Remember, 1/3 of repub voters, maybe more, think its all a hoax. Until they become engaged and care, our politicians, from both parties, cant/wont do shit. Because, freedumb.
Two Antarctic glaciers that have long kept scientists awake at night are breaking free from the restraints that have hemmed them in, increasing the threat of large-scale sea-level rise.
Located along the coast of the Amundsen Sea in West Antarctica, the enormous Pine Island and Thwaites glaciers already contribute around 5 percent of global sea-level rise. The survival of Thwaites has been deemed so critical that the United States and Britain have launched a targeted multimillion-dollar research mission to the glacier. The loss of the glacier could trigger the broader collapse of the West Antarctic ice sheet, which contains enough ice to eventually raise seas by about 10 feet.
The new findings, published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, come from analysis of satellite images. They show that a naturally occurring buffer system that prevents the glaciers from flowing outward rapidly is breaking down, potentially unleashing far more ice into the sea in coming years.
The glaciers’ “shear margins,” where their floating ice shelves encounter high levels of friction that constrain the natural flow of ice, are progressively weakening and in some cases breaking into pieces.
“The stresses that slow down the glacier, they are no longer in place, so the glacier is speeding up,” said Stef Lhermitte, a satellite expert at Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands who led the new research along with colleagues from NASA and other research institutions in France, Belgium, Austria and the Netherlands.
While many of the images have been seen before, the new analysis suggests that they are a sign of further disintegration to come.
“We already knew that these were glaciers that might matter in the future, but these images to me indicate that these ice shelves are in a very bad state,” Lhermitte said.
It’s just the latest in a flurry of bad news about the planet’s ice.
Arctic sea ice is very close to — but likely to not quite reach — a record low for this time of year. Last month, Canada lost a large portion of its last major Arctic ice shelf.
And in Greenland, the largest still-intact ice shelf in the Northern Hemisphere, sometimes known as 79 North because of its latitude (its full name is Nioghalvfjerdsfjorden), just lost a large chunk of ice, equivalent in size to roughly two Manhattan islands, according to the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland. Experts there blamed the fracture on a strong general warming trend and temperatures that have been “incredibly” high in the northeast of Greenland in recent years.
Ice shelves are vast floating platforms that extend across the surface of the ocean at the outer edge of marine-based glaciers. As they flow over the water, these shelves freeze onto mountainsides and islands and anchor themselves to bumps in the seafloor. In this way, the shelves provide a braking mechanism on the natural outward flow of ice.
The buttressing effect occurs in the shear margins, where faster-flowing ice meets ice that is more static and stable, often because it is moored to some part of the landscape. In these places, the ice frequently crumples and contorts, a visible indication of the powerful stresses that it is under.
But when those stresses become too much, ice breaks. That’s what’s now happening in West Antarctica, the new research argues, suggesting that warm ocean water has thinned the ice shelves out enough from below that they became brittle.
At the same time, and for the same reason, the glaciers themselves began to flow outward faster. The resulting forces led the shear-margin ice to break into pieces — which means that the glacier, less constrained, will now be able to add ice to the ocean even faster.
For the Pine Island Glacier, the new study finds that while the cracking and fraying at the shear margin dates to 1999, it accelerated in 2016. Here’s a video based on images from the European Space Agency’s Sentinel satellite, showing the changes in the past four years:
Even more concerning is the Thwaites Glacier. Here, again, the breakdown of the shear margin has increased in recent years:
“This is important work,” Richard Alley, a glaciologist at Pennsylvania State University, said of the new study.
Alley noted that the processes playing out in Antarctica appear to have already reached their completion in parts of Greenland, where one of the largest glaciers, Jakobshavn, no longer has any significant ice shelf at all. When it lost that shelf around the year 2000, Jakobshavn’s rate of ice loss steeply increased.
The 79 North glacier still has a major ice shelf, as do some of Greenland’s other northernmost glaciers, but many of these have lost considerable size in recent decades.
“The new paper shows that the Amundsen Sea Embayment ice shelves have gone through most, but not all, of the Jakobshavn steps,” Alley said in an email. “[A] warming ocean thinned the ice shelves, this reduced buttressing, this let the non-floating ice move faster, contributing some to sea-level rise and also starting to break the sides of the ice shelves, but additional acceleration could occur if the rest of the steps (further fracture and ice-shelf loss) should occur.”
Multiple ice-shelf collapses have already been seen in Canada, Greenland and the warmer Antarctic Peninsula, where the onetime Larsen A and Larsen B ice shelves fractured and, today, no longer exist.
“When the ice shelves are damaged by climate change, as we saw in the Antarctic Peninsula in the last several decades, their buttressing effect is reduced and the ice streams speed up and raise sea levels,” said Isabella Velicogna, a glaciologist at the University of California at Irvine, commenting on the new study. “The speed-up increases damage, a positive feedback which is not good news.”
If a similar process plays out in the Amundsen Sea of West Antarctica, where Pine Island and Thwaites are, the sea-level consequences could be enormous.
Lhermitte provided calculations showing that over the past six years, the western and central parts of the Pine Island ice shelf have shrunk by about 30 percent, from about 1,500 square miles down to closer to 1,000 square miles. In other words, an area about the size of Los Angeles has been lost.
“This shear margin is so damaged we think it preconditions this ice shelf for destabilization on the longer term,” Lhermitte said. “These are the first signs we see that Pine Island ice shelf is disappearing. This damage is difficult to heal.”
I don't see stating reality as being a Debbie Downer, H2M. The biggest Debbie Downers are the climate change deniers.
"he American public, in general, could care two shits about this happening."
I would guess that if you took a survey, you would find the majority- a slim majority perhaps- of Americans (and First World people in general) actually are concerned about climate change and environmental issues.What you won't find is a majority willing to make the sacrifices necessary to make the needed changes. Recycling cans and bottles is not enough. We need to also be willing to consume fewer products, buy things that are durable, practice re-use more often, commute fewer miles in cars, live in smaller houses, use less heat and air conditioning, eat less red meat, travel and fly less often, support environmental groups like Sea Shepherds, Natural Resources Defense Committee, Wildlands Network- organizations that do less fund raising and take more action, reproduce in smaller numbers, and be a more active voice for defending wildlife and the planet. The average First World person is weak in most of these actions.
Yeah, I'm reading a book right now about an expedition in 2013 to traverse the Northwest Passage in a 4 person row boat. The author stopped in an arctic village and an elder was talking to him about how things have changed for him in the last 50 years, and talked about warming. The author wondered if climate deniers would claim that the elder had an agenda and then rhetorically wondered what agenda the climate deniers have. This elder obviously had no agenda, because he has little contact with the the modern world, and was merely observing how his isolated life had changed. He didn't need science, news or an agenda to inform him - he was living it. The science confirms it though, and made the expedition possible. This expedition wouldn't have even been attempted years ago due to ice.
the problem though, with climate change deniers, is two fold; you tell them the planet's climate is changing in dramatic fashion, they say "no it's not". you show them data, they shift to "climate is cyclical; there's no way to prove it won't revert back like it always does".
there is no convincing them.
My favorite is “we’ve only been recording climate for X amount of years so there is no way to know for sure, and anyways my stonks are up...”
Remember, 1/3 of repub voters, maybe more, think its all a hoax. Until they become engaged and care, our politicians, from both parties, cant/wont do shit. Because, freedumb.
