Category: Climate Change

Climate Change

Mark Lynas : Turtleneck Enchainment

Post author By Jo
Post date June 21, 2011
No Comments on Mark Lynas : Turtleneck Enchainment

Mark Lynas’ increasingly entangled, highly chained argument about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, is beginning to look like it could be one big prank to me. Either that or he’s hiding inside a very large turtleneck and hasn’t had much air lately.

https://www.marklynas.org/2011/06/the-ipcc-renewables-controversy-where-have-we-got-to/

“Some green-tinged commentators, in trying to protect the IPCC from any criticism – legitimate or illegitimate – are now seeking to deflect attention by putting blame elsewhere. Carbon Brief, a sort of PR rapid-response service which takes on climate sceptics (and which has former Greenpeace campaigner Christian Hunt as its main press contact), admitted that there were “legitimate issues with the organisation’s communications” – but tried to pin the blame on the media…”

So…let’s get this straight – according to Mark Lynas – Christian Hunt, who used to work with the Public Interest Research Centre, and helped edit the first Centre for Alternative Technology report “Zero Carbon Britain“, which PIRC published, is now a mere ideologue ? You mean he is incapable of reporting accurately on the work of thousands of British and international renewable energy engineers because he used to work for Greenpeace ?

Sorry. That argument doesn’t hold. Why does Christian Hunt now have to be in the “bad boy” box ?

Previously, Mark Lynas was confident of a renewable energy future for Britain, but was “agnostic” about Nuclear Power :-

https://www.heatmyhome.co.uk/solar-panels/is-a-zero-carbon-britain-possible/336

““Localism will become the buzzword,” says Mark Lynas, the environmentalist and author of Six Degrees: Our Future on a Hotter Planet. “It is technically possible to achieve a zero-carbon Britain by 2050 as we are blessed with abundant renewable resources, especially off-shore wind in the shallow North Sea – although it will be a harder task without nuclear, on which I am agnostic. This largely covers electricity generation, but weaning ourselves off fossil fuels for our transport needs is much harder to achieve.”

Now, it appears, he’s in love with the dreamlike future of Nuclear Power :-

https://www.scotsrenewables.com/blog/book-reviews/the-god-species-review/

“Lynas belives we can now claw our way back below the 350ppm CO2 boundary – and that we can do it without cutting consumption or radically changing our habits. Nuclear-charged electric cars, biofuelled jets and continuing economic growth mean it will be business as usual in the low carbon future he envisages.”

What changed ? Fukushima Daiichi happened, or rather, started happening and got progressively worse, halfway through writing his new book, but that didn’t put him off the atomic power trail. He’s on a very lonely island. Perhaps he’s there with David MacKay, the author of the book “Sustainable Energy Without The Hot Air” which I think has some pretty unrealistic visioning about harvesting uranium from seawater. Have they both drunk the Kool Aid ? I can see no other reason for their unsuppressed belief in the March of Nuclear Progress, unless they’ve spent too long talking to Matt Ridley, who could probably even be optimistic about Fukushima Daiichi…Oh…wait… He has been ! But I digress.

Mark Lynas believes in the power of Renewable Energy, even though he’s been snared in the cult of Atomkraft :-

“Personally I think that 80% of the world’s energy probably could be met by renewables by mid-century – but the IPCC’s renewables report singularly fails to demonstrate that. (So I’m not a clean energy ‘unbeliever’ – denier? – even by [Greenpeace’s Sven] Teske’s standard above.) Instead, the figure comes from one of 167 [no, 164, actually] different energy scenarios, none of which are assessed in terms of their likelihood or feasibility. They are just ‘scenarios’, not plans, strategies or even projections.”

An international group of experts have put together a collection of 164 potential pathways, but how can Mark Lynas possibly know which is the most likely ? Which is the best ? Which the most optimal ? Who better than the people on the IPCC to assess the best options ?

A lot of our energy future rests on choice – the choices that governments, companies and people make – about the best energy technologies to invest in, about the regulations for environmental protection, and about how best to match and marry energy resources.

Without care and composure and strategic policy, these choices will probably be made on a step-by-step basis, with limited systems thinking. This has been the way throughout the development of the use of fossil fuels and uranium, and we have ended up with heinously wasteful power generation networks, and rapacious resource scavenging around the world.

It’s right that we give priority not to particular, favourite technologies, but to packages of options that fit well together and have synergistic effects on resource optimisation, environmental protection and climate safety.

Many groups are working on this very problem, and not just the non-governmental organisations. We now have government departments, engineering companies and energy systems analysts around the world looking at economy-wide responses to climate change, and how to effect the changes in the energy systems that can meet the challenge.

There are many experts out there. Many of them resist new Nuclear Power as costly, dangerous and defunct, and propose strategies similar to the Greenpeace [r]Evolution, which, as Sven Teske explains, was written by an alliance that spanned industry as well as Civil Society.

What gives Mark Lynas (and his New Best Friend, Steve McIntyre), the authority to say that Sven Teske’s judgement on the best way forward is wrong ? And why shouldn’t the IPCC prefer a scenario similar to the one proposed by Greenpeace ?

Nuclear Power is not a very pragmatic choice. It’s lumpy, costly, unreliable, risky and lots of the expenses are stacked up towards the end of a reactor’s life. It’s part of the dying paradigm of centrally-provided electricity generation. It’s proved it’s uselessness. Let’s move on from Nuclear Power.

Climate Change Conflict of Interest Corporate Pressure Delay and Deny Demoticratica Divide & Rule Energy Change Energy Revival Nuclear Nuisance Nuclear Shambles Policy Warfare Political Nightmare Public Relations Realistic Models Regulatory Ultimatum Social Change Solution City Water Wars

Mark Lynas : Dam Right

On one thing, Mark Lynas is right – the world cannot cope with more large hydropower dam projects – just look at what Rainfall Change has meant for power blackouts in South America.

However, yet again, he blurs the value of one of the central principles guiding the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – inclusivity :-

https://www.marklynas.org/2011/06/new-allegation-of-ipcc-renewables-report-bias/

Who are the experts on climate change and energy ? We need to make sense of the various voices, and for that, we need to hear them all. The IPCC is the best platform we have – it is as neutral as it is possible for a host organisation to be.

Mark Lynas has just joined the Delayers-and-Deniers club, whose agenda has moved on from trying to take down Climate Change science to taking down any organisation that could help the policy and industry situation improve.

His contributions, including this comment at JudithCurry.com, betray his unwitting complicity in a destructive agenda :-

https://judithcurry.com/2011/06/17/an-opening-mind-part-ii/#comment-76593

Mark, they’re Americans. Americans believe in Free Speech. Americans are legally permitted to say anything they like, even if it has no factual basis. I know, there are lots of Canadians, Britannians and Australians in the Delayers-and-Deniers club, too, but the central point stands – all this grunting and dismissiveness about the IPCC is their way of distracting the public mind from the real problems we must face in changing the energy systems while we still have time – before it becomes a genuine crisis situation, where we can no longer act.

Who is completely independent, neutral or unbiased about Climate Change ? Who is completely independent, neutral or unbiased about Energy ?

Solving Climate Change requires solving Energy, and that requires solving the problems in democratic dialogue. The so-called Climate Change “skeptics” do not engage in forthright, honest, transparent dialogue, not even about energy. Back away from the grumblers, Mark !

I have my criticisms of the “corporate steal” of the United Nations Climate Change Framework Convention – issues of economic development and industrial investment have dominated the international conferences, and unworkable economics theories have snuck into the Kyoto Protocol and any other initiative you think of – including the emergence of proposals for Carbon Taxation and Carbon Trading schemes.

I also have criticisms of the communications structure within and around the IPCC – I think the IPCC reports should be written in such a way as to make sure that everybody can take in the full seriousness, urgency and momentum of what they are discussing.

Why are executives of major energy companies bothering to take part in the IPCC process ? Because they perceive that things cannot go on like they are. This is the same perception as held by those in Greenpeace and other non-governmental organisations and charities.

Nominate for me a set of people who are entirely independent, who cannot have a biased opinion about the future of energy and the environment, and I will place my trust in their review of the literature on Climate Change and Renewable Energy.

