Category: global warming

  • $200 trillion is needed to stop global warming.

    — Bloomberg New Energy Finance

    Buckle up, fireworks will be going off in a couple weeks in the pristine complex known as Dubai. World leaders, climate scientists, environmentalists, and fossil fuel producers will clash over the outlook for climate change and the impact of global warming, or should it be called global heating? Already, there are signs of tension, as explained in a recent BBC News headline: “Deep Divisions Ahead of Crucial UN Climate Talks” d/d October 31, 2023.

    The 2023 United Nations Climate Change Conference or Conference of the Parties of the UNFCCC, more commonly referred to as COP28, will be the 28th United Nations Climate Change conference, held from November 30th until December 12th at Expo City, Dubai.

    The question arises, will the aftermath of COP28 help to save the planet? But, on the other hand, does the planet really need help, or is it human civilization that’s in trouble? After all, the planet has been thru worse, the Permian-Triassic Extinction 250 mil years ago, and it survived. Homo sapiens wouldn’t have made it as 95% of marine life was wiped-out and almost all vertebrates died. But, then again, that was 250 million years ago.

    It should be noted that 30 years of COPs have yielded very little progress towards reduction or regulation or removal of greenhouse gases. Governments have never taken it seriously enough. Meanwhile, over the same time frame, CO2 has increased by 60% with never a down year except 2020 when greenhouse gases dropped by 4.6% during the worldwide covid lockdown only to snap back to a new record level in 2021.

    Greenhouse gases have been on a relentless track, up and away, throughout the age of industrialization, trapping global heat, increasing global temperatures, distorting jet streams, disrupting the climate system into a mad frenzy. All of which continues to harass the scientific community to come up with answers to a perceived threat of human extinction, the planet’s 6th, but maybe it’ll only be partial extinction or no extinction. Nobody really knows for sure how events like these turn out. But can people survive without life-sourcing ecosystems, like rainforests, wetlands, the Great Barrier Reef, vibrant rivers, and this: according to the UN Convention to Combat Desertification, 75% of Spain’s land is battling climatic conditions that could lead to desertification?

    Leading up to COP28 more than 70 environment ministers and 100 national delegations have been meeting in Abu Dhabi during the hottest year ever recorded on a global basis. Delegates must wonder if a petrostate can deliver a low carbon globe. The question answers itself. The president of the upcoming COP28, Sultan Al Jaber, who has a reputation as a divisive negotiator, is head of Adnoc, the UAE state oil company.

    According to BBC News, Greta “How Dare You” Thunberg is in a state of shock, questioning the entire COP process, which is understandable. In sharp contrast to Greta, Mr. Al Jaber claims the climate change imbroglio can only be resolved with the help of the oil industry with an eye towards limiting temperature rise to 1.5°C. Of course, this has been the publicly stated objective of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Why would the host of COP28 say anything else? But still, it’s interesting that Al Jaber claims the problem can only be solved by help of the oil industry.

    Even more interesting yet, Al Jaber admits that emissions must be cut by 43% by 2030 because that’s what the science says must be done. Nevertheless, Adnoc has plans to increase oil production by 600,000 barrels per day over exactly the same time frame. The oil and gas giant will be spending $150B for expansion of production. Even more confusing yet, Al Jaber claims: “The world economy needs the additional production as emissions fall.” What is missing here?

    According to a recent interview with Kevin Anderson, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, regarding COP28: “The fossil fuel industry has now completely succeeded in corrupting the COP process… what we’ve got is a COP process that has been completely taken over by the fossil fuel companies.”

    Complicating matters even more, the European Union (EU) has staked a position, along with several other countries, claiming that “no compromise is possible on cutting fossil fuel production,” in direct opposition to Al Jaber, especially as Adnoc plans an increase of 600,000 barrels per day.

    Another festering bone of contention is a funding agreement by developed nations for poor undeveloped nations to help pay for the damage incurred by climate change, amounting to some $100 billion per year owed by developed countries, yet big question marks remain about actual payments and seriousness to fulfill commitments. This was supposed to be a big win at the last COP but discussions about how to implement it have already broken down in preliminary talks at Abu Dhabi.

    Already the battle lines have formed.

    Benchmarks for Success at COP28

    According to the World Resources Institute (WRI), COP28 will have a first-ever Global Stocktake report, which will be presented at the proceedings, detailing  progress since the all-important Paris Agreement of 2015. That report, already published in September, according to WRI, “is truly a damaging report card.” It’s supposed to serve as a blueprint for what to do, or not do, for nations moving forward.

    According to WRI: “At COP28, countries must deliver a rapid response plan to the Global Stocktake that transforms every major system on Earth at a pace and depth not seen before, while also improving people’s lives and advancing climate justice.”

    The success of COP28 hinges on whether the summit makes progress in four key areas:

    1. Respond to the first Global Stocktake
    2. Transform Earth’s systems inclusive of energy, food, land use, and cities.
    3. Build resilience to sever impacts of climate change.
    4. Deliver climate finance to most vulnerable nations.

    And of utmost importance, it’s expected that the fundamental role of fossil fuels will take center stage at COP28. Already, several countries have made “phasing out fossil fuels” a central goal for negotiations. This could be a showstopper.

    Moreover, according to data provided by the International Energy Agency (IEA), to reach net-zero by 2050, green energy equivalents must collectively reduce energy-related emissions by 15 gigatons by 2030. And assuming carbon capture and storage (CCS) is part of the mix, it would capture only 1 of 15 gigatons by the end of this decade. Therefore, and this is key: “Clearly, carbon capture and storage technology must not be used as an excuse to expand fossil fuel production or slow the transition to renewable energy sources like wind and solar.” (IEA)

    Carbon capture effectiveness is very suspect with a long history of failure. “CCS is ‘a mature technology that’s failed,’ according to Bruce Robertson, an energy finance analyst who has studied the top projects globally. ‘Companies are spending billions of dollars on these plants and they’re not working to their metrics.” (Bloomberg, October 23, 2023.)

    Expected Fossil Fuel Industry ‘Commitments’ at COP28

    According to the World Resources Institute: “It’s essential that this UN climate summit not become a platform for pledges by the oil and gas industry that fail to tackle the core issue at stake. At COP28, the UAE is expected to announce a commitment from at least 20 major oil and gas companies to reduce methane leakage and reach net-zero emissions by 2050 – but only for their own operations, not for the fuel they sell. By not addressing the so-called “Scope 3” emissions of the fuel produced from their oil and gas extraction and then sold, the oil and gas industry is sidestepping the emissions that account for up to 95% of its contribution to the climate crisis.”

    It is premature to draw conclusions, but one can assume, guess, surmise that COP28 will not deliver what’s really needed to seriously tackle global warming. Assuming “expected fossil fuel commitments,” as stated above and no further concessions by the fossil fuel industry, maybe future COPs should be limited to addressing adaptation measures for rapidly rising sea levels, like how to build really big, strong, secure seawalls and other survival measures.

    In fact, that’s already happening: Up and down US coastlines, cities as diverse as New YorkCharlestonNorfolkHouston and San Francisco are staring down the same dilemma: tall concrete walls could technically protect homes and property from seas rising because of climate change, but the proposals are so potentially hideous that some locals are rejecting them… for example, in oil-rich Texas  the $29bn project proposed for Galveston, Texas.  (“Coastal Residents Fear ‘Hideous’ Seawalls Will Block Waterfront Views”, The Guardian, January 2023.)

    Thus, the reality of climate change/global heat is already making its presence known by destroying waterfront views where well-to-do people live. Just wondering when seawall construction companies will do IPOs on Wall Street?