Two Antarctic glaciers that have long kept scientists awake at night are breaking free from the restraints that have hemmed them in, increasing the threat of large-scale sea-level rise.
Located along the coast of the Amundsen Sea in West Antarctica, the enormous Pine Island and Thwaites glaciers already contribute around 5 percent of global sea-level rise. The survival of Thwaites has been deemed so critical that the United States and Britain have launched a targeted multimillion-dollar research mission to the glacier. The loss of the glacier could trigger the broader collapse of the West Antarctic ice sheet, which contains enough ice to eventually raise seas by about 10 feet.
The new findings, published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, come from analysis of satellite images. They show that a naturally occurring buffer system that prevents the glaciers from flowing outward rapidly is breaking down, potentially unleashing far more ice into the sea in coming years.
The glaciers’ “shear margins,” where their floating ice shelves encounter high levels of friction that constrain the natural flow of ice, are progressively weakening and in some cases breaking into pieces.
“The stresses that slow down the glacier, they are no longer in place, so the glacier is speeding up,” said Stef Lhermitte, a satellite expert at Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands who led the new research along with colleagues from NASA and other research institutions in France, Belgium, Austria and the Netherlands.
While many of the images have been seen before, the new analysis suggests that they are a sign of further disintegration to come.
“We already knew that these were glaciers that might matter in the future, but these images to me indicate that these ice shelves are in a very bad state,” Lhermitte said.
It’s just the latest in a flurry of bad news about the planet’s ice.
Arctic sea ice is very close to — but likely to not quite reach — a record low for this time of year. Last month, Canada lost a large portion of its last major Arctic ice shelf.
And in Greenland, the largest still-intact ice shelf in the Northern Hemisphere, sometimes known as 79 North because of its latitude (its full name is Nioghalvfjerdsfjorden), just lost a large chunk of ice, equivalent in size to roughly two Manhattan islands, according to the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland. Experts there blamed the fracture on a strong general warming trend and temperatures that have been “incredibly” high in the northeast of Greenland in recent years.
Ice shelves are vast floating platforms that extend across the surface of the ocean at the outer edge of marine-based glaciers. As they flow over the water, these shelves freeze onto mountainsides and islands and anchor themselves to bumps in the seafloor. In this way, the shelves provide a braking mechanism on the natural outward flow of ice.
The buttressing effect occurs in the shear margins, where faster-flowing ice meets ice that is more static and stable, often because it is moored to some part of the landscape. In these places, the ice frequently crumples and contorts, a visible indication of the powerful stresses that it is under.
But when those stresses become too much, ice breaks. That’s what’s now happening in West Antarctica, the new research argues, suggesting that warm ocean water has thinned the ice shelves out enough from below that they became brittle.
At the same time, and for the same reason, the glaciers themselves began to flow outward faster. The resulting forces led the shear-margin ice to break into pieces — which means that the glacier, less constrained, will now be able to add ice to the ocean even faster.
For the Pine Island Glacier, the new study finds that while the cracking and fraying at the shear margin dates to 1999, it accelerated in 2016. Here’s a video based on images from the European Space Agency’s Sentinel satellite, showing the changes in the past four years:
Even more concerning is the Thwaites Glacier. Here, again, the breakdown of the shear margin has increased in recent years:
“This is important work,” Richard Alley, a glaciologist at Pennsylvania State University, said of the new study.
Alley noted that the processes playing out in Antarctica appear to have already reached their completion in parts of Greenland, where one of the largest glaciers, Jakobshavn, no longer has any significant ice shelf at all. When it lost that shelf around the year 2000, Jakobshavn’s rate of ice loss steeply increased.
The 79 North glacier still has a major ice shelf, as do some of Greenland’s other northernmost glaciers, but many of these have lost considerable size in recent decades.
“The new paper shows that the Amundsen Sea Embayment ice shelves have gone through most, but not all, of the Jakobshavn steps,” Alley said in an email. “[A] warming ocean thinned the ice shelves, this reduced buttressing, this let the non-floating ice move faster, contributing some to sea-level rise and also starting to break the sides of the ice shelves, but additional acceleration could occur if the rest of the steps (further fracture and ice-shelf loss) should occur.”
Multiple ice-shelf collapses have already been seen in Canada, Greenland and the warmer Antarctic Peninsula, where the onetime Larsen A and Larsen B ice shelves fractured and, today, no longer exist.
“When the ice shelves are damaged by climate change, as we saw in the Antarctic Peninsula in the last several decades, their buttressing effect is reduced and the ice streams speed up and raise sea levels,” said Isabella Velicogna, a glaciologist at the University of California at Irvine, commenting on the new study. “The speed-up increases damage, a positive feedback which is not good news.”
If a similar process plays out in the Amundsen Sea of West Antarctica, where Pine Island and Thwaites are, the sea-level consequences could be enormous.
Lhermitte provided calculations showing that over the past six years, the western and central parts of the Pine Island ice shelf have shrunk by about 30 percent, from about 1,500 square miles down to closer to 1,000 square miles. In other words, an area about the size of Los Angeles has been lost.
“This shear margin is so damaged we think it preconditions this ice shelf for destabilization on the longer term,” Lhermitte said. “These are the first signs we see that Pine Island ice shelf is disappearing. This damage is difficult to heal.”
I don't see stating reality as being a Debbie Downer, H2M. The biggest Debbie Downers are the climate change deniers.
"he American public, in general, could care two shits about this happening."
I would guess that if you took a survey, you would find the majority- a slim majority perhaps- of Americans (and First World people in general) actually are concerned about climate change and environmental issues.What you won't find is a majority willing to make the sacrifices necessary to make the needed changes. Recycling cans and bottles is not enough. We need to also be willing to consume fewer products, buy things that are durable, practice re-use more often, commute fewer miles in cars, live in smaller houses, use less heat and air conditioning, eat less red meat, travel and fly less often, support environmental groups like Sea Shepherds, Natural Resources Defense Committee, Wildlands Network- organizations that do less fund raising and take more action, reproduce in smaller numbers, and be a more active voice for defending wildlife and the planet. The average First World person is weak in most of these actions.
Yeah, I'm reading a book right now about an expedition in 2013 to traverse the Northwest Passage in a 4 person row boat. The author stopped in an arctic village and an elder was talking to him about how things have changed for him in the last 50 years, and talked about warming. The author wondered if climate deniers would claim that the elder had an agenda and then rhetorically wondered what agenda the climate deniers have. This elder obviously had no agenda, because he has little contact with the the modern world, and was merely observing how his isolated life had changed. He didn't need science, news or an agenda to inform him - he was living it. The science confirms it though, and made the expedition possible. This expedition wouldn't have even been attempted years ago due to ice.
the problem though, with climate change deniers, is two fold; you tell them the planet's climate is changing in dramatic fashion, they say "no it's not". you show them data, they shift to "climate is cyclical; there's no way to prove it won't revert back like it always does".
there is no convincing them.
My favorite is “we’ve only been recording climate for X amount of years so there is no way to know for sure, and anyways my stonks are up...”
Remember, 1/3 of repub voters, maybe more, think its all a hoax. Until they become engaged and care, our politicians, from both parties, cant/wont do shit. Because, freedumb.
Two Antarctic glaciers that have long kept scientists awake at night are breaking free from the restraints that have hemmed them in, increasing the threat of large-scale sea-level rise.