Failing that, I stick with the collage produced by the multi-viewed expert panel, corporate and non-corporate, part of the IPCC. There is nothing better than a totally open forum. Maybe International Rivers want to take part in future IPCC work ? If important views are being ignored, they need to be included from now on.

Allowing the Delayers-and-Deniers to keep setting the agenda is dangerous and disabling. We’ve already seen the success they had in derailing public acceptance of Climate Change science. Their latest plans include telling us that wind power and solar power don’t work. It would be laughable, except that the mainstream media keep repeating the lies :-

https://thinkprogress.org/romm/2011/06/20/248246/solar-beats-peak-gas-today-cnbc/

Mark, your allegiance to the failing nuclear industry demonstrates that you have not understood that its promotion is one of the tactics of the Delayers-and-Deniers club to keep us from effective, long-term energy change.

By attacking anything that has the possibility of succeeding, they have a stranglehold on progress. Don’t give in to their agenda. We shouldn’t be fighting each other.

Bait & Switch Behaviour Changeling Big Picture Biofools Climate Change Coal Hell Demoticratica Divide & Rule Energy Change Energy Disenfranchisement Energy Insecurity Energy Revival Energy Socialism Financiers of the Apocalypse Fossilised Fuels Gamechanger Green Investment Hydrocarbon Hegemony Major Shift Mass Propaganda Media National Energy National Socialism Nuclear Nuisance Nuclear Shambles Nudge & Budge Oil Change Optimistic Generation Peace not War Policy Warfare Political Nightmare Protest & Survive Public Relations Regulatory Ultimatum Resource Curse Social Capital Social Change Social Chaos The Power of Intention Voluntary Behaviour Change Vote Loser

Energy for Democracy

Dropping The Campaign Wrecking Ball

Intelligent commentators, authors and policy people are often suspicious of campaign groups. At the back of their minds they are drawing on a cultural discourse, primarily conducted in the media, that equates campaigners with mini-Hitlers – spreading disinformation and cult behaviour.

It is true that – as Mein Kampf reveals – the National Socialists in Germany used the latest communications tools to coerce and channel the energy of democracy towards their goals.

Some of the Nazi ambition was for democratic engagement, involvement in the process of rebuilding the country. Yet some of the methods were perverse, and caused an inexorable descent into the abuse of power.

When people like Mark Lynas accuse Greenpeace and other green campaign organisations of failings, there is any underlying theme – accusations of manipulation – both of facts and people. The sub-text harks back to the combat against fascism and Nazism in Europe.

We’re never going to make any progress on climate change if those advocating for energy change are equated to early 20th Century dictators and totalitarians.

Energy is a Social Good

I recently wrote an essay called “Energy for Democracy” making a first attempt at connecting the dots on grassroots democratic mobilisation and energy change. The subject set was in the field of “Environmental Communication”, and so I went back and looked at the development of mass media, advertising and public persuasion. I then went on to think about how propaganda and governance are interrelated. And I also looked at philosophy, and politics. I looked at the early 20th Century ideological splits in Europe, and the part that industrial development played. I looked at how democratic and other forms of socialism dealt with the problem of energy.

I posited that, since energy is produced for the Common Good, it should be subject to democratic management. I found myself “channelling” the spirit of Ramsay Macdonald, and going back to the questions of society and the integration of new industries that were pervasive before the two so-called “World Wars”.

Energy Of A Similar Wavelength

And today I find this very theme picked up by Ulrich Beck in The Guardian newspaper, along with the expression “energy change”, which is a term I am using increasingly to encapsulate the pivotal and essential response to climate change :-

https://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jun/20/germany-nuclear-power-renewable-energy

“Germany is right to opt out of nuclear”, he headlines, “The rejection of nuclear power is a result not of German angst but of economic thinking. We must invest in renewable energy”.

I was gladdened when he stepped from economics to democratics :-

“…Ultimately, the rejection of nuclear is not a result of German angst but of economic thinking. In the long run, nuclear power will become more expensive, while renewable energy will become cheaper. But the key point is that those who continue to leave all options open will not invest…People everywhere are proclaiming and mourning the death of politics. Paradoxically, the cultural perception of the danger may well usher in the very opposite: the end of the end of politics…what is denounced by many as a hysterical over-reaction to the “risks” of nuclear energy is in fact a vital step towards ensuring that a turning point in energy generation becomes a step towards greater democracy…The novel coalition between the state and social movements of the kind we currently see at work in Germany now has a historic opportunity. Even in terms of power politics, this change of policy makes sense…”

The British are stumbling towards democracy, too, but they keep tripping over old divisiveness, and create new divisions too, just to complicate matters.

People Power – Not Potty Nor Puny

The Climate Camp has just been a baby step on the pathway to democratic movement on energy. Camping in coal trucks and dropping banners from power station cooling stacks has been a sign that democracy has been ailing – if there were genuine engagement between the governments, private enterprises and “campaign” groups over the future scenarios for energy, then people wouldn’t need to camp outside banks and coal-fired power plants.

As a consumer of mainstream media, all you see is the blockade of a Biofuel refinery, or people gluing themselves to the entrance of the Royal Bank of Scotland, or the occupation of a plant nursery at the site of a proposed runway. If you think “what a ramshackle bunch of unwashed hippies, straining the last of their voices, railing at the State, in a vain attempt to roll back the tide of industry, progress and Thorium reactors”, then you haven’t understood the bigger picture.

People want to be engaged in the decisions made about energy in this country – properly engaged. People want to use their knowledge to influence decisions. If the only means they have of expressing their democratic will and their opposition to hydraulic fracturing is to D-lock themselves to Shale Gas drilling equipment, then perhaps they might just do that. This might happen in Poland too. The alternative would be a proper discussion between the people groups and the governments. Where’s the European Union environmental legislature while all of this is happening ? Shale Gas could destroy Poland.

Energy Collectives – Expressing Collective Democratic Will

Groups like Fair Pensions are building momentum between people groups and investing institutions – raising the flag for clean energy. This isn’t about fighting – let’s drop the battlefield language, including that word “campaign”, which is so often used in a derogatory, dismissive, belittling way. This is about getting people working together on a new, sustainable future, and it requires all the righteous anger rising up to be channelled into a positive, productive movement, fully expressing the will of the people.

Consultations and placard-waving demonstration protests are not the way forward – we need energy change, and that’s going to require a whole lot more democratic energy. People don’t want dirty energy, and they don’t want nuclear power. Dirty energy should be asked to leave the building, nicely, politely. Firm but fair.

Group Thinking – Democratic Intelligence

Investment in renewable and sustainable energy is creating long-lasting assets for the UK and other countries. We don’t need and we don’t want dirty, radioactive energy any more. A thousand cheers for German democracy !

Bad Science Bait & Switch Climate Change Corporate Pressure Divide & Rule Energy Change Energy Insecurity Energy Revival Engineering Marvel Fossilised Fuels Freak Science Genetic Modification Genetic Muddyfixation Green Investment Hydrocarbon Hegemony Major Shift Mass Propaganda Media Non-Science Nuclear Nuisance Nuclear Shambles Oil Change Optimistic Generation Peak Emissions Peak Energy Policy Warfare Political Nightmare Protest & Survive Realistic Models Renewable Resource Science Rules Scientific Fallacy Technofix Technological Fallacy Technological Sideshow Technomess The Data The War on Error Unqualified Opinion

Mark Lynas : Mutant Ninja

Mark Lynas may call himself a “green”, and be a clean-shaven, respectable, politely-spoken Oxford academic type but he appears to be mutating into something very unappealing indeed. He’s written some good books on climate change – every schoolroom and university module should have one – but on energy, he is deep in the political woods, without even a wind-up flashlight.

His latest stunt is to join in with accusations from Steve McIntyre of Climate Audit that the IPCC’s report on Renewable Energy has been partly crafted by people without appropriate independence or expertise. Here, from Andrew Revkin :-

https://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/15/a-deeper-look-at-an-energy-analysis-raises-big-questions/

“The IPCC must urgently review its policies for hiring lead authors – and I would have thought that not only should biased ‘grey literature’ be rejected, but campaigners from NGOs should not be allowed to join the lead author group and thereby review their own work.”