    As a preamble to COP28, it should be observed that past COPs have emphasized the importance of achieving limits to global warming of 1.5°C pre-industrial. According to MIT, here’s the IPCC position: “To prevent worsening and potentially irreversible effects of climate change, the world’s average temperature should not exceed that of preindustrial times by more than 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit). (“Explained: The 1.5C Climate Benchmark”, MIT News, August 27, 2023.)

    To achieve that, key markers must be met by 2030 and 2050 in terms of reduced emissions and mitigation efforts. According to the IPCC: Global greenhouse gas emissions must peak by 2025 and be reduced by 43% by 2,30 to achieve no more than 1.5°C pre-industrial.

    What are the costs? Please be seated… accordingly, “Bloomberg NEF, Bloomberg’s green-energy research team, estimates in a new report this week it could cost $196 trillion in investments to zero out the world’s carbon emissions by 2050, as many countries have pledged to do, to avoid society-destroying global warming.” (“$200 Trillion Is Needed to Stop Global Warming. That’s a Bargain“, Bloomberg, July 5, 2023.)

    And, over the short-term: “BNEF suggests annual green investments will need to nearly triple to $6.9 trillion by 2030 if we are to have any hope of hitting net zero by 2050. This will include governments, businesses and consumers swapping most of the world’s fleet of gas-powered vehicles for electric ones, building charging stations for those vehicles and replacing fossil fuel-powered energy with wind, solar and other renewables, with new grids to connect them all.” (Ibid.)

    However, in direct opposition to BNEF’s analyses, according to a new UN report, a lot of that $6.9B would be offset and neutralized, assuming it really happens, which is questionable, but regardless, here’s the fossil fuel offsets by 2030: “Plans (of fossil fuel companies) would lead to 460% more coal production, 83% more gas, and 29% more oil in 2030 than it was possible to burn if global temperature rise was to be kept to the internationally agreed 1.5C. The plans would also produce 69% more fossil fuels than is compatible with the riskier 2C target.” (Insanity: Petrostates Planning Huge Expansion of Fossil Fuels, Says UN Report”, The Guardian, November 8, 2023.)

    Meantime, the dangers of excessive global warming are not waiting around for UN COPs to decide what’s best for human living conditions. The world’s climate system is on a fast-track, changing right before our eyes. It was only two years ago that NPR (National Public Radio) stated: “By limiting the planet’s warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, or 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit, by 2100, the hope is to stave off severe climate disruptions that could exacerbate hunger, conflict and drought worldwide” d/d November 8, 2021. Really???

    How quickly things change!

    Alas, it’s no surprise to people “in the know” that global warming is set to blow past all markers, way ahead of schedule, in fact, within a couple decades: Dr. James Hansen’s latest paper (Earth Institute, Columbia University): “How We Know that Global Warming is Accelerating and that the Goal of the Paris Agreement is Dead”, November 10, 2023, goes into detail about the factual evidence and clearly states: “Within less than a decade, we must expect 0.4×0.25×4°C = 0.4°C additional warming. Given global warming of 0.95C in 2010, the warming by 2030 will be about 0.95°C + 2×0.18°C + 0.4°C = 1.71°C. Global warming of 2°C will be reached by the late 2030s.”

    (Thirty-five years ago, Dr. James Hansen, director of NASA’s Institute for Space Studies warned: (“Global Warming Has Begun, Expert Tells Senate”, New York Times, June 24, 1988.)

    Meanwhile, it was only a couple of years ago that mainstream news warned about holding “the global temperature limit to 1.5°C pre-industrial by 2100.” No wonder people are too complacent ab0ut the potential ravages of global warming. It seems like a lifetime away. But, oops, it’s right around the corner. As for proof, the climate system has been acting like a wild bull on steroids. And that’s what’s been on TV news of late, on every continent. It’s worldwide, massive floods, massive droughts, massive fires, massive storms.

    It’ll get worse. Here’s why: “Researchers have found that Earth’s energy imbalance approximately doubled during the 14-year period from 2005 to 2019.” (“Joint NASA, NOAA Study Finds Earth’s Energy Imbalance Has Doubled”, NASA, June 15, 2021.) According to climate scientists: That’s a staggering development, portending more serious trouble down the line. It reveals an albedo crisis. At this rate, forget 1.5°C by 2100; just hope and pray we get there. (check-out a great idea: MEER: Cooling Earth By Reflecting Sunlight).

    “The 1.5-degree limit is deader than a doornail,’ Hansen, now a director at the Earth Institute at Columbia University, said in a call with reporters Thursday. ‘In the next several months, we’re going to go well above 1.5C [Celsius] on a 12-month average. … For the rest of this decade, the average is going to be at least 1.5.” (“Famed Climate Scientist Has a New, Dire Prediction”, The Washington Post, November 2, 2023.)

    COP28 will have to pull off a miracle.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • “The world is failing to get a grip on the climate crisis.” That’s how United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres began his Tuesday remarks about a new U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) report on nationally determined contributions (NDCs), or countries’ plans to meet the goals of the Paris agreement, including its 1.5°C temperature target. The UNFCCC analysis “provides…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • • Read Part 1 here

    How to Fix the Climate Crisis is a multifaceted affair; a National Geographic November 2023 article, “The Race to Save the Planet, Can Technology Help Fix the Climate Crisis?” that this two-part series is based upon focuses on the nexus of trouble, which is excessive levels of greenhouse gases, specifically CO2. Technologies to fix excessive CO2 in the atmosphere, as mentioned in the National Geographic article, are described herein:

    The scope of the CO2 problem is very difficult to comprehend. The planet is big, and any solution involves the entire planet, or it is no solution at all. For example, CO2 disperses evenly throughout the planet. A Marshall Plan solution that bailed out Europe post WWII would simply be way too small. To effectively do the job requires an ultra-massive cooperative effort by nations of the world. In that regard, if the results of 30 years of annual UN climate conferences on climate change, like COP 21 at Paris in 2015, indicate what to expect, then the outlook is bleak. COP agreements over the past 30 years have not been kept by countries of the world, which ignore the biggest risks of all time to life on the planet.

    There is no practical way to remove carbon from the atmosphere with enough umph to meet IPCC guidelines without major governments joining together. This is the biggest drag on combating excessive climate change conditions that are well beyond the forces of nature.

    In pursuit of the best ways to fix the climate crisis Sam Howe Verhovek, author of “Clear the Air”/National Geographic visited the intellectual godfather of carbon removal, Klaus Lackner in Tempe, head of the Center for Negative Carbon Emissions at Arizona State University. Dr. Lackner is experimenting with “mechanical trees,” which he claims are a thousand times more efficient at carbon removal than real trees and better at keeping it stored away. “As an evangelist for direct air capture, Lackner says the key question is not whether the technology works, but what price society will be willing to pay for it.” This has been, and remains, a major impediment. After all, it’s the biggest project in human history that requires all hands-on deck and trillions of investible funds.

    Several nascent carbon removal and capture projects are now active worldwide. One of the largest is Climeworks, a Swiss company that received funding of $650 million from Microsoft, JP Morgan and Stripe. It’s the largest private investment the industry has seen so far. Funders are purchasing “verified offsets” which allows them to claim they’re operating a carbon neutral business. The company builds modular units each the size of a standard shipping container that captures carbon directly out of the air. The containers can be delivered by ship, rail, or truck and interconnected like Lego blocks. The company envisions thousands of units sucking up enough CO2 laced air to remove one megaton (a million metric tons) annually by 2030, 100 megatons/year by 2040, and by 2050 one gigaton (a billion metric tons) annually. For reference purposes, worldwide CO2 emissions in 2022 were 37.5 billion metric tons (GtCo2). According to The World Counts: From 1850 to 2019, 2,400 gigatons of CO2 were emitted by human activity. Around 950 gigatons went into the atmosphere. The rest has been absorbed by oceans and land. It is only too obvious that emissions must be stopped at the source in addition to removal technologies in order to meet IPCC guidelines of halting temperature increases to 2°C above pre-industrial.  Alas, Europe is warming faster than the global average. The mean annual temperature over European land the last decade has been running 2.04°C to 2.10°C warmer than during the pre-industrial period.  (“Global and European Temperatures”, European Environment Agency, June 29, 2023.)

