak atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2) — the greenhouse gas that contributes most to human-caused climate change. CO2 does vary seasonally, peaking in May as the Northern Hemisphere’s plants blossom and breathe in more CO2 during the summer. Still, the year-to-year increase in CO2 is unmistakable. When this year’s peak is announced (see here for daily updates), it will be the highest level in at least two million years. The last time CO2 levels were this high, trees grew near the South Pole and sea levels were 50 to 65 feet higher than today.

Ice core data show ups and downs for CO2 in the last 800,000 years, but the rapid increase since the industrial revolution is unprecedented. This increase leads to the rise in global temperatures — the foundation for climate change impacts that are affecting us here and now. Even if we halted our emissions today, these impacts wouldn’t disappear; CO2 stays in the atmosphere for a thousand years or more. Cutting our carbon footprint is the greatest challenge of our time, but solutions do exist. From renewable energy and energy efficiency to cleaner transportation and agriculture, sustainable practices are ready for use.

Methodology: CO2 data from Mauna Loa, Hawaii is reported by NOAA’s Earth System Research Laboratory Global Monitoring Division.

For Earth Day, a look at how people around the world view climate change

Pew Research Centre
18 April 2019

Protesters in Athens hold a banner calling for more efforts to stop climate change. Nine-in-ten in Greece say global climate change is a major threat to the country. (Helen Paroglou/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images)

April 22 is Earth Day, an annual event that highlights environmental concerns and encourages civic action. This year’s Earth Day comes amid widespread global concern about climate change.

Here are five facts about how people globally see climate change, drawn from a 2018 Pew Research Center survey on how people evaluate eight potential threats, as well as other polls conducted by the Center. (For more on how people in the United States see climate change, see our companion post, “How Americans see climate change in 5 charts.”)

Majorities in most surveyed countries say global climate change is a major threat to their nation. In fact, it’s seen as the top threat in 13 of 26 surveyed countries, more than any other issue the survey asked about.

People in Greece express very high levels of concern, with 90% labeling climate change a major threat (similar to the 88% there who cite the condition of the global economy). People in South Korea, France, Spain and Mexico also express strong concerns. Eight-in-ten or more in each of these countries say climate change is a major threat. Read the whole story here.

US judge halts hundreds of drilling projects in groundbreaking climate change ruling

The Guardian
20 March 2019



Drilling has been halted on more than 300,000 acres of public land in Wyoming. Photograph: Brennan Linsley/AP

In the first significant check on the Trump administration’s “energy-first” agenda, a US judge has temporarily halted hundreds of drilling projects for failing to take climate change into account.

Drilling had been stalled on more than 300,000 acres of public land in Wyoming after it was ruled the Trump administration violated environmental laws by failing to consider greenhouse gas emissions. The federal judge has ordered the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), which manages US public lands and issues leases to the energy industry, to redo its analysis.

The decision stems from an environmental lawsuit. WildEarth Guardians, Physicians for Social Responsibility, and the Western Environmental Law Center sued the BLM in 2016 for failing to calculate and limit the amount of greenhouse gas emissions from future oil and gas projects.

The agency “did not adequately quantify the climate change impacts of oil and gas leasing”, said Rudolph Contreras, a US district judge in Washington DC, in a ruling late on Tuesday. He added that the agency “must consider the cumulative impact of GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions” generated by past, present and future BLM leases across the country. Read the whole story here.

Geoengineering is not a cure-all for climate change

CBC | What on Earth?
14 March 2019



Photo credit: climate.nasa.gov

Climate change can be a touchy subject — even among advocates of climate action. And especially when it comes to the issue of geoengineering.

Geoengineering is the idea of using technology to manipulate the environment in order to combat global warming. One popular example is stratospheric aerosol injection, wherein sulphur dioxide is injected into the atmosphere (like what happens during a volcanic eruption). This reduces the amount of sunlight that can penetrate the atmosphere and could theoretically lower Earth’s temperature.

Earlier this week, tempers flared on Twitter between climatologist Michael Mann and David Keith, a professor of applied physics at Harvard University and an expert on solar geoengineering. Keith, who is Canadian, was the co-author of a recent study released in Nature Climate Change that suggests solar geoengineering, paired with a reduction in CO2 emissions, could be used to cut global warming in half without making climate change worse. Read the whole story here.

How brain biases prevent climate action

BBC.com
8 March 2019

UK students went on strike in February 2019 in protest of climate change inaction. Our ability to anticipate future scenarios is a capacity that sets humans apart (Credit: Getty)

We know that climate change is happening. We also know that it’s the result of increased carbon emissions from human activities like land degradation and the burning of fossil fuels. And we know that it’s urgent.