Located along the coast of the Amundsen Sea in West Antarctica, the enormous Pine Island and Thwaites glaciers already contribute around 5 percent of global sea-level rise. The survival of Thwaites has been deemed so critical that the United States and Britain have launched a targeted multimillion-dollar research mission to the glacier. The loss of the glacier could trigger the broader collapse of the West Antarctic ice sheet, which contains enough ice to eventually raise seas by about 10 feet.
The new findings, published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, come from analysis of satellite images. They show that a naturally occurring buffer system that prevents the glaciers from flowing outward rapidly is breaking down, potentially unleashing far more ice into the sea in coming years.
The glaciers’ “shear margins,” where their floating ice shelves encounter high levels of friction that constrain the natural flow of ice, are progressively weakening and in some cases breaking into pieces.
“The stresses that slow down the glacier, they are no longer in place, so the glacier is speeding up,” said Stef Lhermitte, a satellite expert at Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands who led the new research along with colleagues from NASA and other research institutions in France, Belgium, Austria and the Netherlands.
While many of the images have been seen before, the new analysis suggests that they are a sign of further disintegration to come.
“We already knew that these were glaciers that might matter in the future, but these images to me indicate that these ice shelves are in a very bad state,” Lhermitte said.
It’s just the latest in a flurry of bad news about the planet’s ice.
Arctic sea ice is very close to — but likely to not quite reach — a record low for this time of year. Last month, Canada lost a large portion of its last major Arctic ice shelf.
And in Greenland, the largest still-intact ice shelf in the Northern Hemisphere, sometimes known as 79 North because of its latitude (its full name is Nioghalvfjerdsfjorden), just lost a large chunk of ice, equivalent in size to roughly two Manhattan islands, according to the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland. Experts there blamed the fracture on a strong general warming trend and temperatures that have been “incredibly” high in the northeast of Greenland in recent years.
Ice shelves are vast floating platforms that extend across the surface of the ocean at the outer edge of marine-based glaciers. As they flow over the water, these shelves freeze onto mountainsides and islands and anchor themselves to bumps in the seafloor. In this way, the shelves provide a braking mechanism on the natural outward flow of ice.
The buttressing effect occurs in the shear margins, where faster-flowing ice meets ice that is more static and stable, often because it is moored to some part of the landscape. In these places, the ice frequently crumples and contorts, a visible indication of the powerful stresses that it is under.
But when those stresses become too much, ice breaks. That’s what’s now happening in West Antarctica, the new research argues, suggesting that warm ocean water has thinned the ice shelves out enough from below that they became brittle.
At the same time, and for the same reason, the glaciers themselves began to flow outward faster. The resulting forces led the shear-margin ice to break into pieces — which means that the glacier, less constrained, will now be able to add ice to the ocean even faster.
For the Pine Island Glacier, the new study finds that while the cracking and fraying at the shear margin dates to 1999, it accelerated in 2016. Here’s a video based on images from the European Space Agency’s Sentinel satellite, showing the changes in the past four years:
Even more concerning is the Thwaites Glacier. Here, again, the breakdown of the shear margin has increased in recent years:
“This is important work,” Richard Alley, a glaciologist at Pennsylvania State University, said of the new study.
Alley noted that the processes playing out in Antarctica appear to have already reached their completion in parts of Greenland, where one of the largest glaciers, Jakobshavn, no longer has any significant ice shelf at all. When it lost that shelf around the year 2000, Jakobshavn’s rate of ice loss steeply increased.
The 79 North glacier still has a major ice shelf, as do some of Greenland’s other northernmost glaciers, but many of these have lost considerable size in recent decades.
“The new paper shows that the Amundsen Sea Embayment ice shelves have gone through most, but not all, of the Jakobshavn steps,” Alley said in an email. “[A] warming ocean thinned the ice shelves, this reduced buttressing, this let the non-floating ice move faster, contributing some to sea-level rise and also starting to break the sides of the ice shelves, but additional acceleration could occur if the rest of the steps (further fracture and ice-shelf loss) should occur.”
Multiple ice-shelf collapses have already been seen in Canada, Greenland and the warmer Antarctic Peninsula, where the onetime Larsen A and Larsen B ice shelves fractured and, today, no longer exist.
“When the ice shelves are damaged by climate change, as we saw in the Antarctic Peninsula in the last several decades, their buttressing effect is reduced and the ice streams speed up and raise sea levels,” said Isabella Velicogna, a glaciologist at the University of California at Irvine, commenting on the new study. “The speed-up increases damage, a positive feedback which is not good news.”
If a similar process plays out in the Amundsen Sea of West Antarctica, where Pine Island and Thwaites are, the sea-level consequences could be enormous.
Lhermitte provided calculations showing that over the past six years, the western and central parts of the Pine Island ice shelf have shrunk by about 30 percent, from about 1,500 square miles down to closer to 1,000 square miles. In other words, an area about the size of Los Angeles has been lost.
“This shear margin is so damaged we think it preconditions this ice shelf for destabilization on the longer term,” Lhermitte said. “These are the first signs we see that Pine Island ice shelf is disappearing. This damage is difficult to heal.”
I don't see stating reality as being a Debbie Downer, H2M. The biggest Debbie Downers are the climate change deniers.
"he American public, in general, could care two shits about this happening."
I would guess that if you took a survey, you would find the majority- a slim majority perhaps- of Americans (and First World people in general) actually are concerned about climate change and environmental issues.What you won't find is a majority willing to make the sacrifices necessary to make the needed changes. Recycling cans and bottles is not enough. We need to also be willing to consume fewer products, buy things that are durable, practice re-use more often, commute fewer miles in cars, live in smaller houses, use less heat and air conditioning, eat less red meat, travel and fly less often, support environmental groups like Sea Shepherds, Natural Resources Defense Committee, Wildlands Network- organizations that do less fund raising and take more action, reproduce in smaller numbers, and be a more active voice for defending wildlife and the planet. The average First World person is weak in most of these actions.
Yeah, I'm reading a book right now about an expedition in 2013 to traverse the Northwest Passage in a 4 person row boat. The author stopped in an arctic village and an elder was talking to him about how things have changed for him in the last 50 years, and talked about warming. The author wondered if climate deniers would claim that the elder had an agenda and then rhetorically wondered what agenda the climate deniers have. This elder obviously had no agenda, because he has little contact with the the modern world, and was merely observing how his isolated life had changed. He didn't need science, news or an agenda to inform him - he was living it. The science confirms it though, and made the expedition possible. This expedition wouldn't have even been attempted years ago due to ice.
the problem though, with climate change deniers, is two fold; you tell them the planet's climate is changing in dramatic fashion, they say "no it's not". you show them data, they shift to "climate is cyclical; there's no way to prove it won't revert back like it always does".
there is no convincing them.
My favorite is “we’ve only been recording climate for X amount of years so there is no way to know for sure, and anyways my stonks are up...”
lol..."my stonks".....
Stonks only go up or down when you have a head code.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
There are many more similar stories from all of our favorite Dems...
Disappointing!
This is a bad time for me to be bad-mouthing Democrats because we would be better off with Dems who are more likely to support environmental initiatives, so let there be no misunderstanding about that. Dems have better records on environment than Republicans which mean that Republicans in general are PISS POOR on environment.