And who is this nefarious untalented Non-Governmental Organisation ? Greenpeace, it appears, according to Mark Lynas, is not capable of writing about the future of energy (or even the current situation).

Daniel Kammen has weighed in and The Revkin has updated his post :-

“There is no Himalaya-gate here at all. While there are some issues with individual chapters, there is no ‘Greenpeace Scenario.’ The 77% carbon free by 2050 is actually more conservative than some cases. The European Climate Foundation, for example has a 100% carbon neutral scenario and Price Waterhouse has a very low carbon one for North Africa. Further, while the IPCC works from published cases, the scenarios are evaluated and assessed by a team.”

There have been a number of reports written in the last year that back the viability of Renewable Energy technologies in replacing the world’s fossil fuel and nuclear energy systems. Not all of them were crafted by Greenpeace researchers. In fact, virtually none of them. Nuclear…yes…maybe it’s that little word “nuclear” that’s the root cause of Mark Lynas’ problem with Greenpeace.

In the Guardian, he is quoted as saying :-

https://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2011/jun/15/italy-nuclear-referendum
https://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/jun/13/greenpeace-foe-charles-secrett-criticism

“Many ‘green’ campaigns, like those against nuclear power and GM crops, are not actually scientifically defensible…”

And that’s where you are so wrong, Mark Lynas with the book coming out soon that you seem so desperate to publicise by saying things you know people will find annoying. Nuclear power is a TECHNOLOGY, not a SCIENCE. This is the same basic category error made by Dick Taverne and a number of other public commentators who don’t appear to have an engineering background.

TECHNOLOGY is where people decide that their designs to make something look like they’ll work, build them and don’t foresee flaws with them. SCIENCE is where people study the technology that they’ve built and research the flaws that appear and report on them. Science is what has shown the limitations with the original boasts about genetically modified crops. It turns out that GMOs are a ruse to sell chemicals. And on nuclear fission – the science is in and on the front of your daily newspaper : nuclear power plants pose a number of risks. The advice of the reputable scientists and engineers – old fission nuclear power plants should be withdrawn.

But returning to Renewable Energy, a number of organisations now believe that the demise of fossil fuels needn’t stop humanity from accessing abundant energy. Here is just a very short compilation :-

The Two Marks : Mark A. Delucchi and Mark Z. Jacobson :-
https://www.peopleandplace.net/on_the_wire/2011/2/5/mark_jacobson_and_mark_delucchi_wind_water_and_solar

PriceWaterhouseCooper :-
https://www.pwc.co.uk/eng/publications/100_percent_renewable_electricity.html

CAT Zero Carbon Britain 2030 :-
https://www.zerocarbonbritain.com/

Roadmap 2050 :-
https://www.roadmap2050.eu/

European Renewable Energy Council R[e]volution :-
https://www.erec.org/media/publications/energy-revolution-2010.html

But oh, no, we can’t quote the last one because Greenpeace researchers were involved, and Mark Lynas wouldn’t approve of that. Mark Lynas appears to be living in a world where Greenpeace people can’t have engineering research skills because they have ideals, working for a world that uses safe, clean energy.

The IPCC report on Renewable Energy is here :-
https://srren.ipcc-wg3.de/

Much as I respect turtles, I have to say it – Mark Lynas, you’re a turtle – slow-moving and easy to catch out and turn into soup. You should know by now not to get sucked in by spurious non-arguments from Steve McIntyre. The “cleantech” industry that’s ramping up to provide the world with green energy is worth billions, soon to be trillions of dollars worldwide, and this fact appears to have completely passed you by. The only future for energy is sustainable, renewable, non-nuclear, clean, quiet and safe. There is no other viable, liveable, option.

[ UPDATE : In the Independent newspaper, Mark Lynas is quoted as remarking “Campaigners should not be employed as lead authors in IPCC reports”. So, Mark, it’s really fine for employees of the major oil, gas and mining companies to take a leading role on major IPCC reports; but it’s not fine, according to you, that somebody working for much less money and much higher principles than mere corporate profit should contribute ? Denigrating somebody for being a “campaigner” is a stereotypical insult. Everybody’s got an agenda, campaigners included. What’s your agenda, Mark ? Selling your new book ? Don’t be dismissive about Greenpeace researchers. They may have ideals, but they’re not naive – they also have brains – and with their declared position on getting at the truth they can be trusted to be direct, decent and honest. Where’s your ethical compass, Mark ? ]

Viva Italia !

Behaviour Changeling Big Picture British Sea Power Climate Change Climate Chaos Climate Damages Delay and Deny Demoticratica Disturbing Trends Divide & Rule Droughtbowl Economic Implosion Emissions Impossible Energy Change Energy Insecurity Energy Nix Energy Revival Energy Socialism Engineering Marvel Environmental Howzat Fossilised Fuels Green Investment Green Power Heatwave Low Carbon Life Major Shift Marvellous Wonderful National Energy Nuclear Nuisance Nuclear Shambles Optimistic Generation Peak Emissions Policy Warfare Political Nightmare Protest & Survive Regulatory Ultimatum Renewable Resource Social Change Social Chaos Solution City The Power of Intention Voluntary Behaviour Change Western Hedge Wind of Fortune

James Delingpole : Going Underground

Post author By Jo
Post date June 5, 2011
No Comments on James Delingpole : Going Underground

James Delingpole hardly ever sets his delicate foot in Wales, the country he archaically refers to as “the Principality”, apart from, ooh, about ten days a year when he holidays there, but nonetheless, feels he has some kind of inherited ex-colonial right to be affronted that large electricity generation and transmission infrastructure are going to be built there :-

https://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100088906/wales-is-in-danger-why-isnt-the-prince-of-wales-saving-it/

He gets top marks for being rather offensive himself – achingly rude, in fact, about the Welsh Assembly, besides his getting untethered about the wind farms and pylons for the transmission cables :-

“…The wind farms are bad enough on their own. But to make matters far worse […], in order for these bird-crunching, bat-chomping, view-blighting, rent-seeking monstrosities to be connected to the grid a huge 400kv power line is going to be constructed all the way from Montgomeryshire through some of Britain’s most spectacular scenery to the equally beauteous Shropshire…”

Tags George Monbiot, James Delingole

Big Society Climate Change Corporate Pressure Cost Effective Deal Breakers Demoticratica Direction of Travel Emissions Impossible Freemarketeering Fuel Poverty Green Investment Growth Paradigm Low Carbon Life Major Shift Money Sings National Energy Policy Warfare Political Nightmare Regulatory Ultimatum Social Change Solution City The Power of Intention Unutterably Useless Utter Futility Vain Hope Voluntary Behaviour Change Vote Loser Western Hedge

Iain Duncan Smith Deflects

Post author By Jo
Post date June 5, 2011
No Comments on Iain Duncan Smith Deflects

I receive another letter from Iain Duncan Smith MP on vellum yellow with sickly pale green type. “Dear Mrs [sic] Abbess”, the letter reads, “Further to our previous correspondence regarding Stop Climate Chaos Big [sic] campaign, please find enclosed a reply from Chris Huhne, the Energy Secretary.” I asked Iain Duncan Smith in person for his own and personal support for a strong Energy Bill. What did he do ? Pass my letter on to the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC). I would have prefered a personal commitment to the issue, but, sadly, it was not to be.

The Rt Hon continued, “I hope you find his letter reassuring…” Reassuring ? What ? Am I some kind of emotionally incontinent complainant ? “…and helpful. However, please don’t hesitate to contact me again if I can be of further assistance.”

Animal Kingdoom Bad Science Big Picture Climate Change Climate Chaos Climate Damages Demoticratica Direction of Travel Extreme Weather Fair Balance Feel Gooder Freshwater Stress Gamechanger Global Heating Global Singeing Global Warming Heatwave Human Nurture Incalculable Disaster Media Optimistic Generation Peace not War Political Nightmare Protest & Survive Rainstorm Scientific Fallacy Social Capital Social Change Social Chaos Stirring Stuff The War on Error Wildfire

Adam Curtis : Chaotically Unstable

Post author By Jo
Post date June 5, 2011
1 Comment on Adam Curtis : Chaotically Unstable

I’m looking quizzical, rubbing my chin. Adam Curtis appears to have lost control of his mind, or at the very least, is showing signs of unhealthy self contradiction. Where are the checks and balances ?