A recent report from international climate experts tells us that we are likely to reach 1.5C of average global warming in as little as 11 years. At that point we can expect “increased risks to health, livelihoods, food security, water supply, human security and economic growth”. These experts also found that temperature rise has already altered human and natural systems in profound ways, resulting in more extreme weather, the melting polar ice caps, sea level rise, droughts, floods and biodiversity loss.

But that information hasn’t been enough to change our behaviours on a scale great enough to stop climate change. And a big part of the reason is our own evolution. The same behaviours that once helped us survive are, today, working against us.

It’s important to remember one thing, however. It’s true that no other species has evolved to create such a large-scale problem – but no other species has evolved with such an extraordinary capacity to solve it, either. Read the whole story here.

7 reasons why Arctic sea ice matters

12 December 2018
Mother Nature Network

Ice in the central Arctic Ocean has thinned by more than 60 percent since 1975. (Photo: Pablo Clemente-Colon/NOAA)

The Arctic hasn't been itself lately. Temperatures there are rising at twice the global rate, sparking an array of changes unlike anything seen in recorded history.

One of the most striking examples is the region's sea ice, which is now declining by about 13 percent per decade, with the 12 lowest seasonal minimums all recorded in the last 12 years. In September 2018, Arctic sea ice tied for its sixth-lowest extent on record, according to the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC).

"This year's minimum is relatively high compared to the record low extent we saw in 2012, but it is still low compared to what it used to be in the 1970s, 1980s and even the 1990s," says Claire Parkinson, a climate change senior scientist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, in a statement about the 2018 minimum.

Arctic sea ice always waxes and wanes with the seasons, but its average late-summer minimum is now shrinking by 13.2 percent per decade, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). And in its 2018 Arctic Report Card, NOAA reports the oldest Arctic sea ice — frozen for at least four years, making it more resilient than younger, thinner ice — is now in steep decline. This oldest ice comprised about 16 percent of the total ice pack in 1985, NOAA reports, but it's now less than 1 percent, representing a loss of 95 percent in 33 years. Read the whole story here.

Climate change: Oceans 'soaking up more heat than estimated'

1 November 2018
BBC News

Photo credit: Getty Images

The world has seriously underestimated the amount of heat soaked up by our oceans over the past 25 years, researchers say.

Their study suggests that the seas have absorbed 60% more than previously thought.

They say it means the Earth is more sensitive to fossil fuel emissions than estimated.

This could make it much more difficult to keep global warming within safe levels this century.

According to the last major assessment by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the world's oceans have taken up over 90% of the excess heat trapped by greenhouse gases.

But this new study says that every year, for the past 25 years, we have put about 150 times the amount of energy used to generate electricity globally into the seas - 60% more than previous estimates.

That's a big problem.

Scientists base their predictions about how much the Earth is warming by adding up all the excess heat that is produced by the known amount of greenhouse gases that have been emitted by human activities.

This new calculation shows that far more heat than we thought has been going into oceans. But it also means that far more heat than we thought has been generated by the warming gases we have emitted. Read the whole story here.

A 'conservative' carbon tax

Climate Fwd:
The New York Times
10 October 2018

The newest financial supporter of a plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is the biggest energy company in the world: the fossil fuel giant Exxon Mobil.

The company announced that it would give $1 million over the next two years to Americans for Carbon Dividends, a group supporting legislation that would tax carbon emissions and return the money to Americans in refunds.

The proposal is “founded on conservative principles,” said James A. Baker III, one of the Republican elder statesmen who co-founded the group. “The glue that holds it together is returning all carbon-fee revenue directly to the American people rather than using it to grow government.”

Exxon publicly backed the plan last year. So did other companies in the fossil fuel and renewable energy fields, as well as General Motors, Johnson & Johnson, PepsiCo and Unilever.

Scott Silvestri, an Exxon spokesman, said, “Applying a uniform cost across the economy is consistent with our principles on how to manage the risk of climate change.”Ted Halstead, another founder of Americans for Carbon Dividends, said he expected lawmakers in Washington to propose legislation based on the plan in the next session of Congress, with a long-term goal of passing legislation in 2021. “We see this as a marathon, not a sprint,” he said.

The plan sets an initial tax of $40 per ton of carbon dioxide produced, which would add 36 cents to the cost of each gallon of gasoline sold. The rate would rise over time, reducing demand for fossil fuels. The average family of four would receive approximately $2,000 in the first year as a carbon dividend, the group says. Read the whole story here.

Major climate report describes a strong risk of crisis as early as 2040

The New York Times
7 October 2018

Harry Taylor, 6, played with the bones of dead livestock in Australia, which has faced severe drought. (Photo credit: Brook Mitchell/Getty Images)

INCHEON, South Korea — A landmark report from the United Nations’ scientific panel on climate change paints a far more dire picture of the immediate consequences of climate change than previously thought and says that avoiding the damage requires transforming the world economy at a speed and scale that has “no documented historic precedent.”