    The EU is showing the world what to expect at 2°C above pre-industrial; i.e., ecosystems dry-out, including major water reservoirs and major river systems, Rhine, Po, Danube, and Loire nearly dried out in the summer of 2022 with major commercial barges stuck in mud, as over 100 communities in France and Italy ran out of ground water, and of special concern, France’s celebrated nuclear power industry (70% of total electricity) was threatened with shutdowns, and actually down-shifted, because of low water resources, as France for the first time in 40 years became a net importer of electricity. (“Climate Change, Water Scarcity Jeopardizing French Nuclear Fleet”, Balkan Green Energy News, March 24, 2023.)

    This alone should be enough for nations to declare a red alert to stop fossil fuel emissions as soon as practicable, at the least, but no such declaration has been posted. Ironically, the world looks for nuclear reactors to help solve global warming.

    Climeworks makes money by selling credits to companies like airlines or oil companies or any company that wants to claim carbon neutrality. At today’s prices to remove carbon, Climeworks revenues in 2050 would surpass Apple’s revenues, but Climeworks expects the price per ton of carbon removal to drop precipitously by 2050, as the market matures.

    It remains to be seen if the carbon capture business can successfully scale up to meaningful size fast enough to inhibit what has become the equivalent of a runaway freight train called rapid global warming. To date, carbon capture devices in the world are sucking up 4% of what’s needed to be accomplished by 2030 to be on track to hopefully hold global temperatures down to something that’s livable. Obviously, at only 4% of what’s needed, there does not appear to be a panic-driven movement to come to grips with the biggest threat to life since the last big asteroid collided 65 million years ago (the Academy Award Best Picture nominee Don’t Look Up, Netflix, 2021, deals with this issue).

    Meanwhile, deep in the outback of Australia, Aspira DAC, a company that’s a unit of Corporate Carbon, which also sells credits for certified carbon removal, is planning on a massive project of thousands of modules in the barren outback. Funded by Facebook, Google, and Stripe, Aspira is currently building test units the size and shape of a two-person tent with solar panels on either side which provides power for a fan that blows air across a polymer honeycomb device that filters CO2 that’s ultimately released into a collection system. Each module is designed to capture two metric tons of CO2. Aspira believes there could be “a million or two” modules over time. But first, when installations start next year, they are hopeful that the technology will work according to plan.

    As mentioned in Part 1 of this two-part series, decades of failed carbon capture projects indicate controlling carbon is far more temperamental than backers let on. Capturing carbon is typically an eight-step process from production of CO2 to burial. At each stage, there’s a potential pitfall. Several major corporations have abandoned carbon capture projects (see Part 1) after spending billions.

    Vesta, a San Francisco-based company, is experimenting with finely ground olivine, a magnesium iron silicate found in Earth’s mantle. In water, it absorbs CO2 in a natural chemical process that yields bicarbonates that in turn sequester carbon. If successful, it could bring carbon removal to two-thirds of the planet, the oceans.

    A New South Wales company named PhycoHealth is working on an elaborate plan to use seaweed to remove carbon. Pound for pound, seaweed is 40 times more efficient than trees at sequestering carbon. According to PhycoHealth, “if we use the natural infrastructure of the ocean and create large seaweed islands, we could see a dramatic decrease in the main driver of climate change.”  The company claims that seaweed has miraculous powers to heal the planet. Still, PhycoHealth, like all companies working on carbon removal, complains about the failure of governments to get involved enough to make a big enough difference. Like all nascent technology companies, government funding will be required to meet the scale of operations.

    Another experimental solution bypasses carbon emissions by creating hydrocarbon fuels from nothing but sunlight and the air surrounding us. This is called the holy grail of carbon capture, a project of Aldo Steinfeld at ETH Zurich, Europe’s MIT. Aldo specializes in sustainable energy systems. Using a dodecagonal-shaped collection of mirrored panels the size of a beach umbrella, sunlight is sharply focused into an intense beam that splits CO2 and water into component parts in two separate streams, carbon monoxide, which is carbon dioxide reduction, and hydrogen in one stream, which forms the basis for “solar synfuel” and oxygen vented in the other. Thus, creating solar-synthesized fuel. According to Steinfeld: “The circular economy of it is the beautiful thing… Carbon doesn’t get added to the atmosphere — it’s getting collected and reused.” However, commercialization of Steinfeld’s solar synfuel demands a huge number of expensive solar panels to create a tiny amount of fuel. Once again, the scale of operations is an impediment that’s challenging to overcome. Even though Steinfeld’s energy utopia is possible via solar synfuel, it’s years, if not decades, away.

    Paradoxically, the good news about global warming is its universal impact, bringing forward the sharpest minds to find solutions. It is not a hidden monster waiting to spring loose on humanity. We know all about it. The biggest obstacle to fixing the climate crisis is politics that’s been bought (lock, stock, and barrel) by the biggest beneficiaries of fossil fuel production.

    According to Al Gore in a recent TED speech: To solve the persistent problem of excessive fossil fuel emissions, he suggests looking at the obstacles, which includes unrelenting opposition by the fossil fuel industry. Even though many people think they are onside and trying to help, he begs to differ:

    Let me tell you … on every piece of legislation at every level of government, they’re in there with their lobbyists and revolving door colleagues doing everything possible to slow down progress. They have used fraud on a massive scale; they’ve used falsehoods on an industrial scale, and they’ve used their legacy political and economic networks… to capture the policy-making process.

    The climate crisis is a fossil fuel crisis. There’s no other way to look at it.

    Yet, as an aside, many climate scientists insist there’s much more at stake than fossil fuels. They claim an equally big issue, maybe more challenging, is too many people living on a finite resource, also known as the human footprint, which is now using 1.75 Earths to exist (Global Footprint Network); the lines crossed into negative territory in 1977. This “experiment” with nature has no historical precedent; none of the prior five extinctions in Earth’s paleoclimatic history happened by intentional abuse, misuse, and destruction of nature’s ecosystems. That’s unique to Homo sapiens. Indeed, it’s doubtful “the experiment” will leave a legacy.

    On the agenda for next week: The COP28 Showdown – An article about what to expect at the most controversial UN climate conference of all time at Expo City, Dubai — The 2023 United Nations Climate Change Conference or Conference of the Parties of the UNFCCC, more commonly referred to as COP28 from November 30th until December 12th, 2023.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • “Massive Permafrost Thaw Documented in Canada, Portends Huge Carbon Release”, Bob Berwyn, February 28, 2017 (Credit: Wikimedia)

    New studies show the Arctic heating up 4-times the overall rate of global warming. This startling rate in one of the most sensitive environments in the world could trigger toxic disasters in up to 20,000 industrial contamination sites.

    Twenty-five percent (25%) of the Northern Hemisphere is covered by permafrost that’s melting the fastest ever. The risks of toxic leaks at industrial sites are immeasurable. Nobody really knows for sure how it ends, but it has started.

    Industrial contaminants accumulated in Arctic permafrost regions have been largely neglected in existing climate impact analyses. Here we identify about 4500 industrial sites where potentially hazardous substances are actively handled or stored in the permafrost-dominated regions of the Arctic. Furthermore, we estimate that between 13,000 and 20,000 contaminated sites are related to these industrial sites.