At the start of Part 2 of “All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace”, he unpicks, and, I would suggest, stamps on, the idea that ecosystems are networks of feedback loops, tending to re-balance. And then at the end of the same presentation, he asserts that human revolutions fail, and society folds in on itself and returns to the state of power and control it was in before. Now which is it to be, Adam Curtis ? Self-correcting stability or non-correcting ebbs, flows and shifting sands ?

Be Prepared Climate Change Climate Chaos Disturbing Trends Eating & Drinking Emissions Impossible Extreme Weather Food Insecurity Global Heating Global Warming Human Nurture Incalculable Disaster Near-Natural Disaster Peak Emissions Water Wars

Fiona Harvey : Astonishing Admissions

Post author By Jo
Post date May 30, 2011
No Comments on Fiona Harvey : Astonishing Admissions

From the consistent and unrelenting rise in global carbon dioxide emissions, you would never have guessed that there’d been a downturn. But that’s because energy is cheap, and easily substitutes for economic production, labour and resources – within limits.

Fiona Harvey has gathered and presents some astonishing admissions from various key speakers on the issue of emissions, ahead of the annual mid-year United Nations climate change talks in Bonn :-

https://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/may/29/carbon-emissions-nuclearpower

“Worst ever carbon emissions leave climate on the brink : Exclusive: Record rise, despite recession, means 2C target almost out of reach : Fiona Harvey, Environment correspondent, guardian.co.uk, Sunday 29 May 2011 : Greenhouse gas emissions increased by a record amount last year, to the highest carbon output in history, putting hopes of holding global warming to safe levels all but out of reach, according to unpublished estimates from the International Energy Agency. The shock rise means the goal of preventing a temperature rise of more than 2 degrees Celsius – which scientists say is the threshold for potentially “dangerous climate change” – is likely to be just “a nice Utopia”, according to Fatih Birol, chief economist of the IEA. It also shows the most serious global recession for 80 years has had only a minimal effect on emissions, contrary to some predictions…”

Bait & Switch Behaviour Changeling Big Picture Big Society Climate Change Corporate Pressure Demoticratica Divide & Rule Economic Implosion Evil Opposition Financiers of the Apocalypse Growth Paradigm Human Nurture Libertarian Liberalism Major Shift Mass Propaganda Media National Socialism Nudge & Budge Optimistic Generation Political Nightmare Protest & Survive Social Capital Social Change Social Chaos The Power of Intention The War on Error Voluntary Behaviour Change

Adam Curtis : Against Nature

Post author By Jo
Post date May 29, 2011
1 Comment on Adam Curtis : Against Nature

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uz2j3BhL47c

I was encouraged to take in the audiovisual presentation of “All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace”, wherein Adam Curtis demonstrates what appears to be a lack of understanding regarding failure in the financial markets. Most foundational year ecologists can tell you that systems are self-correcting, that virtual bubbles get popped, that hubris gets torn down, that over-population gets underfed. Rabbits and foxes. Owls and mice. George Monbiot’s “War On Slugs” because of missing hedgehogs and thrushes. It all depends on the natural resources available to feed the participants in the game. The global economy can only accelerate growth so much before it implodes. There are Limits to Growth. Curtis could be said to be expressing his suspicions that the fake “Knowledge Economy”, the Asian “Shock Doctrine” and the Property Crash were an artefact of a secret evil cabal formed from the vaguely impressed followers of Ayn Rand – but the rest of us all know that’s silly. She was a lovely, sensitive, principled woman, although she could have done with a little more kindness in her life to inspire altruism in her worldview.

Tags Adam Curtis, Al Gore, Ayn Rand, Charlie Brooker, Climate Camp, collective, cooperative, democracy, George Monbiot, James Lovelock, Social Change, social engagement, This is what democracy looks like, UK Uncut

Climate Change Disturbing Trends Energy Insecurity Global Warming Green Power Low Carbon Life Methane Management Peak Emissions Regulatory Ultimatum Renewable Gas Renewable Resource Science Rules Solution City

Renewable Gas #2 : Fugitive urban emissions

Post author By Jo
Post date May 28, 2011
No Comments on Renewable Gas #2 : Fugitive urban emissions

Carbon dioxide is not the only greenhouse gas, although it’s the one most scientists worry about on the long term scale. Its diversion out of deep storage into the active global carbon cycle is causing global warming, and that, the evidence strongly shows, is causing widespread and disruptive climate change.

But in short timeframes, methane is the gas on everybody’s worried lips. The sources of methane are affected by global warming, and methane emissions cause strong global warming in the short term, so it’s a positively augmenting feedback, self-amplifying, and causing grave concern in many environmental policy seminars.

People often point the finger at the digestive systems of ruminant livestock when they want to pinpoint a scapegoat for rising methane emissions, but they should perhaps look closer to their own bathrooms and kitchens and their underfloor gas pipelines.

Climate Change Emissions Impossible Energy Change Energy Revival Engineering Marvel Global Warming

Thanks, The Energy Collective, but no thanks

Post author By Jo
Post date May 27, 2011
2 Comments on Thanks, The Energy Collective, but no thanks

I cannot waste my time counting how many cut-and-paste e-mails I receive, and usually I just junk them, but I thought this one seemed sufficiently personalised to actually respond to it.

from Energy Collective
to jo abbess
date Fri, May 27, 2011 at 2:29 AM
subject You Are Invited! Blog With The Energy Collective

Dear Ms. Abbess:

…I am…at The Energy Collective (TEC). TEC is a pragmatic anti-carbon, tech-agnostic blog that aims to stoke the discussion on climate and energy solutions by bringing together the smartest climate and energy bloggers on the planet. We are at about 70k hits per month, and growing quickly. Our users are smart, engaged, energy professionals located all over the world, but concentrated in the US.

I stumbled over your blog, I think through Twitter, and am delighted by it. I like your straight-forward, unflinching writing style, as well as your lack of tolerance for climate deniers. I would like to invite you to blog with us at The Energy Collective. The deal here is a trade: you grant TEC permission to syndicate selected posts from your RSS for free, and we post, promote and leverage your content to get it in front of as many eyes as possible. We strive to create as much value as possible for our bloggers, and often offer contract writing opportunities, chances to participate as experts in our webinars, free or discount conference access, professional connections, and more.

Be Prepared Climate Change Climate Chaos Climate Damages Delay and Deny Disturbing Trends Extreme Weather Freak Science Global Heating Global Singeing Global Warming Incalculable Disaster Near-Natural Disaster Neverending Disaster The Data The War on Error

No Connection

Post author By Jo
Post date May 24, 2011
No Comments on No Connection

Many news articles now follow a predictable path. Some awe-inspiring, statistics-shaking weather event hits town – in the case of Joplin, literally. Then some people muse about whether these extreme events could have anything to do with Global Warming. Then some other people smother the idea very publicly. “No one weather event can be attributed to Climate Change !”, they insist, and yes, in the grand scheme of things they’re right – you cannot say for certain that one freak tornado, hurricane, flood or storm can be cast iron guaranteed to have been caused by atmospheric heating and increased sky water vapour. There is No Connection, official, and we can all breathe a sigh of relief and donate to a worthy clean-up cause.

Climate Change Climate Chaos Climate Damages Dead Zone Disturbing Trends Extreme Weather Faithful God Firestorm Freshwater Stress Global Heating Global Singeing Global Warming Incalculable Disaster Near-Natural Disaster Social Capital Social Change Social Chaos Wildfire

Texas travel advisory

[ UPDATE : Texas Governor proclaims three days of prayer for rain ]

Texas ? My advice is – don’t go there. Not only does it have numerous social problems, it’s also in the midst of a hellfire makeover, caused by extensive drought :-

https://www.statesman.com/news/local/fires-rage-through-much-of-texas-more-than-1418294.html

“Fires rage through much of Texas; more than 1 million acres burned : April 20, 2011 : Several massive wildfires in North and West Texas continued to rage Tuesday, racing through parched fields and woods and adding to a sweeping acreage toll that has reached almost 1.2 million in less than two weeks. A wildfire spanning four counties west of Fort Worth near Possum Kingdom Lake has consumed nearly 150,000 acres, destroyed 150 homes and a church, and forced hundreds to flee since it began Friday, Texas Forest Service spokesman Marq Webb said. The fire, which nearly doubled in size in a day, is one of more than 20 active fires that the Forest Service is fighting statewide in an April that has been plagued by a fierce drought, high temperatures and gusting winds – conditions that have allowed wildfires to ignite and spread quickly in several parts of the state, including Austin…”

The situation is so bad, that the God Squad has been moved to participate, some in practical ways and some in the spiritual department. People are dying, but meanwhile, some in the Heavenward crowd are in denial about Climate Change. Seems that some tombstone-headed American Christians would rather crucify their country than admit that Global Warming Science is right.