The report, issued on Monday by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a group of scientists convened by the United Nations to guide world leaders, describes a world of worsening food shortages and wildfires, and a mass die-off of coral reefs as soon as 2040 — a period well within the lifetime of much of the global population.

The report “is quite a shock, and quite concerning,” said Bill Hare, an author of previous I.P.C.C. reports and a physicist with Climate Analytics, a nonprofit organization. “We were not aware of this just a few years ago.” The report was the first to be commissioned by world leaders under the Paris agreement, the 2015 pact by nations to fight global warming.

The authors found that if greenhouse gas emissions continue at the current rate, the atmosphere will warm up by as much as 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit (1.5 degrees Celsius) above preindustrial levels by 2040, inundating coastlines and intensifying droughts and poverty. Previous work had focused on estimating the damage if average temperatures were to rise by a larger number, 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit (2 degrees Celsius), because that was the threshold scientists previously considered for the most severe effects of climate change.

The new report, however, shows that many of those effects will come much sooner, at the 2.7-degree mark. Read the whole story here.

Experiencing extreme weather is not enough to convince climate change sceptics that humans are damaging the environment, a new study shows

1 October 2018
Science Daily

Carton credit: medium.com

Political bias and partisan news reporting influence whether people report experiencing certain extreme weather events, the research suggests.

But Americans who lived in areas where a variety of extreme events were recorded -- flood, tornado, hurricane, and drought -- were ultimately no more likely to share the same beliefs about climate change as scientists.

Dr Ben Lyons, from the University of Exeter, who led the research, said: ""Extreme weather plays a limited long-term role in forming people's beliefs about climate change. Instead, their views and beliefs can alter the way they perceive the weather. We have found when an extreme weather event is ambiguous, as with polar vortex and drought, people are more likely to see the event through a partisan lens. If there is grey area, people are more comfortable applying their preferred label."

The University of Exeter, University of Michigan and University of Texas research found that Republicans were less likely to report experiencing a polar vortex, while those exposed to liberal media were more likely.

However the weather can be sometimes so extreme that it overshadows personal views -- the researchers found that partisanship and media use did not affect the way people in the American Northeast -- where the 2014 and 2015 polar vortex events hit hardest -- reported the weather they had experienced.

Those who favoured liberal news sources such as the Huffington Post or the Daily Show reported experiencing drought more often than national weather data would suggest they actually did.

Dr Lyons said: "Very extreme weather accompanied by constant media coverage is harder for people to deny. But on the other end of the scale, droughts can take longer to have an effect, so people have some difficulty perceiving their onset and this may allow them to bring their biases to the table." Read the whole story here.

At Climate Week NYC, the Focus is on Maintaining Momentum

The New York Times
21 September 2018

California Gov. Jerry Brown speaks as Michael Bloomberg, left, listens during a news conference at the Global Action Climate Summit Thursday, Sept. 13, 2018, in San Francisco. Gov. Brown pledged to make his state fully carbon-neutral by 2045. Photo credit: Eric Risberg/Associated Press

This year’s annual Climate Week NYC arrives Monday at a moment of increasing urgency in the ongoing battle to contain — if not reverse — the effects of climate change.

On one hand there is much to celebrate. Climate Week is now entering its 10th year in New York City, emerging as the leading international forum for politicians, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), activists and policymakers to share climate-related strategies and successes with like-minded people.

Climate Week’s debut West Coast counterpart — the Global Climate Action Summit — was held in San Francisco earlier this month. A highlight was a commitment from Gov. Jerry Brown of California, to make his state fully carbon-neutral by 2045. Read the whole story here.

Cities’ Emissions Are Decreasing Even as Their Economies and Populations Grow

Yale Environment 360
14 September 2018

Photo credit: peiwc.com

Twenty-seven cities across the globe, home to 54 million people, have already reached their peak greenhouse gas levels and are now seeing emissions fall an average 2 percent per year, according to C40 Cities, a coalition of local governments working to fulfill the Paris climate agreement. This downward trend is happening even as the cities’ economies grow an average of 3 percent per year, and their populations 1.4 percent per year.

Scientists estimate that global greenhouse gas emissions need to peak by 2020 if the world hopes to stave off the worst impacts of climate change. The 27 cities in the new C40 analysis — including Barcelona, Berlin, Paris, New York City, and Sydney — all peaked their emissions in 2012 and have seen their greenhouse gases fall over the last five years. The coalition says many of its other member cities are on track to reach peak emissions by 2020.