    — Moritz Langer et al, “Thawing Permafrost Poses Environmental Threat to Thousands of Sites with Legacy Industrial Contamination”, Nature Communications, March 28, 2023.

    This percolating threat is starting to become reality as Arctic climate conditions shift into overdrive, heating up like never before. As stated in the Langer study: “The latest data analyses suggesting up to four-fold faster warming, substantially changing the ground stability.”

    “Substantially changing the ground stability” is the last thing anybody wants to hear. Previously, it was thought that the Arctic was warming roughly 2+times faster than the rest of the planet, but this new data suggests 4-fold, which is roughly twice the rate of past warming. It is a shocker with potential to kick-start release of massive amounts of extremely dangerous toxic materials, including radioactive waste, in permafrost throughout the Far North.

    For decades, industrial and economic development of the Arctic assumed that permafrost would serve as a permanent and stable platform: Past industrial practices also assumed that perennially frozen ground would function as long-term containment for solid and liquid industrial waste due to its properties as a hydrological barrier… A number of experiments were conducted in Alaska, Canada, and Russia in which toxic liquids and solids, including radioactive waste, were deliberately placed in permafrost for containment.

    — Ibid.

    Between 1955 and 1990, the Soviet Union conducted 130 nuclear weapons tests in the atmosphere and near surface ocean of the Novaya Zemlya archipelago off the coast of north-west Russia. The tests used 224 separate explosive devices, releasing around 265 megatons of nuclear energy. More than 100 decommissioned nuclear submarines were scuttled in the nearby Kara and Barents seas. While the Russian government has since launched a strategic clean-up plan, the review notes that the area has tested highly for the radioactive substances’ caesium and plutonium, between undersea sediment, vegetation, and ice sheets…The United States’ Camp Century nuclear-powered under-ice research facility in Greenland also produced considerable nuclear and diesel waste. When it was decommissioned in 1967, waste was left in the accumulating ice, which faces a longer-term threat from changes to the Greenland Ice Sheet.

    — “Rapidly Warming Arctic Could Cause Spread of Nuclear Waste, Undiscovered Viruses and Dangerous Chemicals, New Report Finds”, Aberystwyth University, September 30, 2021.

    In 2021 the Russian newswire Tass claimed the country was at “the finish line,” removing thousands of tons of radioactive material from the Arctic. However:

    Since the 1990s, the Bellona Foundation has been involved in discovering and documenting nuclear hazards and radiation threats in Arctic Russia and based on that experience, the organization asserts that Likhachev’s announcement is untrue — Russia is nowhere near the “finish line” in these efforts.

    — “Rosatom Says Nuclear Cleanup in Arctic Done- Far from the Case, Says Bellona”, Bellona, June 7, 2023.

    The problem may be magnified beyond what’s already known simply because, to date:

    There has been no assessment of the environmental impact of these activities on the Arctic as a whole.

    — Ibid.

    In other words, nobody really knows what’s happened or what’s happening. This is a new under-researched arena of study that has horns protruding like glistening daggers in the night.

    The following research of danger lurking in the Arctic should spook the daylights out of anybody:

    Over 110 of Russia’s decommissioned nuclear submarines still have operating nuclear reactors, which, according to Russian designs, means two reactors per vessel or more than 220 individual reactors. There is nowhere to put the liquid waste or to store the spent fuel, so the reactors have to keep operating with only skeleton crews. While, in the past, one country’s failure to safely dispose of its military hardware might rightly have been viewed as its own problem, the case of nuclear submarines cannot be seen in the same light. The proliferation threats these vessels pose is global, due to the large amounts of highly enriched uranium (HEU) and plutonium—the key ingredients of nuclear weapons—contained in their fresh and spent fuel. This enormous stockpile of fissile material, which is currently not well protected from theft or diversion, presents an attractive target for a potential proliferator, whether a rogue state or sub-state actor.

    — “Dismantling Russia’s Nuclear Subs”, Arms Control Association, May 19, 2021.

    Throughout the Arctic, the issue of what to do for remediation or cleanup is compounded due to the loss of ground stability which limits access to impacted sites and use of heavy equipment. As such, permafrost melt creates a barrier to cleanup. The Langer study found that many former industrial-use facilities are now abandoned and difficult to access.

    In the face of clear warnings, the scope of danger is increasing in real time because of new industrial development. There are no international environmental regulations for the Arctic as formulated for the Antarctic in the Madrid Protocol that requires transparent documentation of contamination and potential sources of hazardous substances. However, governance for the Arctic falls under an umbrella organization called PAME (1991) that established an Arctic Council. PAME does delineate environmental issues and shipping issues with a softball approach that does not appear to have teeth for enforcement.

    At the same time as scientists uncover more and more risks of toxic materials, the situation is made all the worse because of increased economic interest and commercial development in a less forbidding melting Arctic. But that is merely a ruse as it’s more forbidding than ever before; a melting Arctic is filled with unexpected dangers lurking right around the corner. There is risk of multiple contaminated sites leaking at the same time whilst new industrial development runs amok. Alas, this is starting to look like an exercise in madness at a level of human stupidity seldom witnessed in the history of civilized society. Such situations likely never end well.

    “Oceana Warns That Irresponsible Industrialization of the Arctic Could Lead to Catastrophic Consequences Worldwide”, Oceana, “Protecting the World’s Oceans”:

    This sea ice loss has also opened the Arctic to the immediate threat of rapid industrialization. As Arctic sea ice melts, Arctic waters have become susceptible to new threats of increased industrial fishing, shipping, and oil and gas exploration and development. Increasing human activities could significantly accelerate the threats facing the Arctic, which would have cascading effects all over the world.

    The Norilsk Diesel Tank Incident

    The disaster scenario is already playing-out for all to witness: The Norilsk Diesel Tank Incident d/d June 2020: A regional emergency was declared in the city of Norilsk when the supporting posts in the basement of a storage tank of diesel fuel suddenly sank because of cascading permafrost causing 21,000 tonnes of diesel to pour into rivers and lakes in Russia’s Arctic North. President Vladimir Putin declared a state of emergency. Just wondering: How many diesel tanks are located in the Arctic permafrost?

    The scope of the Arctic permafrost problem is beyond belief with (1) pesticides like DDT packed in barrels and buried in the permafrost (2) increasing oil leaks by pipelines that stretch throughout the landscape (3) radioactive materials buried around former and current military bases, and (4) deposit reservoirs containing numerous industrial toxicants. Making matters even worse yet, only recently Canada’s massive fires are bringing into focus a whole new dynamic. Wildfires could be sending up plumes of toxicant-laden smoke that spreads across the land and to adjoining countries, like the USA.

    Throughout the Arctic, airport runways are sinking, roads are cascading, and buildings are tilting, as some of the most toxic materials known to humankind sit in waiting to be released into the environment because of man-made global warming; once again proving the ancient proverb: “You reap what you sow.” According to Darcy Peter, a permafrost researcher at Woods Hole Research Center:

    I’ve heard of dozens of houses falling in, and a few churches. There are multiple graveyards that are falling in, and there’s nothing that anybody can to.

    Eos, June 24, 2020.

    Analysts that research and study Arctic permafrost say: “It’s a ticking time bomb.”

    As the Arctic fall season of 2023 turns into an icy Arctic winter, which is a shadow of its former self, COP28 is scheduled to be held in Dubai where oil sheiks have taken over control of the science-based UN COP/28 meeting aka: Conference of the Parties for the UN Climate Change Conference starting in a few weeks, late November, when nations of the world and at least 100+ prime ministers and presidents show up for photo ops with Bono to allegedly challenge climate change with 80,000 attendees roaming the decorated halls, similar in many respects to extravagant US auto shows, that presupposes “all will be well, just hang in there, we’ll find solutions.” That would be historic!