But that doesn't get Dems off the hook on this. I am watching my state as well as Oregon and even parts of Washington burn to the ground and pollute the air in ways that are affecting our health. I can feel it in my lungs. We are witnessing what is the strongest evidence yet that climate change is a serious issue that is having devastating effects on human life and, even worse, on wild life. It's time we stop dicking around, friends. We need to start making changes fast. Otherwise, we can kiss our asses goodbye.
Here is what Biden said today,
“If we have four more years of Trump’s climate denial, how many suburbs will be burned in wildfires, how many suburban neighborhoods will have been flooded out, how many suburbs will have been blown away in superstorms?” Biden asked. “If you give a climate arsonist four more years in the White House, why would anyone be surprised if we have more of America ablaze … when more of America is under water?”
He is campaigning passionately on the climate. Anything in congress could and would be blocked by the senate. It’s Biden winning or its over for new energy initiatives.
If we are going to attack Biden on fracking and help trump get re-elected, we need an alternative to nat gas. Heat pumps don’t work in cold climates, electric heat uses double to triple the amount of energy, oil is less efficient and dirtier and the other option is coal.
So progressives want Biden to support coal?
I am totally voting for Biden over Trump for every reason imaginable, including environment.
I guess I should have waited until after the election is over to post this, but the guardian article I posted got my dander up on this old issue. I have been actively promoting environmental protection for about 40 years and have been concerned about it for over 50 years- that includes having donated several thousand dollars over all those years to the best run environmental organizations I can find, writing letters, organizing a reduction in carbon emissions rally, voting, signing petitions in person, calling representatives and disseminating information about environmental concerns. 40 years of this and still the environment degrades (look at the western U.S. right now!) despite all the promises from liberal and progressive politicians.
The fact- the undeniable fact- is that these politicians have let us down. We cannot stand for this any longer. We cannot just accept lip-service and wish the problems away. The environmental collapse is changing the planet in ways the will make the lives of younger and following generations very, very difficult. This is no time for hollow promises. For five decades now, I've heard them all. I'm sick and tired of the weak responses from these so-called leaders. It's now or never or our kids and there's are toast and whatever other species die off before their time.
Biden spoke passionately on the topic yesterday. I did not hear lip service.
I did hear Biden campaigning in a electoral system that is biased against him and the left. He gets too close politically to AOC, Sanders, etc. he loses NC FL AZ WI and trump wins. Go ahead and convince me biden wins any of these states tacking all the way to the left.
It MUCH smarter that biden take the center left lane (coincidentally, that is who he is), defeat trump, then forge a climate deal with the progressives, moderates and centrist Republicans.
If Biden starts to forget the bias of the US electoral system, trump wins. How does the climate look then?
And liberals should consider attacking biden on fracking is not smart as all of the alternatives to fracking in a sub freezing climate use much more energy and are dirtier to the atmosphere.
Lerxst, I must not be making myself clear here. I am sorry for the misunderstanding. This thread was not meant to focus on Biden. I am not at all suggesting Biden should campaign as though he were Edward Abbey, Paul Watson, Douglas Peacock, Dave Foreman, Robert Hunter, Julia Butterfly Hill or Bill McKibben. That would not get him elected. What I would like to see is for him, and all other politicians who claim to be concerned about climate change and environmental degradation, to step up to the plate once elected and work with the same passion and vigor that any of those aforementioned environmental champions have to raise awareness and enact legislation to bring about environmental improvement.
Surely you would agree that the trajectory we are currently on in terms of environment is one that is leading down a dangerous path? Is not the massive conflagration of the American west evidence enough of that? Is that not enough impetus for us to start demanding our representatives to take bold and timely action to stand up for protecting the planet that sustains us? Or do we just keep treading down a road that is leading to ours and many other species premature demise? I think those are the right questions to ask and the demands I am suggesting to be logical steps to take.
The trajectory we are on is horrific. But the problem is our electoral system, as mandated by the constitution. As depressing as the presidential race is with respect to giving the climate denial red states more voting power, the problem is worse in the senate. The Dems lose either the senate or White House, its game over for any hope for climate reform.
So as a country we have two choices, understand the political system mandated by the constitution and try to win at that specific game on Election Day, or change hearts and thoughts in the places that get a disproportionate share of the voting power. Option 2 seems to me to be a long shot, so let’s win at option 1 and then work with Biden at reversing course.
There are many more similar stories from all of our favorite Dems...
Disappointing!
This is a bad time for me to be bad-mouthing Democrats because we would be better off with Dems who are more likely to support environmental initiatives, so let there be no misunderstanding about that. Dems have better records on environment than Republicans which mean that Republicans in general are PISS POOR on environment.
But that doesn't get Dems off the hook on this. I am watching my state as well as Oregon and even parts of Washington burn to the ground and pollute the air in ways that are affecting our health. I can feel it in my lungs. We are witnessing what is the strongest evidence yet that climate change is a serious issue that is having devastating effects on human life and, even worse, on wild life. It's time we stop dicking around, friends. We need to start making changes fast. Otherwise, we can kiss our asses goodbye.
Here is what Biden said today,
“If we have four more years of Trump’s climate denial, how many suburbs will be burned in wildfires, how many suburban neighborhoods will have been flooded out, how many suburbs will have been blown away in superstorms?” Biden asked. “If you give a climate arsonist four more years in the White House, why would anyone be surprised if we have more of America ablaze … when more of America is under water?”
He is campaigning passionately on the climate. Anything in congress could and would be blocked by the senate. It’s Biden winning or its over for new energy initiatives.
If we are going to attack Biden on fracking and help trump get re-elected, we need an alternative to nat gas. Heat pumps don’t work in cold climates, electric heat uses double to triple the amount of energy, oil is less efficient and dirtier and the other option is coal.
So progressives want Biden to support coal?
I am totally voting for Biden over Trump for every reason imaginable, including environment.
I guess I should have waited until after the election is over to post this, but the guardian article I posted got my dander up on this old issue. I have been actively promoting environmental protection for about 40 years and have been concerned about it for over 50 years- that includes having donated several thousand dollars over all those years to the best run environmental organizations I can find, writing letters, organizing a reduction in carbon emissions rally, voting, signing petitions in person, calling representatives and disseminating information about environmental concerns. 40 years of this and still the environment degrades (look at the western U.S. right now!) despite all the promises from liberal and progressive politicians.
The fact- the undeniable fact- is that these politicians have let us down. We cannot stand for this any longer. We cannot just accept lip-service and wish the problems away. The environmental collapse is changing the planet in ways the will make the lives of younger and following generations very, very difficult. This is no time for hollow promises. For five decades now, I've heard them all. I'm sick and tired of the weak responses from these so-called leaders. It's now or never or our kids and there's are toast and whatever other species die off before their time.
Biden spoke passionately on the topic yesterday. I did not hear lip service.
I did hear Biden campaigning in a electoral system that is biased against him and the left. He gets too close politically to AOC, Sanders, etc. he loses NC FL AZ WI and trump wins. Go ahead and convince me biden wins any of these states tacking all the way to the left.
It MUCH smarter that biden take the center left lane (coincidentally, that is who he is), defeat trump, then forge a climate deal with the progressives, moderates and centrist Republicans.
If Biden starts to forget the bias of the US electoral system, trump wins. How does the climate look then?