San Francisco, for example, hit its peak greenhouse gas emissions in 2000 and has since reduced them by 30 percent from 1990 levels. During the same period, the city’s economy grew 111 percent and its population 20 percent.

The cities achieved their emissions reductions in different ways, such as shifting away from coal-fired electricity, incentivizing energy efficiency, or expanding public transportation, the Los Angeles Times reported.

“To prevent the worst impacts of climate change, we have to cut greenhouse gas emissions even as the population grows,” Michael Bloomberg, the UN Secretary-General’s Special Envoy for Climate Action and President of the C40 Board, said in a statement. “Cities are showing that it can be done - and that the same steps they’re taking to reduce their carbon footprint are also strengthening their local economies, creating jobs, and improving public health.”

As waters rise, coastal megacities like Mumbai face catastrophe

Science News
15 August 2018

A woman poses for a photograph as a wave at high tide crashes over Mumbai’s seaside promenade in July during a pause in the seasonal monsoon rains.

Each year when the monsoon rain sheets down and the tides swell over coastal Mumbai, Saif shutters his soda shop on Juhu Beach and takes shelter up in the rafters. Still, the water invades through the roof and over the concrete floors, sometimes reaching as high as the freezers full of ice cream.

For 36-year-old Saif, the coastal megacity’s chronic flooding is stressful. “What would happen if too much water comes?” asks Saif, who, like many in India, goes by one name. “I could get swept up with it.” Last year’s torrential floods killed at least 14 people in Mumbai. And in July 2005, when a meter of rain fell in a single day, flooding cost the city about $1.7 billion in damages.

Rebuilding his uninsured shop after the 2005 floods cost Saif about $57,000. He was lucky. When those floodwaters receded after two days, more than 1,000 people had died from drowning, landslides or other flood-related accidents in Mumbai and surrounding areas. “What can we do?” Saif asks. “Who can win against nature?”

Such questions are becoming more urgent in coastal cities at mounting risk of climate-driven flooding. Climate change is raising sea levels, while also making storms more severe and bringing heavier rains to some places. For densely populated cities like Mumbai — the financial heart of India, which is the world’s fastest-growing major economy — those risks threaten to throw personal incomes and national economies into chaos.

“The challenge is getting people to prepare for a risk they can’t yet see,” says Stéphane Hallegatte, lead economist at the World Bank’s Global Facility or Disaster Reduction and Recovery in Washington, D.C. “A very tiny change in sea level can have an enormous impact on risk levels,” he adds. Read the whole story here.

Heat wreaks havoc

The New York Times
30 July 2018

The continental U.S. had its hottest May and the third-hottest June. Japan has been walloped by record triple-digit temperatures, killing at least 86 people. Record temperatures were also logged on the edge of the Sahara and above the Arctic Circle.

An official with the World Meteorological Organization said the extreme heat was not surprising. “This is not a future scenario,” she said of climate change. “It is happening now.”

Our correspondents around the world spoke with people to find out how they’re coping. Click here.

A climate policy fit for Trump?

The New York Times
Climate Fwd:
20 June 2018

Photo Illustration by The New York Times; photo by Donat Sorokin/TASS, via Getty Images

This is not something you see every day: Over the past month, a growing chorus of Senate Republicans, conservative taxpayer groups and corporate executives has been urging President Trump to implement a major Obama-era policy to tackle climate change.

They’re just not calling it that.

The issue at hand revolves around air-conditioners. In 2017, at a United Nation summit in Kigali, Rwanda, President Barack Obama’s administration agreed with 196 other countries to phase out the use of hydrofluoro-carbons, or HFCs, an extremely potent greenhouse gas used in air-conditioners, refrigerators and foams. The pact was an amendment to the 1987 Montreal Protocol meant to protect the ozone layer.Experts say the policy could have a surprisingly large climate impact. With countries like China and India installing millions of new air-conditioners, HFC emissions were expected to skyrocket this century. Reducing the use of these chemicals could help avoid up to 0.44 degrees Celsius of warming by century’s end. Given that the world’s nations are trying to limit total warming below two degrees, that’s a significant chunk.

But for the United States to fully participate in these efforts, the Kigali amendment needs to be ratified by two-thirds of the Senate. Mr. Trump has not decided whether to submit the treaty for approval.

On the surface, it would seem Mr. Trump would have no interest. He’s been rolling back most Obama-era climate policies. Why should this one be any different?But in this case, dozens of American manufacturers have been pressing Mr. Trump to move forward. Companies like Honeywell, Dow Chemical and Johnson Controls are well positioned to produce next-generation air-conditioners and alternatives to HFCs, and they don’t want to lose out on a budding global market. Read the whole story here.

