9 November 2017, DeSmog, Climate Denier Lamar Smith Holds Rare Congressional Hearing on Geoengineering. Geoengineering, hailed in some circles as a potential technofix to the climate change crisis, has taken a step closer to going mainstream. The U.S. House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology held a rare joint subcommittee hearing on November 8, only the second ever congressional hearing of its kind on the topic (the first was held in 2009). The committee invited expert witnesses to discuss the status of geoengineering research and development. Geoengineering is a broad term encompassing sophisticated scientific techniques meant to reverse the impacts of climate change or pull greenhouse gases out of the atmosphere. Ironically, the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology is chaired by U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith — a climate science denier who has received tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from ExxonMobil throughout his political career. In fact, Smith actually mentioned “climate change” in his opening remarks for the hearing, in discussing his interest in geoengineering. “As the climate continues to change, geoengineering could become a tool to curb resulting impacts,” said Smith, who recently announced he will not run for relection in 2018. “Instead of forcing unworkable and costly government mandates on the American people, we should look to technology and innovation to lead the way to address climate change. Geoengineering should be considered when discussing technological advances to protect the environment.” In the past, Smith has denied climate change in stark terms, referring to those who believe in climate science as “alarmists” in a 2015 op-ed published by The Wall Street Journal. “Climate alarmists have failed to explain the lack of global warming over the past 15 years,” Smith said at the time. “They simply keep adjusting their malfunctioning climate models to push the supposedly looming disaster further into the future.” Smith has since pivoted to less skepticism about the science, saying at a March 2017 congressional hearing that “climate is changing and humans play a role” and that it’s now just a question of the “extent” to which human activity is the culprit (it is). So perhaps geoengineering, labeled by its critics for years now as a false solution to the climate crisis, will be a “pivot” of sorts for converted deniers and their bankrollers? Read More here
Category Archives: PLEA Network
6 November 2017, Bloomberg, How China and Environmentalists Became Unlikely Bedfellows. If politics make strange bedfellows, few are more unlikely than the growing link between China and the environmentalists seeking to rein in climate change. The nation that spews the most pollution and is building dozens of coal-fired power plants is also winning accolades from the likes of Greenpeace and WWF for its efforts to fight global warming and steer an eventual path away from fossil fuels. “Air quality kills competitiveness, kills people — that’s a big driver for China,” said Rachel Kyte, a United Nations special representative who leads the Sustainable Energy for All program. “How that translates into their leadership beyond the way they’re already leading is something that will be important to watch.” Once a wrecker of global warming deals, China under President Xi Jinping is moving to shape the consensus on how to rein in greenhouse gases after President Donald Trump decided to scale back U.S. involvement. China’s ambitions on climate will be on display this week, when Trump arrives in Beijing on Nov. 8 to meet Xi, and on the other side of the world where envoys from almost 200 nations gather starting Monday in Bonn for UN climate talks. Read More here
2 November 2017, The Conversation, Extreme weather leads to public health crises – so health and climate experts must work together. This year has seen a number of extreme weather events around the globe, from hurricanes in the Americas to devastating flooding in South Asia. The loss of lives, homes and livelihoods are made worse by subsequent disease outbreaks: after the South Asian floods, more than 12,000 cases of watery diarrhoea were reported in Bangladesh. Presumably, many more cases are unreported. As our climate changes, severe weather events (especially intense rainfall) will become the “new normal”. The connection between climate and disease is well established, even in less extreme situations.This makes it vital that our meteorologists, climate scientists and health systems work closely together. Particularly, health professionals should make better use of weather forecasts to proactively manage disease risk. Climate outlooks – with a longer-term perspective than weather forecasts – can also help with long-range tactical and strategic planning. The link between climate change and disease. Climate change projections consistently indicate increased climate variability. A more variable climate creates conditions for the spread and control of infectious disease. In particular, changes in the intensity and duration of rain can help spread pathogens through water. Both floods and droughts can increase waterborne infections, either when clean and dirty water mix during floods, or through inadequate storage and concentration of toxic organisms when water is scarce. Read More here
1 November 2017, The Guardian, Fossil fuel companies undermining Paris agreement negotiations – report. Global negotiations seeking to implement the Paris agreement have been captured by corporate interests and are being undermined by powerful forces that benefit from exacerbating climate change, according to a report released ahead of the second meeting of parties to the Paris agreement – COP23 – next week. The report, co-authored by Corporate Accountability, uncovers a litany of ways in which fossil fuel companies have gained high-level access to negotiations and manipulated outcomes. It highlights a string of examples, including that of a negotiator for Panama who is also on the board of a corporate peak body that represents carbon traders such as banks, polluters and brokers. It also questions the role of the world’s biggest polluters in sponsoring the meetings in return for access to high-level events. The report argues that as a result of the corporate influence, outcomes of negotiations so far have been skewed to favour the interests of the world’s biggest corporate polluters over those of the majority of the world’s population that live in the developing world. It finds that influence has skewed outcomes on finance, agriculture and technology. Read more here