    Will climate scientists attend?

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Rapid melting of West Antarctic ice shelves that serve as a crucial defense against worsening sea level rise may be “unavoidable,” comprehensive new research finds, even under optimistic scenarios of climate crisis mitigation. The study, published online in Nature Climate Change on Monday, finds that West Antarctic ice shelves are slated for “widespread increases” in melting…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • In another sign of the climate crisis, September of 2023 — following the hottest summer ever recorded over June, July, and August — also seems to be one for the record books. A data set out of Japan found that September 2023 was 0.5°C warmer than the previous warmest September on record and around 1.8°C warmer than temperatures in the preindustrial era, climate scientist Zeke Hausfather wrote on…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • “Climate breakdown has begun. Our climate is imploding faster than we can cope,” UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres. (Source: “2024 Likely to be Hottest Year on Record,” Phys.org, September 6, 2023)

    A report from the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR) released by the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting in Berlin in the spring of 2023 reveals how surprisingly fast the icy continent is changing and its impact on the world. At current levels of global warming, the planet is already committed to approximately 16 inches of global sea level rise, “which turns what was once considered a one in 100-year coastal flood event into an annual one.” (Source: “Report: Antarctic is Changing Dramatically with Global Consequences,” Phys.org, June 13, 2023)

    Annual 100-year coastal flooding events puts one billion people at annual risks of losing homes, coastlines, and port facilities… every year! Maybe build sea walls… everywhere, worldwide? After all, sea level rise is not going to stop on its own. In fact, already, according to the Miami Herald: “Many of the main roads in the Florida Keys could be under water as soon as 2025.” (Source: “Some Keys Roads Will Flood by 2025 Due to Sea Rise, Fixing Them Could Cost $750 Million,” Miami Herald, Oct. 21, 2021)

    Moreover, the 33rd annual State of the Climate Report published in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society/Boulder discusses the vast extremes in Antarctica, which interestingly mirror similar climate extremes throughout the planet. It seems that climate change/global heating is synchronized throughout the world, which is likely a first of wide-spread implications, none positive.

    The West Antarctic Ice Sheet has experienced “enhanced warming” and is starting to lose ice much more rapidly than scientists ever expected at this early juncture. Meanwhile, in the heart of the continent, temperatures blew past all records, 79°F (44°C) higher than average March temperatures; a weather station recorded a balmy 14.7°F in the interior where temperatures on average run -71°F.

    Of even more concern, an Antarctic heat wave occurred during the transition period from summer to winter when the temperature always drops rapidly, but that normalized behavior looks to be gone for now.

    Like the rest of the planet, Antarctica experiences heat waves as well as intense unprecedented precipitation via atmospheric rivers, which in the north regions of the planet turn into massive, destructive flooding. Antarctica had a tripling of normalized snowfall. Thus, a new concern is future atmospheric rivers bringing enhanced heat causing more rapid melt and/or rain that gooses sea levels well beyond current expectations. Atmospheric rivers in Antarctica bring a new threat of indeterminate dimensions to sea level rise. Importantly, “Antarctica is the driest continent on Earth. The rare snowfall events on the cold Antarctic continent usually come from so-called atmospheric rivers (ARs)… they only occur a few days per year.” (Source: “Contribution of Atmospheric Rivers to Antarctic Precipitation,” Geophysical Research Letters, September 7, 2022) Antarctica just had a tripling of normal snowfall as climate change extends abnormalities to the southern-most regions of the planet.

    The Antarctica issue will likely get worse as highlighted by a new report claiming that the pace of CO2 concentration has increased three-fold, due mostly to burning fossil fuels, the primary force behind global warming. (Source: “State of the Climate Report,” US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) The NOAA report noted that CO2 levels are: (1) 50% higher than pre-industrial (2) the highest in the modern atmospheric record (3) the highest in the paleoclimate records over the past 800,000 years. And annual growth in global mean carbon dioxide, when averaged across the last decade, “has tripled since the 1960s.” Averaged annual growth over a decade that triples is flat-out fast.

    The NOAA report emphasizes the fact that the world is running too warm aka: hot. China, for example, endured “the worst heat wave ever recorded anywhere in the world in 2022,” disrupting major sectors of the country. The massive heatwave caused widespread power shortages and disrupted key food and industrial supply chains. Coincidentally, China’s economy is on the ropes in a big way, hmm.

    As for 2023, “Pigs, Rabbits and Fish Are Dying from Searing Temperatures in China,” CNN Business News, June 2, 2023, as wheat fields flood with the heaviest rainfall in a decade. Radical climate change officially erupted in China with many large cities hitting 40°C (104°F) and staying there for some time.

    Chinese leader Xi Jinping is focusing on food security, as quoted in Qiushi, the Communist Party’s main theoretical journal: “Once something’s wrong with agriculture, our bowls will be held in someone else’s hands, and we’ll have to depend on others for food. How can we achieve modernization in that case?” (Ibid.)

    According to the EU’s Copernicus Climate Change Service, the past eight years are the hottest on record with 2023 set to be hotter than any of them, the hottest year in human history, whilst 20% of global land gets hit hard by drought. Excessive heat is hitting everywhere, e.g., the Swiss Alps lost a record 6% of volume in one year. Consider that rate over another decade, or two, and what remains?

    Copernicus’ Update, September 2023: Antarctic sea ice remained at a record low for the time of year with a monthly value 12% below average, which is “by far the largest anomaly for August since satellite observations began in the 1970s.” How many more 12% below averages does it take to throw a wrench into predictions of 16 inches of sea level rise already baked into the cake? And that’s just for starters based upon what’s been happening so far.

    The El Niño Threat – it’s going to get worse.

    The El Niño weather phenomenon, which increases heat in the southern Pacific and spreads across the world has only just begun. Scientists say its worst effects will be felt at the end of 2023, into 2024 and possibly beyond. Unfortunately, with the world climate system now synchronized and determined by global warming’s impact, it’s highly probable that Antarctica will get hit even harder, especially West Antarctica, which has been notoriously labeled “fragile.”

    According to Mark Maslin, a professor of climatology at University College London: “2023 is the year that climate records were not just broken but smashed… extreme weather events are now common and getting worse every year—this is a wakeup call to international leaders.” (Source: “2023 Likely to be Hottest Year on Record,” Phys.org, September 6, 2023).

    “Global warming continues because we have not stopped burning fossil fuels—it is that simple,” Friederike Otto, climate scientist, Imperial College London, (Ibid.)

    Meanwhile, with great anticipation, COP28 is in bright flashing lights: The largest, the most extravagant, the most anticipated, the most attended, the most world leader photo-ops (100+). the most private jets, the most golden embroidered structures, the favorite playground of petrostates, the 2023 United Nations Climate Change Conference or Conference of the Parties of the UNFCCC, more commonly referred to as COP28, will be the 28th United Nations Climate Change conference, held from November 30 until December 12, 2023, at the Expo City, Dubai.

    It’s fair to say that COP28 will be confronted with the most challenging, the most tumultuous climate system in human history.

    What will 80,000 attendees at a fossil fuel-hosted climate conference come up with?

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • The International Energy Agency said Tuesday that the rapid acceleration of clean energy growth worldwide has kept the Paris climate accord’s critical 1.5°C warming target alive for now — but warned the continued burning of fossil fuels poses a dire threat to efforts to stave off the worst of the planetary crisis. In a new report, the IEA noted that the adoption of clean energy technology has…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • International scientists announced Tuesday that an event like the extreme rain that led to deadly flooding in Libya earlier this month “has become up to 50 times more likely and up to 50% more intense compared to a 1.2°C cooler climate,” or the preindustrial world. Those were among the findings of a World Weather Attribution (WWA) analysis of torrential rainfall in several countries across the…

    Source

  • For three decades, the goal of international climate negotiations has been to avoid “dangerous” warming above 1.5℃. With warming to date standing at around 1.2℃, we haven’t quite reached the zone we labelled dangerous and pledged to avoid. But recent scientific assessments suggest we’re on the brink of passing that milestone. Within this decade, global…

    The post We’re poised to pass 1.5℃ of global warming: Here are four ways to manage this appeared first on InnovationAus.com.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.com.