At the Royal Wedding, Something Green

The New York Times
Climate Fwd:
23 May 2018

The newly married Duke and Duchess of Sussex left Windsor Castle in a Jaguar Roadster that was modified to be all-electric.

Royal wedding viewers may have had a few questions as they watched the Duke and Duchess of Sussex (a.k.a. Harry and Meghan) drive off from Windsor Castle after the ceremony to a reception at Frogmore House a mile or so away. Such as:

1)    Were they wearing seatbelts?

2)    Does the duke, who was behind the wheel, have
       a driver’s license?

3)    What was up with their ride?

We’re not sure about the first question (though video evidence suggests they did not buckle up) and it turns out that Harry passed his driving test as a teenager years ago (and on his first try).

As for the happy couple’s borrowed car, Climate Fwd: is pleased to report that it was a zero-emissions vehicle.

The car is a vintage silver-blue 1968 Jaguar E-Type Roadster with one crucial, and major, modification: Its famous six-cylinder gasoline-powered XK motor was replaced with an all-electric drivetrain.

Where the motor had been, Jaguar Land Rover technicians installed a lithium-ion battery pack capable of powering the car for about 170 miles on a charge (less than Tesla’s new Model 3 mass-market car, but perhaps the Jaguar has better braking). And in place of the gearbox, they installed a 220-kilowatt electric motor. Read the whole story here.

In the Arctic, the Old Ice Is Disappearing

The New York Times
14 May 2018

In the Arctic Ocean, some ice stays frozen year-round, lasting for many years before melting. But this winter, the region hit a record low for ice older than five years.

This, along with a near-record low for sea ice over all, supports predictions that by midcentury there will be no more ice in the Arctic Ocean in summer.

As darker, heat-absorbing water replaces reflective ice, it hastens warming in the region. Older ice is generally thicker than newer ice and thus more resilient to heat. But as the old ice disappears, the newer ice left behind is more vulnerable to rising temperatures. Read the whole story here.

Sea level, temperature rise threaten Cayman in just 80 years

The Cayman Islands Journal
4 April 2018

The most-startling prediction is that a quarter-meter rise in sea levels, less than 10 inches, will swamp 33 buildings in Grand Cayman, among them 17 private homes and two apartment blocks.

Apart from the shock value, the striking thing about the forecasts are that they are nine years old, published in 2009. Yet little has changed. If anything, says Nick Robson, head of climate research organization The Cayman Institute, sea level rise has accelerated.

“The institute’s report on SLR predicted a one-meter rise by 2100,” he said last week. “However, SLR appears to be escalating and may well be more than one meter.”

Pointing to Government Information Services maps, Robson says, the flooding from a sea level rise of only one-quarter meter, 9.94 inches, rapidly becomes “progressively worse from there – and if you model an Ivan-type storm surge on top of the SLR, it quickly becomes frightening.” Read the whole story here.

The oceans’ circulation hasn’t been this sluggish in 1,000 years. That’s bad news.

The Washington Post
11 April 2018

Photo credit: Dr. Michael Pidwirny (http://www.physicalgeography.net)

The Atlantic Ocean circulation that carries warmth into the Northern Hemisphere’s high latitudes is slowing down because of climate change, a team of scientists asserted Wednesday, suggesting one of the most feared consequences is already coming to pass.

The Atlantic meridional overturning circulation has declined in strength by 15 percent since the mid-20th century to a “new record low,” the scientists conclude in a peer-reviewed study published in the journal Nature. That’s a decrease of 3 million cubic meters of water per second, the equivalent of nearly 15 Amazon rivers.

The AMOC brings warm water from the equator up toward the Atlantic’s northern reaches and cold water back down through the deep ocean. The current is partly why Western Europe enjoys temperate weather, and meteorologists are linking changes in North Atlantic Ocean temperatures to recent summer heat waves.

The circulation is also critical for fisheries off the U.S. Atlantic coast, a key part of New England’s economy that have seen changes in recent years, with the cod fishery collapsing as lobster populations have boomed off the Maine coast. Read the whole story here.

Urban Heat: Can White Roofs Help Cool World’s Warming Cities?

Yale Environment 360
7 March 2018

New York City has painted about 7 million square feet of tar rooftops white to lower temperatures. NASA

It has long been known that installing white roofs helps reduce heat buildup in cities. But new research indicates that making surfaces more light-reflecting can have a significant impact on lowering extreme temperatures – not just in cities, but in rural areas as well. Read the whole story here.

Climate Change is Complex. We've got answers to your questions.

The New York Times
16 February 2018

Photo Credit www.climate.NASA.gov

We know. Global warming is daunting. So here’s a place to start: 17 often-asked questions with some straightforward answers. Read them here.

