NOAA's Climate.Gov website: "The Phanerozoic Eon, or roughly the last half a billion years...with global temperatures repeatedly rising above 80°F and even 90°F—much too warm for ice sheets or perennial sea ice."
"Preliminary results from a Smithsonian Institution project led by Scott Wing and Brian Huber, showing Earth's average surface temperature over the past 500 million years. For most of the time, global temperatures appear to have been too warm (red portions of line) for persistent polar ice caps. The most recent 50 million years are an exception."
Mann: “A second Trump term is game over for the climate – really!” - “If we are going to avert ever more catastrophic climate change impacts, we need to limit warming below a degree and a half Celsius, a little less than three degrees Fahrenheit,” Mann said. “Another four years of what we’ve seen under Trump, which is to outsource environmental and energy policy to the polluters and dismantle protections put in place by the previous administration … would make that essentially impossible.”
“The future of this planet is now in the hands of American citizens,” he says. “It’s up to us. The way we end this national and global nightmare is by coming out and voting for optimism over pessimism, for hope and justice and progress over fear and malice and superstition. This is a Tolkienesque battle between good and evil, and Sauron needs to be defeated on election day here in the United States.”
Steve Milloy, a Heartland board member and part of Trump's Environmental Protection Agency transition team, says he welcomes the Legates appointment. "David Legates is a true climate scientist and will bring a great deal of much-needed science to NOAA," Milloy writes in an email to NPR.
#
Marc Morano comments: "This is a victory for science! Having Dr. Legates at NOAA will be a much-needed counter to the usual scientific crap coming from federal science reports. Science has not been served with the likes of Union of Concerned Scientists' activists Katherine Hayhoe or Don Wuebbles. Kudos to the Trump administration."
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.
Ban on anesthesia next?! Doc suggests ‘lowering the flow of anesthetic gas’ in patients to save planet – 1 hour of surgical anesthesia equivalent to driving as many as 470 miles