State policy on fighting fire seems rather contrary to the trends – and that’s probably because “big government” social budgets needs to be cleansed of too much “red tape”.

Will Texas become uninhabitable, with terrain where nothing can grow; the domain of wind farms, solar fields and duststorms ?

It may be Easter, but it’s not a Good Friday. Happy Scorched Earth Day 2011 !

Big Picture Biofools Carbon Taxatious Climate Change Conflict of Interest Drive Train Low Carbon Life Oil Change Peak Oil Petrolheads Political Nightmare Social Change Transport of Delight

The Cost of a Tankful

[ UPDATE : The windfall tax on the oil and gas companies is going to amount to £2 billion, not £10 billion – and George Osborne is going to watch them “like a hawk” to make sure there’s “no funny business” and that they don’t pass on the cost of the tax to their vehicle fuel customers. Yeah, right. Like, when are people going to wake up and realise market tinkering won’t help ? We need “big number” public investment in sustainable fuels and sustainable vehicle technologies, not efforts to massage fuel duty to appease vocal petrolheads. ]

Let’s see now…how’s the price of a gallon of fuel today ?

Well, the fuel duty escalator has been scrapped for the rest of this UK Parliament.

Plus, fuel duty has been decreased by 1 pence per litre.

This will gladden the hearts of many who have campaigned against the scorching taxes on fuel costs to motorists.

But Value Added Tax for fuel hasn’t been brought down – because the UK Government said it would be illegal under EU law to cut VAT specifically for fuel.

None of these measures announced in today’s UK Budget will stop the price of vehicle fuel from rising further with the markets, unfortunately, so nobody who depends on their personal vehicle should be rejoicing.

The £10 billion or so that will be extracted from the North Sea oil industry via a raise in production tax (apparently to pay for cancelling the fuel duty increase) will no doubt be charged back out to vehicle fuel customers one way or another…the price of ICE Brent Crude for forwards contracts dipped a little today, but the average has shot up over the last 3 months.

Minor adjustments to the price of vehicle fuel will not resolve the fundamentals driving crude oil price changes – and hence the price of diesel and petrol and the pump.

The major shake-up in the price of crude oil shows that suggestions to tinker with taxes or levies to try to adjust consumption for environmental reasons will be a totally failed strategy even before it begins.

So why oh why has George Osborne instituted a Carbon Price Floor for electricity emissions in the power generation sector ? The “price signal” this is supposed to give, an “incentive” to reduce high carbon generation and invest in low carbon generation, will be totally lost amongst the increasing operating costs for electricity production – not least because nuclear power is about to get much, much more expensive because of the response to safety concerns raised by the Fukushima Daiichi Japan Nuclear Accident.

It is time to admit that green taxation doesn’t change behaviour because it is always small compared to other price effects.

It is also time to recognise that proactive investment in such things as low carbon fuels, vehicle fuel efficiency and small electric vehicles, small fuel cell vehicles, more public transport, lower driving speeds, fully inflated tyres, de-centralisation of employment and re-localisation of public services are key to tackling Climate Change for the transport sector.

So…how’s the Green Investment Bank shaping up, then, George Osborne ?

Climate Change Global Warming Political Nightmare

Well-scrubbed family man in a nice suit…

Post author By Jo
Post date March 21, 2011
No Comments on Well-scrubbed family man in a nice suit…

…giving Climate Change action “Earth Hour” a professional, clean-shaven edge.

Be Prepared Climate Change Climate Chaos Climate Damages Energy Change Energy Revival Environmental Howzat Extreme Weather Floodstorm Fossilised Fuels Global Singeing Global Warming Green Investment Green Power Health Impacts Incalculable Disaster Major Shift Marvellous Wonderful Near-Natural Disaster Neverending Disaster Political Nightmare Rainstorm Regulatory Ultimatum Screaming Panic Social Change Social Chaos The Power of Intention

Pakistan : Inundation Nation

Post author By Jo
Post date February 21, 2011
1 Comment on Pakistan : Inundation Nation

[ UPDATE : Don’t tell me. I know the images are mostly from India, but the music is Punjabi… ]

https://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=32170&Cat=6&dt=2/21/2011

“Draft of national climate change policy finalised : Noor Aftab : Monday, February 21, 2011 : Islamabad : The draft of National Climate Change Policy has been finalised after two years of deliberations and now the Environment Ministry would present it to the federal cabinet for final approval, the sources told The News here on Sunday. The sources said the recommendations in the draft would certainly test the government’s commitment as it has been proposed to go for alternative energy resources instead of using fossil fuel, considered one of the major reasons for environmental degradation. The sources said the draft recommendations prepared by a core group of the Environment Ministry mainly focuses on two areas including adaptation and mitigation with an aim to enable the country to cope with fast increasing environmental challenges. One of the top officials of the Environment Ministry told this correspondent that continuity of casual approach towards environmental sector has now made economic managers and policy makers feel the heat as environmental degradation has started costing five per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) in Pakistan…”

“Sunday, February 20, 2011 : UK to keep helping Pakistan’s flood victims: Sayeeda Warsi : LAHORE: Baroness Sayeeda Warsi, a British cabinet minister of Pakistani-origin, said on Saturday that the United Kingdom would continue supporting Pakistan in the post-flood operations. “Today I have been heartened to see and hear how the UK is helping millions of people in Pakistan rebuild their lives, but there is much more to do, with widespread malnutrition and the risk of disease outbreaks,” Warsi said while talking to reporters in Islamabad. The primary purpose of Warsi’s visit to Pakistan is to learn how the country is recovering, what more needs to be done, and to see how more than Rs 27.7 billion from British people is supporting the flood victims. “When I was here exactly six months ago in August at the peak of the floods with the UK International Development Secretary Andrew Mitchell I saw scenes of devastation,” the British lawmaker recalled. She said that some areas of Sindh were still under water, adding that reconstruction of millions of houses, bridges and schools that were destroyed would take years…”

Be Prepared Climate Change Climate Chaos Climate Damages Feed the World Financiers of the Apocalypse Food Insecurity Peace not War Political Nightmare Protest & Survive Social Change Social Chaos

Breadline Cairo : Democracy’s Challenge

Post author By Jo
Post date February 11, 2011
No Comments on Breadline Cairo : Democracy’s Challenge

Well, Mubarak’s made an exit – and real Egyptian democracy can begin – as long as the army don’t get crowd control ideas above their station and the old elites don’t interfere with the process of free and fair elections.

