David Runciman in Foreign Policy mag: Runciman is a politics professor at Cambridge University and the author of How Democracy Ends: "If electoral democracy is inadequate to the task of addressing climate change, and the task is the most urgent one humanity faces, then other kinds of politics are urgently needed. The most radical alternative of all would be to consider moving beyond democracy altogether. The authoritarian Chinese system has some advantages when it comes to addressing climate change: One-party rule means freedom from electoral cycles and less need for public consultation. Technocratic solutions that put power in the hands of unelected experts could take key decisions out of the hands of voters." ...
But there are two reasons to doubt that this is what the climate emergency needs. First, any transition from a democratic to a post-democratic system would be massively disruptive....Second, it would not satisfy Thunberg’s generation either. She was not asking for less democracy. She was asking for a democracy in which she could be heard."
Morano on Joe Piscopo Show: But here's the here's the big -- the bigger picture. Yeah, this is kind of like the guy holding up at gunpoint and taking your wallet on the street. But the real terrorism to the grid isn't coming from the people attacking this grid. It's coming from people like [former California Governor] Arnold Schwarzenegger, who 15 years ago signed the 'historic' California climate legislation, which led to California facing blackouts and the highest electricity prices in the country.
The real terrorists to our grid are the Green New Deal proposals and the Inflation Reduction Act, and solar and wind mandates. There is no reason why any modern grid should have energy shortages. The only reason they have shortages is because of the green agenda that's infiltrated itself into our energy policy due to due to politics based on wacky ideological science. So we can be mad at these activists for actually torching and destroying the grid or going after SUVs. But the real culprit is green energy policies.
Politico's E&E: Since Musk’s purchase of Twitter two months ago, some prominent climate deniers have returned to the platform after being banned for pushing misinformation about the Covid-19 pandemic. There also are signs that scientists have left Twitter after their posts depicting global warming research were swarmed by critics. ...
Marc Morano, who runs a blog that routinely attacks climate science, said that since Musk bought Twitter the appearance of his name in climate search results “appear to be juiced by the new algorithms.” “My Twitter account and many others opposing the ‘consensus’ climate view have all increased visibility dramatically since Musk took over Twitter,” he said in an interview. “Whatever Musk is altering, I hope he keeps it up.” Indeed, the number of tweets rejecting climate science have never been higher than in 2022, according to research by the University of London conducted on behalf of The Times newspaper. There have been more than 850,000 climate denial tweets or retweets so far this year. There were 650,000 such messages in 2021 and 220,000 in 2020, the analysis found. ...
Twitter appears to now boost the accounts of serial climate misinformers, including Steve Milloy, a former Trump EPA transition official; Patrick Moore, former head of the CO2 Coalition; and Morano, who runs a climate denial blog. In recent Twitter searches, their accounts appeared in top results with climate scientists, media outlets and NOAA.
Bloomberg News: This is only the beginning of what climate activists need to do in order to be effective, says Andreas Malm, associate professor of human ecology at Lund University and author of How to Blow Up a Pipeline. ... “The task for the climate movement is to make clear for people that building new pipelines, new gas terminals, opening new oil fields are acts of violence that need to be stopped — they kill people,” Malm says on Bloomberg Green’s Zero podcast. ... Malm: “We shouldn't engage in assassinations or terrorism, or use arms and things like that,” he says. “But until that line or boundary, we need virtually everything … all the way up to sabotage and property destruction.”
Business Insider: Two climate scientists were kicked out of a major science conference in Chicago on Thursday. NASA's Peter Kalmus and Rose Abramoff went onstage to urge other researchers to take climate action. They told Insider the American Geophysical Union told them they'd be arrested if they returned. ...
NASA's Peter Kalmus, a climate scientist at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Lab, shouted during his onstage disruption: "Our science is showing that the planet is dying. It's terrifying. Everything is at risk. As scientists, we have tremendous leverage, but we need to use it. We can wake everybody up."
Kalmus blames "capitalism" for the alleged climate crisis. "Can't you all see? The real villain was capitalism all along." Watch: Peter Kalmus weeps over climate in April 2022:"We have been trying to warn you guys for so many decades that we are heading towards a F*cking catastrophe." - "We are going to lose everything. And we are not joking. We are not lying. We are not exaggerating." - We have to stop financing of fossil fuels. We have to stop new fossil fuel projects. we don't have any carbon budget left." - "It is going to literally take us to the brink of civilizational collapse. and we have to stop it right now."Kalmus Doing NASA proud?!
The COVID-19 pandemic wasn’t all bad, a new Biden admin plan to fight climate change argues: It at least “highlighted major opportunities” to reduce travel demand and lower carbon emissions through “remote work and virtual interactions.” The plan—which President Joe Biden’s Environmental Protection Agency and Energy, Transportation, and Housing departments released in January—aims to “eliminate nearly all greenhouse gas emissions” from the transportation sector by 2050, mostly through a transition to electric vehicles. Also included in the plan, however, is a controversial call to reduce “commuting miles” through “an increase in remote work and virtual engagements,” including in education. ...
Jazz Shaw of Hot Air has a prediction: "I can’t shake the feeling that this brings us one step closer to a declared “climate emergency.” You people can all stay locked down in your homes voluntarily to save the polar bears or we can declare an emergency and lock you down like we did during COVID."
NY Post: Experts are now recommending that doctors reduce their use of certain kinds of anesthesia in order to combat the effects of climate change. Dr. Mohamed Fayed, a senior anesthetist at Detroit’s Henry Ford Health, made the suggestion during the American Society of Anesthesiologists’ annual conference last Friday in Orlando, Florida. “Global warming is affecting our daily life more and more, and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions has become crucial,” he said. Dr. Fayed added, “No matter how small each effect is, it will add up. As anesthesiologists, we can contribute significantly to this cause by making little changes in our daily practice — such as lowering the flow of anesthetic gas — without affecting patient care.”
Research notes that inhaled anesthesia accounts for up to 0.1% of the world’s carbon emissions, which are regarded as the primary driver of global climate change. An hour of surgery using an inhaled anesthetic is equivalent to driving as many as 470 miles, according to a 2010 study.
Flashback 2020 Study in American Cancer Society Journal in 2020 Fretted over ‘carbon footprint of cancer care’ - ACS Journal: "Climate change and cancer" - Excerpt: "To date, no studies have estimated the carbon footprint of cancer care...The energy expenditure associated with operating cancer treatment facilities and medical devices, as well as the manufacturing, packaging, and shipment of devices and pharmaceuticals, contributes significantly to greenhouse gas emissions in cancer care...Some cancer treatment facilities have begun to consider their own carbon footprint and started a process to achieve carbon neutrality."
Climate Depot's Morano: "Here is a question for the American Cancer Society: If you need cancer treatment, would you go to a cancer treatment center that was worried about its carbon footprint? Or one that was worried about delivering the best possible modern care possible?"
Researchers predict that by 2100, US case numbers will increase by 50 percent - Spread is due to global warming, meaning more hot areas for the fungus to grow. ... The fungus is endemic to the desert-like parts of the Southwest, and 97 percent of all American cases are found in Arizona and California. But a study in the journal GeoHealth predicted that, due to climate change, the endemic region of the fungus will spread north to include dry western states such as Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, Nebraska, South Dakota, and North Dakota. In a high-warming scenario, this would mean that by 2100 the number of affected states could rise from 12 to 17, while the number of cases could increase by 50 percent.