  • Jungfraujoch’s foreboding temperatures this September at the top of the world in Switzerland at 2.25 miles altitude alarmed glaciologists.

    If anybody has lingering doubts about global warming’s strength of power to directly impact Earth’s ecosystems, think again. Antarctica, at the bottom of the world, experienced record high temperatures during its winter, as record high temperatures were also recorded at the top of the world in the Swiss Alps, where it’s always icy cold. As it happened, both the top and the bottom of the world hit record high temperatures, simultaneously, give or take a few days. There’s no known record of this ever happening before.

    It’s proof positive that global warming is powerfully impacting the entire planet, simultaneously, and it’s happening horrifyingly fast! Too fast to justify petty, phony claims amongst some Americans, with a voice, that global warming’s nothing more than “natural events, the climate always changes, not to worry, blah, blah, blah!” Oh, please, grow up!

    But maybe people should be in the streets demonstrating to pull out all the stops to prevent the inevitable, which is self-advertised in full living descriptive color as both ends of the planet go off course in ballistic fashion within several days of each other. The upshot is global warming (heat) has become Top Dog of the Earth System, pushing aside Goldilocks’ not-too-hot-not-too-cold tenure over the past several thousand years of the Holocene Era. The problem: Goldilocks was a sweetheart. But global warming is a mean-spirited bully, without heart.

    Jungfraujoch is the tallest SwissMetNet station in Switzerland at 11,715 feet. Temperatures above 0° Celsius (32°F) for eight straight days in the month of September shocked glaciologists. That had never happened before in its 90-year history of official recordings.

    The Jungfraujoch environment, according to its web page: “Icy air sweeps your face, snow crunches underfoot, and the panorama almost takes your breath away: on one side the view of the Swiss Mittelland towards the Vosges, on the other the Aletsch Glacier, lined with four thousand metre peaks. Standing on the Jungfraujoch 3,454 metres above sea level, you can feel it with your first step: this is a different world.”

    Glaciologists say this new zero-degree record at extreme altitude is an ominous sign. Of serious concern, Switzerland has ~1,500 ice giants that don’t fancy a lot of heat. Those ice giants have faithfully served as the world’s most trustworthy water towers ever since humans first huddled in caves during the Stone Age a couple million years ago. Now, those wondrous glaciers are at risk of meltdown within only one century after a couple million years of steady work.

    Not only did Jungfraujoch register 8-straight days over zero, but at the higher altitude of 5,298 metres Swiss MeteoSwiss reported record temperatures over the zero-degree limit.

    “The zero-degree limit is a key meteorological indicator particularly in mountainous regions, as it ‘affects vegetation, the snow line and the water cycle and so has considerable impact on the habitats of humans, animals, and plants alike.” (Source: “Climate Records tumble as Switzerland Swelters in Heatwave”, Swissinfo.ch, August 22, 2023)

    Swiss glaciers have lost one-third of ice volume in only 20 years. The next twenty could be crucial.  According to Daniel Farinotti, glaciologist at ETH Zurich: “With a zero-degree isotherm far above 5,000 metres, all glaciers in the Alps are exposed to melt — up to their highest altitudes. Such events are rare and detrimental to the glacier’s health… if such conditions persist in the longer-term, glaciers are set to be lost irreversibly.” (Ibid.)

    “Since the pre-industrial era, the temperature in Switzerland has increased by almost 2° Celsius, well above the global average. At this rate, half of the 1,500 Alpine glaciers – including the majestic Aletsch glacier, a UNESCO heritage site — will disappear in the next 30 years. And if nothing is done to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, all glaciers in Switzerland and Europe risk melting almost completely by the end of the century.” (Source: “Why Melting Glaciers Affect Us All”, Swissinfo.ch, October 11, 2022)

    All of which is a good primer on what to expect if the world average hits 1.5°C and then 2°C, both of which look doable based upon the rapidity of greenhouse gas emissions, for example, CO2 and methane both setting new world records in July 2023.

    And it’s also instructive to note, the world is not uniform; e.g., according to Copernicus Climate Change Service: “Extreme Heat, Widespread Drought Typify European Climate in 2022”, April 20, 2023: “The C35 data show that the average temperature for Europe for the latest 5-year period was around 2.2°C above the pre-industrial era (1850-1900). In 2022 all hell broke out through0ut the EU with water deliveries by truck to 100 thirsty communities in France/Italy and major riverway barges sputtering in mud. It was an “end of the world” type of experience that they muddled through. Of special concern, 75% of Spain’s land risks desertification because of global warming’s severe drought.

    Glaciers worldwide are being hit, getting thinner and thinner in the Himalayas and the Andes where hundreds of millions of people depend upon glaciers for hydro power, irrigation, and drinking water. The situation in Europe is horribly problematic as the water flow of major commercial rivers like the Rhône, Rhine, Danube, and Po decrease, especially in summer months because of severe drought that hammered the EU. This has already, at times, seriously impaired commercial barge traffic in Europe, and lo and behold, nuclear power plants are targets of global warming. France’s 56 nuclear reactors were impacted within the past two years. Marine life as well as nuclear reactors depend upon a constant flow of cold water for existence. However, when global warming makes life in an ecosystem nearly impossible, marine life moves, reactors cannot.

    A new report on Himalayan glacier loss shows a melt rate 65% faster from 2010 t0 2020 than in the prior decade, 2000-10. That’s big-time acceleration for enormous chunks of ice. That finding adds to “a growing body of evidence that the consequences of climate change are speeding up, and that some changes will be irreversible.” (Source: “Snow and Ice in the Hindu Kush Himalaya Are Fast Disappearing, with Grave Implications for People and Nature”, International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development, icimod.org, 2023)

    The Hindu Kush Himalaya provides freshwater for 2 billion people. At current melt rates, almost all of the glacial volume will be gone this century.

    Peak Water

    Researchers say the mountain glacier systems will reach a point by 2050 when the glaciers have shrunk so much that the meltwater starts dwindling. It’s called a turning point “peak water.”

    Meanwhile, melting glaciers spur natural disasters of epic proportions, cascading disasters of flooding and huge landslides like sudden shocks to the system, like earthquake events. Furthermore, there is already evidence of loss of biodiversity habitat, especially butterflies have gone extinct in the Hindu Kush Himalaya. Frogs and other amphibians are on the short list to go next. Scientists expect a quarter of plants and animals to be “wiped out” over the coming decades with the Indian segment of the Himalayan mountains hit extremely hard. (Source: Sunita Chaudhary, ecosystems researcher, International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development).

    As previously mentioned, Antarctica has joined the “it’s never happened before” party. The ice continent, as large as the U.S. and Mexico combined, is the coldest continent on Earth with a mean annual interior temperature of -71F. However, in the dead of winter, the Antarctic Peninsula, an 800-mile extension of the Antarctic continent, temperatures hit 32°F (Source: “It’s Even Hot in Antarctica, Where it’s Winter”, Vox, July 13, 2023). Which happened shortly before zero C at Jungfraujoch, as the top of the world and the bottom of the world coincided in extreme once-in-a-lifetime events, which researchers believe may become a trend, thereby losing the once-in-a-lifetime status, with the ramifications best not discussed herein. They’re too extensive and exhausting!