But democracy is not going to solve the problem of the price of bread.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20082-can-complexity-theory-explain-egypts-crisis.html
https://climateprogress.org/2011/02/09/un-food-agency-severe-drought-threatens-wheat-crop-china-food-security/
https://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/damian-carrington-blog/2011/jan/28/climate-change-food-bubble
https://climateprogress.org/2011/02/07/economist-krugman-high-cost-of-food-extreme-weather-climate-change-tunisia-egypt/
https://climateprogress.org/2011/02/04/contribution-of-high-food-prices-to-mideast-unrest/

Climate Change plays a part in creating scarcity and irregularity in crop production :-

https://www.usda.gov/oce/commodity/wasde/latest.pdf

But it’s what happens next that’s the killer :-

https://www.wdm.org.uk/stop-bankers-betting-food/what-problem

“Food Speculation : What is the problem? : Banks, hedge funds and pension funds are betting on food prices in the financial markets, causing drastic price swings in staple foods such as wheat, maize and soy…”

https://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-how-goldman-gambled-on-starvation-2016088.html

“By now, you probably think your opinion of Goldman Sachs and its swarm of Wall Street allies has rock-bottomed at raw loathing. You’re wrong. There’s more. It turns out that the most destructive of all their recent acts has barely been discussed at all. Here’s the rest. This is the story of how some of the richest people in the world – Goldman, Deutsche Bank, the traders at Merrill Lynch, and more – have caused the starvation of some of the poorest people in the world. It starts with an apparent mystery. At the end of 2006, food prices across the world started to rise, suddenly and stratospherically. Within a year, the price of wheat had shot up by 80 per cent, maize by 90 per cent, rice by 320 per cent. In a global jolt of hunger, 200 million people – mostly children – couldn’t afford to get food any more, and sank into malnutrition or starvation. There were riots in more than 30 countries, and at least one government was violently overthrown. Then, in spring 2008, prices just as mysteriously fell back to their previous level…”

https://www.thisislondon.co.uk/lifestyle/article-23921754-the-men-who-ate-the-world-why-foodstuffs-have-shot-up-in-price.do

“The hedge fund guy sitting beside me was asked about his next plan for global domination. He’d done houses and gold – what was the new new thing? “Food,” he said between mouthfuls of lobster. “We’re piling into food. Weather’s getting weird, so there’ll be crop failures. There won’t be enough to go around.”…”

Many blessings for your newly-born democracy, Egypt, and we hope you can win the fight to secure affordable food, too.

Bait & Switch Climate Change Media Social Change

Peter Sissons Writes. Sigh.

Post author By Jo
Post date February 8, 2011
1 Comment on Peter Sissons Writes. Sigh.

[ UPDATE : Hot on the heels of the e-mail from Biteback Publishing (now, there’s a coincidence, not) I got an e-mail from the Daily Mail, explaining why they will not make further corrections to the excerpt they published from Peter Sissons’ book, apart from the goodwill gesture they first made to remove my name… They appear to have failed to understand the irony. Roger Harrabin insists that my complaint didn’t influence him to change his 2008 article. And now the Daily Mail are insisting that my complaint will not influence them to change their article. This shows quite conclusively that journalists are resistant to complaints; evidence which completely undermines the “contrived” claim by Peter Sissons that my complaint influenced Roger Harrabin… ]

Peter Sissons wrote a book, but since I don’t watch TV, I didn’t see him popping up on various programmes to talk about his new publication.

First I knew, excerpts from the book were serialised in a couple of newspapers – including the Daily Mail. It was only when I questioned the account in the Daily Mail, that I found out that I’d been written about by Peter Sissons in a printed book.

Yet Peter Sissons never contacted me to confirm details in researching his narrative, and he didn’t acknowledge that the version of the story he used had been contested publicly by Roger Harrabin, the BBC journalist.

I have attempted to get a correction from Biteback Publishing, but it appears that so far I have been unsuccessful, and it seems unlikely that my complaint will get recognition. Here is the e-mail trail :-

___________________________________________________________

From: jo abbess
To: info, Biteback Publishing
Subject: Request for clarification regarding Peter Sissons’ publication
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 09:26:41 +0000

Dear Biteback,

According to an e-mail from the Daily Mail’s Assistant Editor that I received yesterday, I have been mentioned by Peter Sissons in one of your publications.

The Daily Mail published an article by Peter Sissons online on 25th January, and I have been told that this was an excerpt from his recent book.

I’m wondering if you could do me the highest favour and clarify for me what exactly may or may not have been put into print by Peter Sissons about me.

I questioned the accuracy of the piece by the Daily Mail, and asked them to consider amendments, but unfortunately, before they could respond, the article was cut and pasted across the Internet, along with my name.

This means that even if my name has been removed from any published version, it would still be easy to find out who the unconfirmed story refers to.

Peter Sissons did not approach me regarding the story he recounted in the Daily Mail to verify details, and does not seem to have taken account of BBC journalist Roger Harrabin’s version of events. The story was therefore incompletely researched, and should not in my view be put into print.

It would be unhelpful if the same incorrect story were to have been printed in Peter Sissons’s book, and I would welcome feedback from you on measures that could be taken to remove the unsound narrative from the public domain if it has appeared in one of your publications.

I am not interested in pursuing legal redress if a false account has been published, but I would like you to provide a remedy to clear my name, actions and character if they have been inaccurately described.

Yours sincerely,

Ms J. Abbess

__________________________________________________________

From: jo abbess
Sent: 04 February 2011 09:41
To: James Stephens, Biteback Publishing
Subject: FW: Request for clarification regarding Peter Sissons’ publication

Dear James,

It was very reassuring to talk to you just now.

As you requested, I’m forwarding the e-mail that I sent this morning to the general info address.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Regards,

jo.

__________________________________________________________

Subject: FW: Request for clarification regarding Peter Sissons’ publication
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 10:00:53 +0000
From: James Stephens, Biteback Publishing
To: jo abbess

Dear Jo,

Many thanks for contacting me on Friday with reference When One Door Closes, the recently published autobiography of Peter Sissons. The book does indeed make mention of you in three paragraphs on page 299, which I have attached here for your convenience.

For clarification, I should make clear that we can see absolutely no reason to withdraw the book – nor to include an erratum notice, nor to issue some manner of correctional statement.

With reference to the e-mail exchange between Roger Harrabin and yourself referred to in the text where Peter uses your words he repeats verbatim what has already appeared elsewhere in the public domain. In terms of events it seems to me that he is factually correct. In terms of Peter’s own interpretation of those facts, we feel that it is the writer’s prerogative – especially in a memoir – to put down his own reflections on and personal interpretation of events.

Again, I thank you for bringing your concern to my attention. However, I hope that once you have had a chance to look at the text you will not feel you have been inaccurately described.

Best regards

James Stephens

__________________________________________________________

From: jo abbess
Sent: 08 February 2011 13:45:15
To: James Stephens, Biteback Publishing

Dear James,

Thank you for the clarification and the PDF of the page of Peter Sissons’ book where my name is mentioned in connection with Roger Harrabin and an e-mail exchange that Roger and I had in 2008.

I agree that Peter Sissons should be free to have his own opinions about what took place, but it appears to me that he has not given an accurate description of the factual events, and so I would question the validity of his summary.

I am unhappy that Peter Sissons published this account without verifying the factual details with me. I am also not happy to have a negative judgement of my character and behaviour appearing in print when this opinion is based on an incomplete account of the factual events.

In addition, it appears that Peter Sissons has ignored the account of the factual events as given by Roger Harrabin back in 2008, which has been repeated several times in several arenas since. In my view, Peter Sissons has come to an inaccurate conclusion based on faulty information.

The account by Peter Sissons seems to me to be lacking in a good deal of context. Were he to have fully researched what happened, and understood what actually took place, I am sure that he could see why I think that his position on this incident is uninformed and faulty.

Roger Harrabin and I made several attempts to get the Climate Change sceptic account of what took place corrected at the time, but it appears that these corrections were not heeded, and it seems possible that the inaccurate narrative will come back again and again to haunt us, if the usual pattern of Climate Change sceptic muck-raking behaviour is to continue.

It would be a really helpful thing if you could send me a letter confirming that you recognise my complaint and that I have challenged the accuracy of Peter Sissons’ account. This I could then use to wave in front of people who seem to be adamant in bringing this long-dead non-scandal back to life.

There is no dirt in what took place, and it should not be dug up repeatedly in my opinion, and I would appreciate your help in deflecting false accusations from third parties in future.

I need to have my voice heard and my position acknowledged on this matter.

Thank you,

jo.

__________________________________________________________

Climate Change Climate Chaos Climate Damages Extreme Weather Faithful God Floodstorm Global Warming Incalculable Disaster Rainstorm

Australia : Inundation Nation (3)

Post author By Jo
Post date February 8, 2011
No Comments on Australia : Inundation Nation (3)

Received by e-mail from Australia
__________________________________________________________

18 January 2011

Hi Jo,

Thanks for this. The thoughts and prayers of […] friends are much appreciated.

Yes, the flooding across huge swathes of eastern Australia ([Queensland], [New South Wales], Victoria, Tasmania) has been terrible. The sheer scale of it is hard to comprehend. It hasn’t affected the areas of New South Wales where my family lives. We are, however, experiencing a very sticky and rainy Summer.