And liberals should consider attacking biden on fracking is not smart as all of the alternatives to fracking in a sub freezing climate use much more energy and are dirtier to the atmosphere.
Lerxst, I must not be making myself clear here. I am sorry for the misunderstanding. This thread was not meant to focus on Biden. I am not at all suggesting Biden should campaign as though he were Edward Abbey, Paul Watson, Douglas Peacock, Dave Foreman, Robert Hunter, Julia Butterfly Hill or Bill McKibben. That would not get him elected. What I would like to see is for him, and all other politicians who claim to be concerned about climate change and environmental degradation, to step up to the plate once elected and work with the same passion and vigor that any of those aforementioned environmental champions have to raise awareness and enact legislation to bring about environmental improvement.
Surely you would agree that the trajectory we are currently on in terms of environment is one that is leading down a dangerous path? Is not the massive conflagration of the American west evidence enough of that? Is that not enough impetus for us to start demanding our representatives to take bold and timely action to stand up for protecting the planet that sustains us? Or do we just keep treading down a road that is leading to ours and many other species premature demise? I think those are the right questions to ask and the demands I am suggesting to be logical steps to take.
The trajectory we are on is horrific. But the problem is our electoral system, as mandated by the constitution. As depressing as the presidential race is with respect to giving the climate denial red states more voting power, the problem is worse in the senate. The Dems lose either the senate or White House, its game over for any hope for climate reform.
So as a country we have two choices, understand the political system mandated by the constitution and try to win at that specific game on Election Day, or change hearts and thoughts in the places that get a disproportionate share of the voting power. Option 2 seems to me to be a long shot, so let’s win at option 1 and then work with Biden at reversing course.
I totally agree with all of that, L.
Yes, let's get the people most likely to favor pro-environmental (and justice, etc.) legislation and then... (all the rest of what I said).
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Remember, 1/3 of repub voters, maybe more, think its all a hoax. Until they become engaged and care, our politicians, from both parties, cant/wont do shit. Because, freedumb.
Two Antarctic glaciers that have long kept scientists awake at night are breaking free from the restraints that have hemmed them in, increasing the threat of large-scale sea-level rise.
Located along the coast of the Amundsen Sea in West Antarctica, the enormous Pine Island and Thwaites glaciers already contribute around 5 percent of global sea-level rise. The survival of Thwaites has been deemed so critical that the United States and Britain have launched a targeted multimillion-dollar research mission to the glacier. The loss of the glacier could trigger the broader collapse of the West Antarctic ice sheet, which contains enough ice to eventually raise seas by about 10 feet.
The new findings, published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, come from analysis of satellite images. They show that a naturally occurring buffer system that prevents the glaciers from flowing outward rapidly is breaking down, potentially unleashing far more ice into the sea in coming years.
The glaciers’ “shear margins,” where their floating ice shelves encounter high levels of friction that constrain the natural flow of ice, are progressively weakening and in some cases breaking into pieces.
“The stresses that slow down the glacier, they are no longer in place, so the glacier is speeding up,” said Stef Lhermitte, a satellite expert at Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands who led the new research along with colleagues from NASA and other research institutions in France, Belgium, Austria and the Netherlands.
While many of the images have been seen before, the new analysis suggests that they are a sign of further disintegration to come.
“We already knew that these were glaciers that might matter in the future, but these images to me indicate that these ice shelves are in a very bad state,” Lhermitte said.
It’s just the latest in a flurry of bad news about the planet’s ice.
Arctic sea ice is very close to — but likely to not quite reach — a record low for this time of year. Last month, Canada lost a large portion of its last major Arctic ice shelf.
And in Greenland, the largest still-intact ice shelf in the Northern Hemisphere, sometimes known as 79 North because of its latitude (its full name is Nioghalvfjerdsfjorden), just lost a large chunk of ice, equivalent in size to roughly two Manhattan islands, according to the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland. Experts there blamed the fracture on a strong general warming trend and temperatures that have been “incredibly” high in the northeast of Greenland in recent years.
Ice shelves are vast floating platforms that extend across the surface of the ocean at the outer edge of marine-based glaciers. As they flow over the water, these shelves freeze onto mountainsides and islands and anchor themselves to bumps in the seafloor. In this way, the shelves provide a braking mechanism on the natural outward flow of ice.
The buttressing effect occurs in the shear margins, where faster-flowing ice meets ice that is more static and stable, often because it is moored to some part of the landscape. In these places, the ice frequently crumples and contorts, a visible indication of the powerful stresses that it is under.
But when those stresses become too much, ice breaks. That’s what’s now happening in West Antarctica, the new research argues, suggesting that warm ocean water has thinned the ice shelves out enough from below that they became brittle.
At the same time, and for the same reason, the glaciers themselves began to flow outward faster. The resulting forces led the shear-margin ice to break into pieces — which means that the glacier, less constrained, will now be able to add ice to the ocean even faster.
For the Pine Island Glacier, the new study finds that while the cracking and fraying at the shear margin dates to 1999, it accelerated in 2016. Here’s a video based on images from the European Space Agency’s Sentinel satellite, showing the changes in the past four years:
Even more concerning is the Thwaites Glacier. Here, again, the breakdown of the shear margin has increased in recent years:
“This is important work,” Richard Alley, a glaciologist at Pennsylvania State University, said of the new study.
Alley noted that the processes playing out in Antarctica appear to have already reached their completion in parts of Greenland, where one of the largest glaciers, Jakobshavn, no longer has any significant ice shelf at all. When it lost that shelf around the year 2000, Jakobshavn’s rate of ice loss steeply increased.
The 79 North glacier still has a major ice shelf, as do some of Greenland’s other northernmost glaciers, but many of these have lost considerable size in recent decades.
“The new paper shows that the Amundsen Sea Embayment ice shelves have gone through most, but not all, of the Jakobshavn steps,” Alley said in an email. “[A] warming ocean thinned the ice shelves, this reduced buttressing, this let the non-floating ice move faster, contributing some to sea-level rise and also starting to break the sides of the ice shelves, but additional acceleration could occur if the rest of the steps (further fracture and ice-shelf loss) should occur.”
Multiple ice-shelf collapses have already been seen in Canada, Greenland and the warmer Antarctic Peninsula, where the onetime Larsen A and Larsen B ice shelves fractured and, today, no longer exist.
“When the ice shelves are damaged by climate change, as we saw in the Antarctic Peninsula in the last several decades, their buttressing effect is reduced and the ice streams speed up and raise sea levels,” said Isabella Velicogna, a glaciologist at the University of California at Irvine, commenting on the new study. “The speed-up increases damage, a positive feedback which is not good news.”
If a similar process plays out in the Amundsen Sea of West Antarctica, where Pine Island and Thwaites are, the sea-level consequences could be enormous.
Lhermitte provided calculations showing that over the past six years, the western and central parts of the Pine Island ice shelf have shrunk by about 30 percent, from about 1,500 square miles down to closer to 1,000 square miles. In other words, an area about the size of Los Angeles has been lost.
“This shear margin is so damaged we think it preconditions this ice shelf for destabilization on the longer term,” Lhermitte said. “These are the first signs we see that Pine Island ice shelf is disappearing. This damage is difficult to heal.”
I don't see stating reality as being a Debbie Downer, H2M. The biggest Debbie Downers are the climate change deniers.
"he American public, in general, could care two shits about this happening."