Donald Trump gets polar ice trend backwards

Politifact.com
29 January 2018

Cartoon Courtesy of Roar Hagen (Norvége/Norway)

President Donald Trump, who once called climate change a hoax spread by China, downplayed concerns about global temperature trends in an interview with Piers Morgan.

Morgan asked Trump if he believed that climate change exists.

"There is a cooling and there is a heating and I mean, look – it used to not be climate change – it used to be global warming," Trump said in an interview broadcast Jan. 26. "That wasn’t working too well, because it was getting too cold all over the place. The ice caps were going to melt, they were going to be gone by now, but now they’re setting records, so okay, they’re at a record level."

We looked at what’s been going on with the polar ice.

Trump is wrong that the ice caps are at record levels.

In March 2017, NASA published a news brief with the headline, "Sea Ice Extent Sinks to Record Lows at Both Poles."

Researcher Julienne Stroeve with the National Snow and Ice Data Center said Trump’s claim was "odd."

Stroeve said polar ice is at "a record low in the Arctic (around the North Pole) right now and near record low in the Antarctic (around the South Pole)."

Read the whole story here.

Three New Year’s Resolutions That Can Help Fight Climate Change

Climate Fwd:
The New York Times
3 January 2018

#1: Measure Up!

There’s some truth to the saying “What gets measured gets managed,” and quantification has become something of a cultural obsession. Oroeco, an app available on both Android and iOS, takes that zeal and applies it to tracking personal carbon emissions.Oroeco helps quantify the carbon emissions associated with purchases, investments, dietary choices and preferred modes of transport. It allows users to set goals, track performance and even compare their performance with friends. The app is still relatively new, and it isn’t perfect, but it can be a useful tool to get you moving in the right direction.

Read about the other resolutions here.

How a wayward Arctic current could cool the climate in Europe

Yale Environment 360 
December 11, 2017

Arctic Sea Ice - Beaufort (Photo credit Melniskof Shutterstock)

The Beaufort Gyre, a key Arctic Ocean current, is acting strangely. Scientists say it may be on the verge of discharging a huge amount of ice and cold freshwater that could kick off a period of lower temperatures in northern Europe.

For millennia, the Beaufort Gyre — a massive wind-driven current in the Arctic Ocean — has been regulating climate and sea ice formation at the top of the world. Like a giant spinning top, the gyre corrals vast amounts of sea ice. Trapped in this clockwise swirl, the ice has historically had more time to thicken than it generally does in other parts of the Arctic Ocean, where currents such as the Trans Polar Drift transport the ice into the warmer north Atlantic more rapidly. In this way, the Beaufort Gyre — located north of Alaska and Canada’s Yukon Territory — has helped create the abundant layers of sea ice that, until recently, covered large parts of the Arctic Ocean year-round.

These days, however, something is amiss with this vital plumbing system in the Arctic, a region warming faster than any other on the planet. Thanks in part to rising air temperatures, steadily disappearing sea ice, and the annual melting of 270 billion tons of ice from Greenland’s ice cap, the gyre is no longer functioning as it has predictably done for more than a half century. And now, scientists are anticipating that a sudden change in the Beaufort Gyre could set in motion events that — in a steadily warming world — would actually lead to a temporary but significant cooling of the North Atlantic region. Read the whole story here.

If my cup of water doesn’t overflow when ice melts, why would sea levels rise if glaciers melt?

New York Times
6 December 2017

Several of you have sent us a version of this question: “How do I answer when someone says that ice cubes melting in a glass don’t make the water overflow — so melting glaciers won’t make sea levels rise?”

The problem with that analogy is that the glaciers, unlike the ice in the glass, aren’t on the water yet. The melting ice sheets that concern scientists are on land, not in the ocean.

As the climate warms, those ice sheets melt into the surrounding seas. It’s like taking ice cubes from the freezer and plunking them into an already-full glass of water: the cup will overflow. This is why sea levels rise as glaciers melt.

Keep in mind that melting glaciers aren’t the only cause of sea level rise. Warm water occupies more space than cooler water, a physics concept known as thermal expansion. As temperatures rise, water molecules expand, also contributing to sea level rise. Studies suggest that much of the rise in sea level we’ve seen since the 1880s is the result of thermal expansion.

Melting glaciers, though, can worsen the situation. The Greenland ice sheet contains enough water to raise sea levels by 24 feet. The Antarctic ice sheet is even larger. If it melted, sea levels would rise by 200 feet. Philadelphia, which is now roughly sixty miles inland, would be underwater.

According to Maureen Raymo, a paleoclimatologist at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, if we don’t reduce greenhouse gas emissions it would still take somewhere more than several centuries — but less than 10,000 years — for the polar ice caps to fully melt. But as some people living in low-lying regions can attest, humans are already beginning to feel the impacts of sea level rise.