Queensland

Three quarters of the state of Queensland, an enormous area, has been declared a disaster zone. Major population centres, including Brisbane, Bundaberg and Toowoomba have been affected, as well as various towns.

Horribly, in the Lockyer Valley, a sudden tide of water swept people to their deaths. Some 20 people have died across the state and there are still about ten missing.

The impact on farmers from the floods is severe. Mining has also been affected – including coal export – which has been talked about in the media largely without irony.

The [Queensland] Premier has announced a commission of inquiry into the disaster, and has launched a flood appeal. Emergency funding packages are being made available to people affected. A flood recovery taskforce has been established.

It has been terrible, but at the same time I have been struck throughout how relatively well equipped Australia is to cope with such circumstances – in contrast, for example, to Brazil and Pakistan.

I am also glad to see how communities come together and support each other. I pray for such coming together before – not just after – the fact in the face of the challenge of climate change.

Victoria

Dozens of towns in Victoria have also been flooded. The town of Horsham, on the Wimmera River, has seen its largest ever recorded flood.

As for Queensland, emergency funding, a flood appeal, and a recovery taskforce have been established. As far as I am aware, there have as yet been no deaths in Victoria.

The Churches’ Responses

Churches across the country are offering support to flood affected communities.

To read about various appeals and statements, see :-

https://www.ncca.org.au/

For an account of ecumenical cooperation, see :-

https://www.journeyonline.com.au/showArticle.php?articleId=2657

[…] might also be interested to see a flood liturgy and intercessory prayers which were written by members of the Uniting Church […] :-

https://www.journeyonline.com.au/showArticle.php?articleId=2654.

The intercessory prayer says :-

“Creator God,
We pray for all those in farms, small towns, and cities in Australia whose lives have been disrupted and whose dreams have been dashed by the floods that have devastated the country.
We pray for those who have lost their homes, their cars, their treasured possessions, their crops, their animals, and their livelihoods. It is a terrible thing to be homeless and helpless.
Be with and sustain those whose entire world has been torn apart and washed away.
Assuage their fears and be patient with their anger.
Grant them patience and hope that eventually they can rebuild their lives and start afresh.
We are grateful to the emergency flood workers and all those who were heroes in helping those in distress during the floods.
May they continue their missions of mercy.
Be with those who are caring for flood victims that their compassion and presence will be life-sustaining.
May they continue their missions of mercy.
We are thankful for those who serve others and provide us all with the inspiration to do the same.
We are sending love, peace, strength, and courage to all our brothers and sisters in Australia.
May this nightmare end shortly.
May healing begin swiftly.”

It is too soon to estimate the damage bill, and the crisis is ongoing, but I have heard figures of up to [AUD] $20 billion.

See the following article about the links between climate change and the flooding : https://www.climateactioncentre.org/floodsclimatechange.

What seems clear is that higher ocean temperatures result in increased evaporation, increasing the amount of rain in this current La Nina cycle that is affecting eastern Australia.

This flooding comes on the back of severe drought, and in the middle of a consultation process in the development of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan – a national plan of management for the huge Murray-Darling river system, which runs through [Queensland], [New South Wales], [Australian Capital Territory], Victoria and South Australia.

The Murray Darling Basin has been overexploited and placed under severe stress – stress that may be temporarily abated with flooding but which will inevitably return.

Peace and love,

_________________________________________________________

Bee Prepared Climate Change Climate Chaos Coal Hell Global Singeing Global Warming Protest & Survive Regulatory Ultimatum Resource Curse Social Change Social Chaos

The True Cost of Coal

Image Credit : Amelia Gregory

London Rising Tide presents…The Beehive Design Collective’s – ‘The True Cost of Coal’

DATE – Thursday 10th Feb, 2011
TIME – 7.30pm – late – with refreshments after the presentation
LOCATION – London Action Resource Centre : 62 Fieldgate Street, Whitechapel, London, E1 1ES

‘The True Cost of Coal’ will take you on an interactive visual tour of the connections between coal mining, climate change, the ever-expanding capitalist economy, and the struggle for justice in local communities affected by the coal industry around the world.

‘The True Cost of Coal’ is a recently completed project by the Beehive Collective (part of the Rising Tide North America Collective), who create portable murals of collaboratively produced illustrations that tell an engaging and disturbing story.

Learn how the artwork is created by the collective and how they use their posters to run community workshop and for storytelling. The True Cost of Coal poster they have produced is quite staggering – check it out at :-

https://www.beehivecollective.org/english/coal.htm

Their visually stunning, large scale Black + White graphics depict social justice and raising ecological consciousness in an unusual and highly creative way.

Come along to find out more at LARC, 7.30pm, Thurs 10th Feb.

For more information on London Rising Tide :-
https://www.londonrisingtide.org.uk

London Rising Tide
c/o 62 Fieldgate Street, London E1 1ES
Telephone: 07708 794665

https://www.facebook.com/people/Rising-Tide-UK/515246801

Please share your art with the Art Not Oil project :-
https://www.artnotoil.org.uk

See also the Camp for Climate Action site :-
https://www.climatecamp.org.uk
https://www.networkforclimateaction.org.uk

Climate Indymedia :-
https://climateimc.org

Indymedia London :-
https://london.indymedia.org/

Image Credit : Minimouse

Climate Change Global Warming Media

Pearce : The Gloom Bubble

Fred Pearce attempted to lighten the nation’s mood with a jolly little piece about how Climate Change sceptics and scientists are trying to resolve their differences, in a Short Sharp Science piece this week :-

https://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2011/02/climate-sceptics-scientists-at.html

Pearce clearly wanted to bring good news and pierce the gloom over continued attacks on Climate Change scientists from the Internet sceptic “community” (which includes a real climate scientist, Judith Curry, pictured smirking above).

However, he appears to have put his foot squarely in his mouth, by recounting what others have now strongly disputed, almost everywhere to near universal disquiet :-

https://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2011/02/pearcegate.php

“Fred Pearce is going down the David Rose road publishing fabricated quotes. Gavin Schmidt in a letter to New Scientist (so far unpublished there) writes…”

https://rabett.blogspot.com/2011/02/through-glass-darkly.html

“Eli a trusting sort of bunny, likes to believe everyone, but favors cutting the cards. Porky Pearce over at Nude Scientist is taking a shellacking for, as they say, making it up. Gavin might even get a few bob out of it if he were Monckton Minded, but as for now all we have is Dr. Schmidt’s (still unpublished as we go to press) letter sent to the editors…”

https://tamino.wordpress.com/2011/02/03/not-a-misquote-a-nonquote/

“As many of you may be aware, a conference was arranged purportedly to “bridge the gap” between mainstream climate scientists and the so-called “skeptics.” Fred Pearce reported in an article for NewScientist that Gavin Schmidt had declined the invitation to attend because the science was settled so there was nothing to discuss. Quoting from the article: “But the leaders of mainstream climate science turned down the gig, including NASA’s Gavin Schmidt, who said the science was settled so there was nothing to discuss.” This isn’t a misquote — it’s just a fabrication. Schmidt has sent a letter to NewScientist objecting to someone making up such a story…”

https://profmandia.wordpress.com/2011/02/03/fred-pearce-at-new-scientist-making-stuff-up/

“In a recent article in New Scientist journalist Fred Pearce decided to make up a quote by Dr. Gavin Schmidt. Read on to see Gavin’s letter to New Scientist that correct’s Pearce’s Journalism 101 mistake…”

https://scienceblogs.com/stoat/2011/02/porky_pearce.php

“Fred Pearce seems to have made a bit of a career out of being rubbish recently, but has now stooped to just making things up (or, just possibly, that good old journo standby, being so clueless as to what you’re talking about that your paraphrases are so inaccurate as to descend into lies). Anyway, Pearce’s current lies are in the Newt Scientist where he says the leaders of mainstream climate science turned down the gig, including NASA’s Gavin Schmidt, who said the science was settled so there was nothing to discuss. Gavin, of course, said no such thing…”

https://thingsbreak.wordpress.com/2011/02/03/fred-pearce-is-still-a-rubbish-journalist/

“When last we left Pearce, he was enthusiastically attempting mouth-to-mouth resuscitation on the vile, rotting corpse of “He said; She said “journalism”” that has long wreaked havoc on public understanding of climate. Checking in, we now find Pearce has sunk to just making statements up and attributing them to people without their knowledge or consent. Specifically NASA GISS researcher (and RealClimate blogger) Gavin Schmidt…”

What with New Scientist carrying a pseudo-article that is actually an advertisement for Statoil, I think I might nearly be at the point where I cancel my subscription, unless Fred Pearce stands down from having control of environmental reporting or editorial functions at the magazine.