I would guess that if you took a survey, you would find the majority- a slim majority perhaps- of Americans (and First World people in general) actually are concerned about climate change and environmental issues.What you won't find is a majority willing to make the sacrifices necessary to make the needed changes. Recycling cans and bottles is not enough. We need to also be willing to consume fewer products, buy things that are durable, practice re-use more often, commute fewer miles in cars, live in smaller houses, use less heat and air conditioning, eat less red meat, travel and fly less often, support environmental groups like Sea Shepherds, Natural Resources Defense Committee, Wildlands Network- organizations that do less fund raising and take more action, reproduce in smaller numbers, and be a more active voice for defending wildlife and the planet. The average First World person is weak in most of these actions.
Yeah, I'm reading a book right now about an expedition in 2013 to traverse the Northwest Passage in a 4 person row boat. The author stopped in an arctic village and an elder was talking to him about how things have changed for him in the last 50 years, and talked about warming. The author wondered if climate deniers would claim that the elder had an agenda and then rhetorically wondered what agenda the climate deniers have. This elder obviously had no agenda, because he has little contact with the the modern world, and was merely observing how his isolated life had changed. He didn't need science, news or an agenda to inform him - he was living it. The science confirms it though, and made the expedition possible. This expedition wouldn't have even been attempted years ago due to ice.
the problem though, with climate change deniers, is two fold; you tell them the planet's climate is changing in dramatic fashion, they say "no it's not". you show them data, they shift to "climate is cyclical; there's no way to prove it won't revert back like it always does".
there is no convincing them.
My favorite is “we’ve only been recording climate for X amount of years so there is no way to know for sure, and anyways my stonks are up...”
lol..."my stonks".....
My introduction to stonks was this meme. I’ve never been able to listen to fortunate people talk about their money without picturing this ever since...or when the economy is sold as being good because the stock market...have you seen this one before?
My introduction to stonks was this meme. I’ve never been able to listen to fortunate people talk about their money without picturing this ever since...or when the economy is sold as being good because the stock market...have you seen this one before?
Just ran across this earlier today. Yet another example of epic fail on the part of liberal democrat who talks the talk but doesn't walk it. I most like Newsom, but this doesn't cut it for me.
With New Permits, Newsom Ramps Up Fracking in California
360 New Fracking Events Approved So Far This Year
SACRAMENTO, Calif.—
Gov. Gavin Newsom’s oil and gas regulatory agency has approved 12 new
permits for Chevron to conduct hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, in the
Lost Hills Oil Field in Kern County.
The authorizations — issued
late Thursday afternoon, just before the holiday weekend — will allow
Chevron to frack these wells 168 times.
“It’s outrageous that
Gov. Newsom is handing out fracking permits during a pandemic that
disproportionately harms polluted communities,” said Hollin Kretzmann, a
senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. “The governor
needs to stop recklessly approving fracking and new oil and gas
drilling. Instead of restarting fracking in areas already suffering from
dirty air, Newsom should direct oil companies to start plugging these
dangerous wells to create jobs and move us away from polluting fossil
fuels.”
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Just ran across this earlier today. Yet another example of epic fail on the part of liberal democrat who talks the talk but doesn't walk it. I most like Newsom, but this doesn't cut it for me.
With New Permits, Newsom Ramps Up Fracking in California
360 New Fracking Events Approved So Far This Year
SACRAMENTO, Calif.—
Gov. Gavin Newsom’s oil and gas regulatory agency has approved 12 new
permits for Chevron to conduct hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, in the
Lost Hills Oil Field in Kern County.
The authorizations — issued
late Thursday afternoon, just before the holiday weekend — will allow
Chevron to frack these wells 168 times.
“It’s outrageous that
Gov. Newsom is handing out fracking permits during a pandemic that
disproportionately harms polluted communities,” said Hollin Kretzmann, a
senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. “The governor
needs to stop recklessly approving fracking and new oil and gas
drilling. Instead of restarting fracking in areas already suffering from
dirty air, Newsom should direct oil companies to start plugging these
dangerous wells to create jobs and move us away from polluting fossil
fuels.”
Unfortunately all the alternatives to fracking require much more energy to produce the gas and/or are dirtier. In cold climates, electric heat is much less efficient and oil is much dirtier to burn. Converting coal power plants to nat gas has actually reduced carbon emissions and companies have been making this investment recently because gas has been very cheap (due to abundant supply from fracking).
Just ran across this earlier today. Yet another example of epic fail on the part of liberal democrat who talks the talk but doesn't walk it. I most like Newsom, but this doesn't cut it for me.
With New Permits, Newsom Ramps Up Fracking in California
360 New Fracking Events Approved So Far This Year
SACRAMENTO, Calif.—
Gov. Gavin Newsom’s oil and gas regulatory agency has approved 12 new
permits for Chevron to conduct hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, in the
Lost Hills Oil Field in Kern County.
The authorizations — issued
late Thursday afternoon, just before the holiday weekend — will allow
Chevron to frack these wells 168 times.
“It’s outrageous that
Gov. Newsom is handing out fracking permits during a pandemic that
disproportionately harms polluted communities,” said Hollin Kretzmann, a
senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. “The governor
needs to stop recklessly approving fracking and new oil and gas
drilling. Instead of restarting fracking in areas already suffering from
dirty air, Newsom should direct oil companies to start plugging these
dangerous wells to create jobs and move us away from polluting fossil
fuels.”
Unfortunately all the alternatives to fracking require much more energy to produce the gas and/or are dirtier. In cold climates, electric heat is much less efficient and oil is much dirtier to burn. Converting coal power plants to nat gas has actually reduced carbon emissions and companies have been making this investment recently because gas has been very cheap (due to abundant supply from fracking).
I have no doubt what you are saying is correct, but I don't understand the trade off which is short term economic gain for long term environmental collapse. I don't know how that can be justified.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Just ran across this earlier today. Yet another example of epic fail on the part of liberal democrat who talks the talk but doesn't walk it. I most like Newsom, but this doesn't cut it for me.
With New Permits, Newsom Ramps Up Fracking in California
360 New Fracking Events Approved So Far This Year
SACRAMENTO, Calif.—
Gov. Gavin Newsom’s oil and gas regulatory agency has approved 12 new
permits for Chevron to conduct hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, in the
Lost Hills Oil Field in Kern County.
The authorizations — issued
late Thursday afternoon, just before the holiday weekend — will allow
Chevron to frack these wells 168 times.
“It’s outrageous that
Gov. Newsom is handing out fracking permits during a pandemic that
disproportionately harms polluted communities,” said Hollin Kretzmann, a
senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. “The governor
needs to stop recklessly approving fracking and new oil and gas
drilling. Instead of restarting fracking in areas already suffering from
dirty air, Newsom should direct oil companies to start plugging these
dangerous wells to create jobs and move us away from polluting fossil
fuels.”
Unfortunately all the alternatives to fracking require much more energy to produce the gas and/or are dirtier. In cold climates, electric heat is much less efficient and oil is much dirtier to burn. Converting coal power plants to nat gas has actually reduced carbon emissions and companies have been making this investment recently because gas has been very cheap (due to abundant supply from fracking).
I have no doubt what you are saying is correct, but I don't understand the trade off which is short term economic gain for long term environmental collapse. I don't know how that can be justified.