How Much Do You Know About Solving Global Warming?

Tatiana Schlossberg
The New York Times
June 12, 2017

Photo credit: McGill Blogs - McGill University

There is no silver bullet for climate change, because slowing planetary warming will require a variety of strategies. “Drawdown,” a new book edited by the green entrepreneur Paul Hawken, analyzes 100 potential solutions, ranks them by the amount of greenhouse gases they could cut, and reaches some surprising conclusions about the most effective ways to fight global warming. Can you figure out which ones are top ranked? Take the quiz here.

Climate Science Meets a Stubborn Obstacle: Students

Amy Harmon
The New York Times
June 4, 2017

Gwen Beatty in James Sutter’s classroom at Wellston High School in Ohio, where she and Mr. Sutter butted heads over the issue of human-caused climate change.

WELLSTON, Ohio — To Gwen Beatty, a junior at the high school in this proud, struggling, Trump-supporting town, the new science teacher’s lessons on climate change seemed explicitly designed to provoke her.

So she provoked him back.

When the teacher, James Sutter, ascribed the recent warming of the Earth to heat-trapping gases released by burning fossil fuels like the coal her father had once mined, she asserted that it could be a result of other, natural causes.

When he described the flooding, droughts and fierce storms that scientists predict within the century if such carbon emissions are not sharply reduced, she challenged him to prove it. “Scientists are wrong all the time,” she said with a shrug, echoing those celebrating President Trump’s announcement last week that the United States would withdraw from the Paris climate accord.

When Mr. Sutter lamented that information about climate change had been removed from the White House website after Mr. Trump’s inauguration, she rolled her eyes.

Read the whole story here.

The skinny on climate change

Climate change is the biggest environmental challenge of the 21st century. Here is some information on climate change and what individuals, companies, and governments can all do to face it.

The evidence:

• more extreme weather like droughts, floods, and hurricanes
• disappearing polar ice
• rising sea levels

What governments can do:

• follow through on the UNFCC 2015 Paris Agreement

What companies can do:

• buy carbon offsets when booking travel
• allow employees to work flex hours to reduce traffic
• be more energy efficient
• contract eco-friendly vendors
• start/maintain recycling programmes
  

What individuals can do:

• drive less
• eat less or no meat and dairy
• be more energy efficient
• reduce waste
• buy less
• buy carbon offsets when you fly
• divest from fossil fuel companies
• vote!

Click here for more information and ideas from the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (“SDGs”).

Sources:  www.DavidSuzuki.org
              www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment

Attention Jetsetters: travel guilt-free with carbon offsets

Feeling a bit guilty about all that flying you're doing? We found an amazing Swiss company, myclimate.org that helps individuals and companies calculate their carbon emissions and invest in the offsetting programs of their choice. Sleep easier (even on the red-eye!) knowing you are doing your part to preserve the environment.

What is a carbon offset?

David Suzuki Foundation

Many types of activities can generate carbon offsets. Renewable energy such as the wind farm example above, or installations of solar, small hydro, geothermaland biomass energy can all create carbon offsets by displacing fossil fuels. Other types of offsets available for sale on the market include those resulting from energy-efficiency projects, methane capture from landfills or livestock, destruction of potent greenhouse gases such as halocarbons, and carbon-sequestration projects (through reforestation, or agriculture) that absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. 

A carbon offset is a credit for greenhouse gas reductions achieved by one party that can be purchased and used to compensate (offset) the emissions of another party. Carbon offsets are typically measured in tonnes of CO2-equivalents (or CO2e) and are bought and sold through a number of international brokers, online retailers and trading platforms.For example, wind energy companies often sell carbon offsets. The wind energy company benefits because the carbon offsets it sells make such projects more economically viable. The buyers of the offsets benefit because they can claim that their purchase resulted in new non-polluting energy, which they can use to mitigate their own greenhouse gas emissions. The buyers may also save money as it may be less expensive for them to purchase offsets than to eliminate their own emissions.

Read more about it here.

Arctic ice melt 'already affecting weather patterns where you live right now'

The Guardian
December 19, 2016 

The dramatic melting of Arctic ice is already driving extreme weather that affects hundreds of millions of people across North America, Europe and Asia, leading climate scientists have told the Guardian.

Severe “snowmageddon” winters are now strongly linked to soaring polar temperatures, say researchers, with deadly summer heatwaves and torrential floods also probably linked. The scientists now fear the Arctic meltdown has kickstarted abrupt changes in the planet’s swirling atmosphere, bringing extreme weather in heavily populated areas to the boil.

The northern ice cap has been shrinking since the 1970s, with global warming driving the loss of about three-quarters of its volume so far. But the recent heat in the Arctic has shocked scientists, with temperatures 33C above average in parts of the Russian Arctic and 20C higher in some other places. 