Climate Change Media

You Won’t Sue The Children of the Revolution

Post author By Jo
Post date February 3, 2011
No Comments on You Won’t Sue The Children of the Revolution

I’m not a litigious sort, but I think I’m justified in getting a bit peeved if people report me inaccurately. And an apology would be nice, too.

So, Peter Sissons, do you need to humbly beg my forgiveness on bended knee with some nice flowering plants, a voucher for a party of five at a nice vegan restaurant and a donation to my favourite charity ? :-

https://www.joabbess.com/2011/01/25/whine-to-the-daily-mail/

https://www.joabbess.com/2011/01/26/how-would-you-have-phrased-it/

=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=
=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=

From: Lucy McGirr, Daily Mail
Sent: 03 February 2011 18:36:06
To: jo abbess

Dear Jo

Please see the below email for your attention from Charles Garside, Assistant Editor.

With best regards

Lucy McGirr
PA to Charles Garside
Assistant Editor, Daily Mail

=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=

Dear Ms Abbess

You will understand that the article we published is from Peter Sissons’ new book, which was published on 2 February.

Perhaps you need to contact him at his publisher Biteback Publishing.

I note that you do not offer a statement on what you say is wrong with his recollection, however as you will see, we have already appended a short letter from Roger Harrabin to the article.

If you would like to offer a short statement of your own, we would consider adding that subject to the Editor’s agreement.

Yours sincerely

Charles A Garside
Assistant Editor

=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=
=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=

Dear Lucy,

Thank you for your response to my request for a minor correction.

I received another response from the Daily Mail to which I have already replied and published here, and you may edit the information at this link as being a personal response from me to your original article :-

https://www.joabbess.com/2011/02/03/whine-to-the-daily-mail-2/

I consider the original Daily Mail article published online to be inaccurate. If Peter Sissons has included the story of my correspondence with Roger Harrabin in his book in the way it was reported in your online article, it is unfortunate and unhelpful that he did not fully research it before publication.

I assume you have the contact details for Biteback Publishing, in which case I would be grateful to hear from you how I may get in touch with them to request clarification of the actual content of the book, if it contains information or reports about me.

I may reasonably expect them to offer an errata slip in each book, I suppose, and I’d quite happily co-write one with Roger Harrabin if he wishes.

Thanks,

Ms J. Abbess

=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=
=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=

Climate Change Media

Whine to the Daily Mail (2)

Post author By Jo
Post date February 3, 2011
No Comments on Whine to the Daily Mail (2)

It seems that my polite and innocent request to the Daily Mail has had a positive response. Hurrah for good manners, say I ! :-

=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=

From: Editorial, Daily Mail online
To: jo abbess
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 12:54:35 +0000
Subject: RE: Request for a minor correction

Hi Jo,

Thank you for your email. We have removed your name from the article.

Best wishes,

MailOnline

=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=

There remains the small problem that the original article has been copied and plastered all over the Interweb, so although my name has been “desmirched” (the opposite of besmirched) at the Daily Mail, I am still instantly name-able by a simple act of Go Ogling.

So, anyway, I decided to try being nice and polite and a bit insistent again, to try to get at least a recognition that the original story was somewhat unresearched.

That way, if anyone researches the story in future, at least the Daily Mail – the source – has corrected it.

See what you think (see below) :-

=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=

From: jo abbess
Sent: 03 February 2011 19:39:12
To: Editorial, Daily Mail online

3rd February 2011

Dear Daily Mail,

Thank you for letting me know today that you have removed my name from the online article “The BBC became a propaganda machine for climate change zealots, says Peter Sissons… and I was treated as a lunatic for daring to dissent”, which I believe was originally published online on 25th January 2011.

It’s awfully decent of you to do this, and since you’ve taken the trouble to reply to me and change the piece, I wonder, would you consider a further slight revision ?

Even though you’ve removed my name from the article, it’s been linked all over the Internet, and so it would be great if you would consider rectifying a couple of pesky inaccuracies.

As the “green activist” you mention, in Spring 2008, I was perturbed by the idea that Climate Change sceptics would capitalise on the dubious headline of an article by Roger Harrabin – a headline he probably didn’t write – and I engaged him in an e-mail exchange asking him to change his piece.

However, he wasn’t “berated” by me – so please can you remove this emotive term. It was a respectful e-mail exchange, although I was feeling a bit miffed, which showed. As you well know, Roger Harrabin is a professional journalist, and handled my complaint calmly and collectedly.

You published, “the sense of the changes, as specifically sought by the activist, was plainly to harden the piece against the sceptics.” I think this is plainly contrived, and I would like the claim to be dropped.

He may correct me if I’m wrong, but as far as I understand it, Roger Harrabin only made minor changes to the story, and later made further minor changes to the story, to better reflect the evidence from the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO).

It’s possible he may have considered modifying the tone of the piece because of my intervention, yet he did not change any material facts, nor did he change the flavour of the story. He certainly didn’t change it just because I asked him to. He knows better than to react to a correspondent in a huff.

You published, “This exchange went round the world in no time, spread by the jubilant activist.” That is not how I remember the turn of events. “Jubilant” is quite the wrong interpretation, and it was Climate Change sceptics in Australia who spread the story.

They cherrypicked certain parts of the e-mail exchange and made false accusations against Roger Harrabin and myself.

The Climate Change sceptics claimed that the e-mail exchange was “proof” of journalistic malpractice, which it wasn’t. Even publishing the exchange online in full didn’t manage to defend the integrity of both parties.

It would be really sportsmanlike of you if you would apologise to Roger Harrabin for repeating “our story” without fact-checking, and if you could please accept his entirely accurate version of his side of the story, which has been in the public domain for over two years.

I’m grateful that you can consider corrections to your publications, as we all know only true stories are sensational.

Yours sincerely,

Ms J. Abbess

=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=

Be Prepared Big Picture Burning Money Carbon Commodities Carbon Rationing Carbon Taxatious Climate Change Climate Chaos Climate Damages Cost Effective Disturbing Trends Energy Change Energy Revival Extreme Weather Floodstorm Global Warming Green Investment Green Power Incalculable Disaster Major Shift Near-Natural Disaster Neverending Disaster Rainstorm Social Chaos

Australia : Inundation Nation (2)

Post author By Jo
Post date February 1, 2011
No Comments on Australia : Inundation Nation (2)

The key question tonight in Queensland is : how safe can we make the house before morning ?

The second key question that should tonight be asked in Queensland Australia is : are the damages from Climate Change likely to be more expensive than changing our energy sources to stop it ?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12294834

“27 January 2011 : Australia floods: PM Julia Gillard unveils new tax : Julia Gillard announces the details of the new tax : Australia’s Prime Minister Julia Gillard has announced a new tax to help pay for devastating floods that she says will cost A$5.6bn ($5.6bn; £3.5bn) in reconstruction. Ms Gillard said the 12-month tax, starting from 1 July, would be levied on those earning A$50,000 or more, and those affected by floods would not pay. “We should not put off to tomorrow what we are able to do today,” she said…”

https://www.smh.com.au/environment/weather/gillard-warms-to-permanent-disaster-fund-20110131-1ab4z.html

“Gillard warms to permanent disaster fund : Phillip Coorey : February 1, 2011 : THE Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, is prepared to entertain the idea of a permanent natural disaster fund if it helps win the support of key independents in both houses. But she is not prepared to bend on the details of her one-off $1.8 billion levy to help with flood reparations in Queensland. As negotiations began with independents yesterday before the legislation for the flood measures is tabled in Parliament next week, Ms Gillard would not rule out a permanent fund. ”We’re happy to have a conversation about the longer term,” she said. But the floods, she said, were ”an extraordinary circumstance which requires a response in the short term”…”