    By now, it has become obvious that Earth’s climate system is askew, out of balance, and rapidly changing the face of the planet. Some knowledgeable people believe the best course of action is to learn to adapt to this rapidly changing environment because it does not appear that fossil fuel emissions are going anywhere but up, up, up, like they have for decades, higher every year, but for various legit reasons, do not count on CO2 capture/sequestration (CCS)  or direct air capture (DAC) to bail us out of a worldwide heat jam, in part, because the scale is way beyond humongous, meaning the problem is as big as the planet is large, and that’s really, really big. Meanwhile, emissions continue to feed into more destructive global warming events, testing the mettle of humans, as fossil fuel emissions (the heart and soul of global warming) increasingly choke a planet that’s already sputtering.

    COP28

    All of which is supposed to be discussed amongst the nations of the world at the upcoming COP28 (UN Climate Change Conference) to be held in Dubai, November 30 – December 12, 2023, but there are serious reservations about the venue and the host and the participants as expressed in a letter sent by Freedom Forward and signed by 200 organizations: “200+ Organizations Call on Governments to Address UAE Human Rights Abuses Ahead of COP28 Climate Negotiations” with the subtitle: Letter to COP28 participating Governments Regarding United Arab Emirates (UAE) Human Rights Violations and Climate Concerns, September 13, 2023.

    The opening paragraph: “We write as a global network of organizations with grave human rights concerns regarding the government of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) host of the 2023 Cop28 to be held by the rulers of a repressive petrostate, and overseen by an oil executive, is reckless, represents a blatant conflict of interest, and threatens the legitimacy of the whole process.”

    Meanwhile, the history of UN meetings to fix the planet is not encouraging: For example, in 2015, 193 countries agreed to UN Sustainable Development Goals, aka: Global Goals. As of August 2023, after 8 years of dalliance, not one of the goals looks set to be achieved. (Nature, 9/12/2023).

    As a result of the failure of sustainable development goals and for that matter, any and all such goals, a new research report indicates that Earth’s life support systems have been so damaged that the planet is “well outside the safe operating space for humanity.” To come back to a safe space, two key actions are required: (1) stop fossil fuel burning (2) end destructive farming. (Source: “Earth Beyond Six of Nine Planetary Boundaries”, Science Advances, September 13, 2023)

    Alas, like the UN Sustainable Development Goals, Paris ’15 climate goals to achieve net zero have mostly bombed.

    COP28/Dubai is weeks away. They expect a record turnout of up to 80,000 participants, claiming: “COP28 is poised to shape the course of international climate action.” Hmm.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • A small section of my followers are excited that someone on Substack has written a “rebuttal” that supposedly “tears apart” my recent article on the climate crisis. Loathe as I am to promote climate scepticism, for those who are interested it can be read here. Its supporters seem to believe it outs me as a deep-state plant, or dupe, or shill, or some other nefarious figure you would be best advised to shun.

    The author’s “rebuttal” gains an air of plausibility, I suppose, because this is a rare instance where my analysis looks, at least to the casual reader, like it overlaps with current orthodoxy. I think there is a climate crisis. The BBC thinks there is a climate crisis. Ergo, I am no better than a state-corporate stenographer, if not actually working for MI5.

    The author of this “rebuttal” does much to muddy the waters on my actual arguments by setting up straw men and by misrepresenting the fact that my central argument is that the current orthodoxy is designed to deceive us and make us do nothing to avert the climate crisis.

    Very belatedly, the BBC, along with politicians and the corporations, concedes that the climate crisis is real and we therefore need to invest in lots of new expensive technologies that are supposedly going to save us. I argue that the climate crisis is real and that the new technologies being so aggressively promoted are mostly not going to help, and that instead the climate-crisis discourse is being weaponised to make Big Oil and other corporations even richer, while nothing effective is actually done.

    Those aren’t the same, or even similar, positions. They are radically different ones.

    In general, I avoid engaging with attacks of this kind – which is sadly what they are, rather than good-faith efforts to engage in dialogue. And I’m not going to get into the weeds of this one, if only because life is short. But because a surprisingly large section of my followers seem suspectible to this kind of climate “scepticism”, I wish to make a few general points about why this – and similar critiques – should not be taken seriously.

    Also, and some readers may find this helpful, my response here requires me to restate the original arguments contained in a very long, digressive piece in far more compact form. That may help bring my key arguments into clearer focus.

    Notably in this “rebuttal”, the author avoids addressing either of the two tracks of history I set out as important evidence to make my case:

    First, the scientific principles behind global warming were understood very well back in at least the 1950s. The scientists who had most intimate knowledge of what the fossil-fuel industry was up to (because they were employed by Big Oil) were soon able to make precise predictions – in secret, of course – about how much carbon would be pumped into the atmosphere and what effect that would have on global temperatures decades before those effects took place.

    Second, the fossil-fuel industry, politicians and the media concealed or downplayed that information for as long as they could. They dramatically switched tack only recently, exactly at the point their own scientists had correctly warned that they would no longer be able to conceal the tangible effects of increased atmospheric carbon on the weather. At that point the corporate-state complex became enthusiastic about paying lip service to climate change, while doing nothing. That was because, by that time, they had refashioned the discourse to make it look like they were part of the solution rather than the problem.

    The author ignores these arguments, presumably because he doesn’t have any good arguments of his own to contradict them.

    Instead he offers boilerplate climate scepticism, of the kind Nigel Lawson specialised in and the BBC endlessly indulged for a couple of decades, when there was still time to act, and before Big Oil had had time to get its misdirection game together.

    Tellingly, the author relies on figures like Dr Judith Curry who are quite open about their ideological opposition to climate activism. Like many others, she correctly understands the political implications of a climate crisis: it means free-market capitalism must be abandoned. Many on the left similarly don’t like a climate crisis because it poses major challenges to current Western ideas of individualism.

    The author of this piece has as his Twitter bio: “There is no ‘greater good’ than personal liberty.” It’s not even as though he is hiding his priorities. You can love personal liberty as much as you like – I’m a pretty big fan myself – but changes to the climate happen, as they have for billions of years, entirely independently of your and my personal ideological preferences. To think otherwise is a form of narcissism.

    There are lots of people, especially on the left and right, including scientists, who don’t like the implications of a climate crisis because it disrupts their political value system. There are lots of people, especially liberals, who embrace the climate crisis – the “alarmists”, as the author calls them – because they don’t properly understand the political implications of the crisis, or because the politicians and media have successfully persuaded them that, correctly, nothing is really going to change.

    My article was pointing out that all of them are engaged in a nonsense debate – because the climate is going to respond to planetary processes, such as carbon cycles, entirely independently of any of their or my belief systems. The author “rebutting” me sidesteps this point, instead trying to drag the debate back into futile, time-wasting political tribalism.

    As I highlight in my piece, it’s not even as though the climate crisis exists as a one-off. We have ecological collapse beginning on every front – something that, by focusing exclusively on the climate crisis and supposed solutions to it, the state-corporate complex can usefully ignore.

    Highlighting the climate crisis is not “alarmism”, as critics insist. The exclusive focus on climate is actually a way to underplay the alarm. It corrals an entirely reasonable sentiment into one, limited arena, one where bogus solutions can be offered to reassure us, providing cover as Big Business further enriches itself. What we truly need is an urgent debate about how the climate crisis fits into a much more general, even more terrifying, planet-wide ecological system collapse provoked by humans. Among the writers trying get to grips with these issues is Paul Kingsnorth.

    The author of the “rebuttal”, like other sceptics, demands that we wait and see how things unfold – as though we haven’t already been waiting for decades and seen exactly how things are unfolding. Things are unfolding as the climate experts warned they would, except the problems are mostly happening faster than expected because science is inherently conservative in the way it arrives at its conclusions. Time is not on our side.