Forget the economics but consider what is logistically possible for use by over a hundred million people in the next 20 years and what is the cleanest heating fuel that currently exists. Unfortunately it’s fracked nat gas. As a liberal who strongly supports environmental change, it is not fun to say that.
Geothermal has potential but to be deployed to tens of millions of households is not on the horizon just yet. Electric heat and pumps are fine where the temps stay above 32 year round but not for cold winter climates. Oil is dirtier and less efficient (means more needs to be used to get the same heat= terrible for the environment). If we don’t frack gas we drill it in the Gulf of Mexico which is environmentally risky and would require more pipelines to the northeast, which is more bad environment policy. Or we import from overseas which requires shipping which is harmful to the earth and we have no control over the drilling methods. Which could mean we exchange fracking in PA for fracking overseas. Same earth .
Plus a big reason right now, if Biden moves against fracking he could easily lose PA, which strongly supports it. If Biden loses that state, his path to victory gets even more complicated. Considering trumps base and conservatives who don’t like trump just got energized with the terrible news this evening, democrats need to be careful about issues that will send moderate voters to trump, especially on state issues like fracking in PA.
Just ran across this earlier today. Yet another example of epic fail on the part of liberal democrat who talks the talk but doesn't walk it. I most like Newsom, but this doesn't cut it for me.
With New Permits, Newsom Ramps Up Fracking in California
360 New Fracking Events Approved So Far This Year
SACRAMENTO, Calif.—
Gov. Gavin Newsom’s oil and gas regulatory agency has approved 12 new
permits for Chevron to conduct hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, in the
Lost Hills Oil Field in Kern County.
The authorizations — issued
late Thursday afternoon, just before the holiday weekend — will allow
Chevron to frack these wells 168 times.
“It’s outrageous that
Gov. Newsom is handing out fracking permits during a pandemic that
disproportionately harms polluted communities,” said Hollin Kretzmann, a
senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. “The governor
needs to stop recklessly approving fracking and new oil and gas
drilling. Instead of restarting fracking in areas already suffering from
dirty air, Newsom should direct oil companies to start plugging these
dangerous wells to create jobs and move us away from polluting fossil
fuels.”
Unfortunately all the alternatives to fracking require much more energy to produce the gas and/or are dirtier. In cold climates, electric heat is much less efficient and oil is much dirtier to burn. Converting coal power plants to nat gas has actually reduced carbon emissions and companies have been making this investment recently because gas has been very cheap (due to abundant supply from fracking).
I have no doubt what you are saying is correct, but I don't understand the trade off which is short term economic gain for long term environmental collapse. I don't know how that can be justified.
Forget the economics but consider what is logistically possible for use by over a hundred million people in the next 20 years and what is the cleanest heating fuel that currently exists. Unfortunately it’s fracked nat gas. As a liberal who strongly supports environmental change, it is not fun to say that.
Geothermal has potential but to be deployed to tens of millions of households is not on the horizon just yet. Electric heat and pumps are fine where the temps stay above 32 year round but not for cold winter climates. Oil is dirtier and less efficient (means more needs to be used to get the same heat= terrible for the environment). If we don’t frack gas we drill it in the Gulf of Mexico which is environmentally risky and would require more pipelines to the northeast, which is more bad environment policy. Or we import from overseas which requires shipping which is harmful to the earth and we have no control over the drilling methods. Which could mean we exchange fracking in PA for fracking overseas. Same earth .
Plus a big reason right now, if Biden moves against fracking he could easily lose PA, which strongly supports it. If Biden loses that state, his path to victory gets even more complicated. Considering trumps base and conservatives who don’t like trump just got energized with the terrible news this evening, democrats need to be careful about issues that will send moderate voters to trump, especially on state issues like fracking in PA.
I don't know any more, man. Twenty more years in the direction we are going what's that going to look like? Easy more me to say- I'll either be dead to too old to matter. But the coming year still matter a lot to me. My nephews and grandnephews and grandnieces, my godchildren, friends kids, kids of a lot of folks who post here- they will be here and have to deal with what we've created. The rest of life on earth which has great value, some would say equal in many ways. It will still be here- some of it anyway.
So yeah, I don't know. I just fucking don't know anymore. Where's a miracle when you need it?
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
There’s a lot we can continue to do. Solar, windmills, electric vehicles, etc. It’s an ironic truth that fracking is believed to be one of the few factors where humanity has been able to have some success reducing greenhouse gasses, because it’s led to a reduction in coal.
Isn’t California a Democratic state? Isn’t the California economy one of the worlds largest (top 10)? And California is failing miserably on the environment? How can this be?
could it be the Democrats just pay lip service to the cause.
in Canada 🇨🇦 our Liberal Prime Minister just pays lip service to the cause. Our PM is spendings 10 + billion on a pipeline through the Rockies to tide water in populated are in which people who live there don’t want??? He also promised Greta 2 billion trees being planted by 2030...none have been planted to date. The 2030 Paris targets will never be hit.
Isn’t California a Democratic state? Isn’t the California economy one of the worlds largest (top 10)? And California is failing miserably on the environment? How can this be?
could it be the Democrats just pay lip service to the cause.
in Canada 🇨🇦 our Liberal Prime Minister just pays lip service to the cause. Our PM is spendings 10 + billion on a pipeline through the Rockies to tide water in populated are in which people who live there don’t want??? He also promised Greta 2 billion trees being planted by 2030...none have been planted to date. The 2030 Paris targets will never be hit.
Good luck.
California is a very misunderstood state. There is a lot of rust under the green surface.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Isn’t California a Democratic state? Isn’t the California economy one of the worlds largest (top 10)? And California is failing miserably on the environment? How can this be?
could it be the Democrats just pay lip service to the cause.
in Canada 🇨🇦 our Liberal Prime Minister just pays lip service to the cause. Our PM is spendings 10 + billion on a pipeline through the Rockies to tide water in populated are in which people who live there don’t want??? He also promised Greta 2 billion trees being planted by 2030...none have been planted to date. The 2030 Paris targets will never be hit.
Good luck.
Many of ours are bought. And sold. I have little to no confidence in our governor, mayor, council members, etc.
It’s sad and angering, and enough to make a cynic out of this native Angeleno.
Isn’t California a Democratic state? Isn’t the California economy one of the worlds largest (top 10)? And California is failing miserably on the environment? How can this be?
could it be the Democrats just pay lip service to the cause.
in Canada 🇨🇦 our Liberal Prime Minister just pays lip service to the cause. Our PM is spendings 10 + billion on a pipeline through the Rockies to tide water in populated are in which people who live there don’t want??? He also promised Greta 2 billion trees being planted by 2030...none have been planted to date. The 2030 Paris targets will never be hit.
Good luck.
Many of ours are bought. And sold. I have little to no confidence in our governor, mayor, council members, etc.
It’s sad and angering, and enough to make a cynic out of this native Angeleno.
What can we feel confident in anymore? Surely there are some civic leaders who are on the level? Please tell me- I'm feeling desperate that way and way too prone to despair.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Isn’t California a Democratic state? Isn’t the California economy one of the worlds largest (top 10)? And California is failing miserably on the environment? How can this be?
could it be the Democrats just pay lip service to the cause.
in Canada 🇨🇦 our Liberal Prime Minister just pays lip service to the cause. Our PM is spendings 10 + billion on a pipeline through the Rockies to tide water in populated are in which people who live there don’t want??? He also promised Greta 2 billion trees being planted by 2030...none have been planted to date. The 2030 Paris targets will never be hit.