Read the whole story here.

The skinny on climate change

Source: www.DavidSuzuki.org
May 18, 2017

[insert photo with caption]

·         The evidence:

o   more extreme weather like droughts, floods, and hurricanes

o   disappearing polar ice

o   rising sea levels

·         What governments can do:

o   follow through on the UNFCC 2015 Paris Agreement

·         What companies can do:

o   allow employees to work flexible hours to reduce traffic

o   be more energy efficient

o   start/maintainrecycling programmes

o   buy carbon offsets when booking travel

o   contract eco-friendly vendors

·         What individuals can do:

o   drive less

o   eat less or no meatand dairy

o   be more energy efficient

o   reduce waste

o   buy less

o   buy carbon offsets when you fly

o   divest from fossil fuel companies

o   vote!

The skinny on climate change

Source: www.DavidSuzuki.org
May 18, 2017

[insert photo with caption]

·         The evidence:

o   more extreme weather like droughts, floods, and hurricanes

o   disappearing polar ice

o   rising sea levels

·         What governments can do:

o   follow through on the UNFCC 2015 Paris Agreement

·         What companies can do:

o   allow employees to work flexible hours to reduce traffic

o   be more energy efficient

o   start/maintainrecycling programmes

o   buy carbon offsets when booking travel

o   contract eco-friendly vendors

·         What individuals can do:

o   drive less

o   eat less or no meatand dairy

o   be more energy efficient

o   reduce waste

o   buy less

o   buy carbon offsets when you fly

o   divest from fossil fuel companies

• start/maintain recycling programmes

30 July 2018



Tom Bailey, head of sustainable consumption at C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group:

This article was originally published by The Guardian and is reproduced by Yale 360 as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

This article was originally published by The Guardian and is reproduced by Yale 360 as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

This article was originally published by The Guardian and is reproduced by Yale 360 as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Climate Could Be an Electoral Time Bomb, Republican Strategists Fear

The New York Times
2 August 2019

Benjamin Backer, 21, on Capitol Hill last month. He founded the American Conservation Coalition, a conservative group that advocates for environmental policies. Photo Credit: Ting Shen for The New York Times

WASHINGTON — When election time comes next year, Will Galloway, a student and Republican youth leader at Clemson University, will look for candidates who are strong on the mainstream conservative causes he cares about most, including gun rights and opposing abortion.

But there is another issue high on his list of urgent concerns that is not on his party’s agenda: climate change.

“Climate change isn’t going to discriminate between red states and blue states, so red-state actors have to start engaging on these issues,” said Mr. Galloway, 19, who is heading into his sophomore year and is chairman of the South Carolina Federation of College Republicans. “But we haven’t been. We’ve completely ceded them to the left.”

While Donald Trump has led the Republican Party far down the road of denying the scientific consensus of human-caused climate change, Mr. Galloway represents a concern among younger Republicans that has caught the attention of Republican strategists.

Can carbon offsets tackle airlines’ emissions problem?

The Guardian
19 November 2019

Carbon emissions from commercial flights are growing up to 70% faster than predicted. Photograph: Roger Bamber/Alamy

Global carbon emissions from the aviation industry are growing faster than expected, and pose a serious risk to the world’s climate efforts if left to grow unchecked. The rise of flygskam, or “flight-shame”, has spurred airlines and travel companies to offer customers the option of offsetting the carbon emissions of their flights. But not everyone is convinced that climate sins can be absolved through projects based on simple carbon accounting.

What is carbon offsetting?

Offsetting involves calculating the emissions of a trip or activity and then purchasing “credits” from projects that prevent or remove the equivalent amount of greenhouse gases elsewhere. Many accredited carbon offsetting schemes involve planting trees to absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, which according to recent research could play a major role in helping to tackle the climate crisis. Other schemes invest in renewable energy projects which save carbon emissions by replacing fossil fuels alternatives. Growing awareness of the climate crisis, and the “Greta Thunberg effect”, has driven demand for carbon offset schemes. The amount of investment from people who hope to “cancel” their carbon footprints has climbed fourfold in recent years, according to the offsetting watchdog Gold Standard. Read the whole story here.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/apr/05/why-the-guardian-is-putting-global-co2-levels-in-the-weather-forecast?utm_term=RWRpdG9yaWFsX0dyZWVuTGlnaHQtMTkxMjE2&utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&CMP=greenlight_email&utm_campaign=GreenLight

QUICK LINKS:

Calculate and offset your CO2 emissions:

The UNFCC explained
(by Wikipedia):



Do you have some good links to recommend? Click on the Contact Us page. We would love to hear from you!