Good luck.
Many of ours are bought. And sold. I have little to no confidence in our governor, mayor, council members, etc.
It’s sad and angering, and enough to make a cynic out of this native Angeleno.
What can we feel confident in anymore? Surely there are some civic leaders who are on the level? Please tell me- I'm feeling desperate that way and way too prone to despair.
Don’t look to me for that!
Years ago, I attended the funeral of a close friend’s mother. Lili Tomlin and some other notables there. So was the councilmember of that district. Right after introductions were made, he hit us up for donations.
That takes some real class...someone I sure want as a leader 🙄
Isn’t California a Democratic state? Isn’t the California economy one of the worlds largest (top 10)? And California is failing miserably on the environment? How can this be?
could it be the Democrats just pay lip service to the cause.
in Canada 🇨🇦 our Liberal Prime Minister just pays lip service to the cause. Our PM is spendings 10 + billion on a pipeline through the Rockies to tide water in populated are in which people who live there don’t want??? He also promised Greta 2 billion trees being planted by 2030...none have been planted to date. The 2030 Paris targets will never be hit.
Good luck.
Many of ours are bought. And sold. I have little to no confidence in our governor, mayor, council members, etc.
It’s sad and angering, and enough to make a cynic out of this native Angeleno.
What can we feel confident in anymore? Surely there are some civic leaders who are on the level? Please tell me- I'm feeling desperate that way and way too prone to despair.
Don’t look to me for that!
Years ago, I attended the funeral of a close friend’s mother. Lili Tomlin and some other notables there. So was the councilmember of that district. Right after introductions were made, he hit us up for donations.
That takes some real class...someone I sure want as a leader 🙄
What a bummer to have some politician do that. I would be pissed as well.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
how do you balance the economy with the environment when a large chunk the population is fixed to lose their homes if liberals do what is necessary but don't transition properly? and how can you transition properly with only 4 years to plan and implement? that's why these elections keep going back and forth in both countries. liberals make promises they can't afford (but are necessary changes) and the conservatives hold that over their heads ("they just tax and spend!") and people vote for next time around. and nothing changes except the bank accounts of those that support them.
the population at large is too stupid and/or too greedy to listen to science. if it means they have to give shit up, whether it's money or their oil-guzzling vehicle, the science somehow isn't sound. if it appears that too much money has been spent and not enough results then people switch back to voting con.
if only we collectively looked up to those that are highly educated and intelligent instead of voting for the cult of personality every time.
how do you balance the economy with the environment when a large chunk the population is fixed to lose their homes if liberals do what is necessary but don't transition properly? and how can you transition properly with only 4 years to plan and implement? that's why these elections keep going back and forth in both countries. liberals make promises they can't afford (but are necessary changes) and the conservatives hold that over their heads ("they just tax and spend!") and people vote for next time around. and nothing changes except the bank accounts of those that support them.
the population at large is too stupid and/or too greedy to listen to science. if it means they have to give shit up, whether it's money or their oil-guzzling vehicle, the science somehow isn't sound. if it appears that too much money has been spent and not enough results then people switch back to voting con.
if only we collectively looked up to those that are highly educated and intelligent instead of voting for the cult of personality every time.
Honestly, bud, it feels like a losing battle these day (although I'm too stubborn to give up or give in to defeat). I think the best we can hope for is for people to somehow see that scaling back our lifestyles and consuming less of the earth is best for everyone in the long run. I'm not sure that legislation can do enough because there are too many people who will shout "no!" because their anti-science idiotic so-called "leaders" tell them to say "no". And I think anyone who does understand the fragile state we are putting ours and others species in needs to somehow encourage others to see the sense in what we know is scientifically true. If we can improve education that will help. Every little bit we can do, no matter how small, makes some kind of positive difference.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Comments
There are no kings inside the gates of eden
www.headstonesband.com
Stonks only go up or down when you have a head code.
So as a country we have two choices, understand the political system mandated by the constitution and try to win at that specific
game on Election Day, or change hearts and thoughts in the places that get a disproportionate share of the voting power. Option 2 seems to me to be a long shot, so let’s win at option 1 and then work with Biden at reversing course.
There are no kings inside the gates of eden
July 6, 2020
360 New Fracking Events Approved So Far This Year
SACRAMENTO, Calif.— Gov. Gavin Newsom’s oil and gas regulatory agency has approved 12 new permits for Chevron to conduct hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, in the Lost Hills Oil Field in Kern County.
The authorizations — issued late Thursday afternoon, just before the holiday weekend — will allow Chevron to frack these wells 168 times.
“It’s outrageous that Gov. Newsom is handing out fracking permits during a pandemic that disproportionately harms polluted communities,” said Hollin Kretzmann, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. “The governor needs to stop recklessly approving fracking and new oil and gas drilling. Instead of restarting fracking in areas already suffering from dirty air, Newsom should direct oil companies to start plugging these dangerous wells to create jobs and move us away from polluting fossil fuels.”
I have no doubt what you are saying is correct, but I don't understand the trade off which is short term economic gain for long term environmental collapse. I don't know how that can be justified.
Plus a big reason right now, if Biden moves against fracking he could easily lose PA, which strongly supports it. If Biden loses that state, his path to victory gets even more complicated. Considering trumps base and conservatives who don’t like trump just got energized with the terrible news this evening, democrats need to be careful about issues that will send moderate voters to trump, especially on state issues like fracking in PA.
could it be the Democrats just pay lip service to the cause.
in Canada 🇨🇦 our Liberal Prime Minister just pays lip service to the cause. Our PM is spendings 10 + billion on a pipeline through the Rockies to tide water in populated are in which people who live there don’t want??? He also promised Greta 2 billion trees being planted by 2030...none have been planted to date. The 2030 Paris targets will never be hit.
What can we feel confident in anymore? Surely there are some civic leaders who are on the level? Please tell me- I'm feeling desperate that way and way too prone to despair.
Years ago, I attended the funeral of a close friend’s mother. Lili Tomlin and some other notables there. So was the councilmember of that district. Right after introductions were made, he hit us up for donations.
That takes some real class...someone I sure want as a leader 🙄
What a bummer to have some politician do that. I would be pissed as well.
As far as I'm concerned as long as the US continues to bloat its population then global warming wins.
More people going to California will just make matters worse, much worse.
the population at large is too stupid and/or too greedy to listen to science. if it means they have to give shit up, whether it's money or their oil-guzzling vehicle, the science somehow isn't sound. if it appears that too much money has been spent and not enough results then people switch back to voting con.
if only we collectively looked up to those that are highly educated and intelligent instead of voting for the cult of personality every time.
www.headstonesband.com
Honestly, bud, it feels like a losing battle these day (although I'm too stubborn to give up or give in to defeat). I think the best we can hope for is for people to somehow see that scaling back our lifestyles and consuming less of the earth is best for everyone in the long run. I'm not sure that legislation can do enough because there are too many people who will shout "no!" because their anti-science idiotic so-called "leaders" tell them to say "no". And I think anyone who does understand the fragile state we are putting ours and others species in needs to somehow encourage others to see the sense in what we know is scientifically true. If we can improve education that will help. Every little bit we can do, no matter how small, makes some kind of positive difference.