    Even if you imagine there is some room for doubt, you should still be pushing hard for things to be done to minimise climate change and related ecological catastrophes if only on the precautionary principle – because if they aren’t done, and the models are only half right, not only humanity but most complex life forms are going to be royally screwed.

    We are about to set the evolutionary clock back by many tens of millions of years. If you understand Earth as a complex, living entity where humans have emerged as the pinnacle of consciousness after billions of years of evolution – the only place in the universe where we know for sure that has happened – continuing to trash the planet because doing something to stop it might infringe on our “personal liberty” seems short-sighted, to put it mildly.

    A more interesting argument – one I ponder often and would struggle to respond to – is whether what is happening to us is inevitable: that we are operating in accordance with a universal principle, or what used to be called a “divine plan”.

    Many cosmologists believe the universe exploded into existence from an initial singularity, in a Big Bang, that will one day reach the limits of expansion, before contracting back to another singularity.

    We observe that stars burn ever more brightly for billions of years till they consume so much of their fuel that they collapse, either into a cold world or a black hole.

    Must we follow the same concertina effect? Do planets like Earth that host ever more complex, ever more conscious life eventually produce a life form that manages to overcome the physical restraints placed on its growth and ends up destroying the very conditions that made its existence possible?

    This is a philosophical and spiritual question, as much as it is a scientific one. Which makes it no less meaningful or important.

    Everything else looks like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Do it if it makes you feel better, but don’t ask me to join you.

    UPDATE:

    Prof Barbara Hariss-White has kindly alerted me to an interesting new essay in the London Review of Books by Prof Geoff Mann, which deals with questions of uncertainty and politics around climate modelling, as my “rebutter” thinks he is doing. But Mann reaches conclusions that are directly opposed to my critics’ do-nothing approach.

    Mann admits that predictions based on climate models must concede a significant degree of uncertainty. Put most starkly, our own reckless actions warming the planet could all be reversed overnight should a mega-asteroid crash into Earth, throwing up vast quantities of dust that block out sunlight. Then, we would be facing global cooling, not warming.

    There are too many variables to make crystal-ball predictions. But, as Prof Mann also notes, the direction of travel we have set ourselves on is clear to all but the most deluded. In reality, he observes, the fact of uncertainty ought to have us more worried, not more complacent:

    The point of highlighting the vertiginous degree of uncertainty is that we might not be making nearly as big a deal of climate change as we should. We are, as a result, tragically under-prepared for the possibility of really bad outcomes, yet at the same time far too confident in our level of preparation.

    Science is dealing with probabilities, and the broad range of probability is that we are in serious trouble and that time is not on our side. Prof Mann makes a further, important point about our current political responses to the climate crisis:

    A precise calculation of the ‘optimal’ carbon tax is nothing more than a claim that the best way forward is to perch the gargantuan machine of contemporary capitalism as close as possible to the precipice without tipping us all over the edge. That is neither efficient nor optimal. It is a myopic and recklessly arrogant approach to the unknown fate of life on earth.

    What we need is a much more honest assessment of what we do not or cannot know, which is, among other important things, where the edge is. We might, in fact, be past it already, treading thin air like Wile E. Coyote before the fall.

    We need to stress too that conclusions about our direction of travel are not uncertain – and do not depend primarily on evidence.

    Even were there no scientific data yet showing an impending climate crisis, even were there no real-world evidence that “normal” weather is breaking down – and there are both – it would still be clear that our actions are driving us towards a climate catastrophe. Why? Because our societies are committed by every parameter to endless growth – especially in terms of resource extraction and economic growth – that conflicts in its very essence with a bounded, finite eco-system that has taken billions of years to find the delicate balance necessary to support us, a highly conscious life form.

  • Hurricane Lee, which became a monster Category 5 before weakening over the weekend and which may or may not ever make landfall, is being treated as a warning by meteorologists and climate experts who say the storm’s behavior over recent days could have dire future implications. The National Hurricane Center said Saturday that Lee would move well north of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands but that…

    Source

  • Climate scientists across the world have been alarmed over the past three months by fast-spreading wildfires, prolonged and deadly heatwaves, and numerous shattered heat records across the northern hemisphere both in the oceans and on land — and data released Tuesday confirmed that the past three months have been the hottest summer on record, driven by humans’ continued emission of heat-trapping…

    Source

  • The Council for the Human Future, which is a dedicated group of intelligent well-informed people, has identified ten Mega Risks to Earth. As it happens, all ten risks are threatening the planet all at the same time. Consequently, the board of the Council has called for an Earth System Treaty. This may be one of the most unique efforts to organize the world community under a banner of identification of serious mega risks to the planet’s life-support system.

    Humanity created its current dire trajectory. It is now time to change course with a binding global treaty designed to empower individuals, institutions, and policymakers, and through this shared effort, reduce the existential threats to civilization. The Earth Systems Treaty is potentially a major step forward, a step towards a healthy future for all.

    —  Paul R. Ehrlich, Emeritus Professor, Stanford University

    Two issues are key to the way forward: (1) focusing on the Mega Risks to take coordinated constructive measures, or (2) ignore Mega Risks as if they’re harmless science fiction, a fantasy world not to be concerned about; it’ll go away. There are no other options. Now is the time when people must decide which option to take. The Earth System has never been more vulnerable. For the first time, the direct impact of global warming and vulnerability of degraded ecosystems have become nightly TV news, almost every night!

    Studies have shown that climate change puts most people into one of two camps: (1) believing in the science or (2) casting it off as essentially science fiction, ignoring the issue. But beware, grasshopper, reality often follows in the footsteps of science fiction. In that regard, this article will take a step forward, or maybe a step backwards, depending upon perspective, into the world of the Twilight Zone, created by Rod Sterling in the 1960s for an interesting retrospective on science fiction foretelling the future.

    The Twilight Zone (1959-1964) was an American science fiction TV series about people experiencing strange problems, for example: “The Midnight Sun”, Episode 75, November 1961:

    At twenty minutes to midnight, it is 110 °F (43 °C) and sunny as high noon. Norma and Mrs. Bronson try to support each other as they watch life as they know it erode around them. The streets are deserted, water usage is limited to an hour a day, and their electricity is gradually being turned off. Food and water are scarce, and the sea has dried up. A radio presenter announces that the police have been moved out of the city and that citizens must defend themselves against looters, then angrily goes off script before being forcibly taken off the air.

    Science fiction has a way of becoming reality. For example, some say that “Space Station V” of 2001: A Space Odyssey was inspiration for the International Space Station (ISS).

    And 40 years before the introduction of the iPad, Dr. David Bowman and Dr. Frank Poole crew members of Discovery One in 2001: A Space Odyssey held “newspads” in their hands that Samsung would later claim as the original tablet featured in the film 40 years before arrival of the first iPad in 2010. Eventually, Samsung lost its claim in a lawsuit against Apple.

    In the 1990 film Total Recall, Douglas Quaid (played by Arnold Schwarzenegger) jumps into a driverless car to escape pursuit by bad guys. The car is driven by an onboard satellite navigation system, which is at the forefront of driverless vehicles today.

    And most amazing of all, Star Trek’s “beam me up, Scotty” via dematerialism and conversion back to rematerialization is now a reality but not with humans. Quantum entanglement allows for teleporting balls of energy known as photons with two entangled particles far away from each other remaining connected with actions performed by one affecting the other. This happens faster than the speed of light. It’s true! Einstein referred to quantum entanglement as “spooky action at a distance.”

    Today’s Earth System Mega Risks are real even though seemingly science fiction because of the near impossibility of mentally accepting the most-difficult-of-all-consequences; i.e., loss of inhabitable land because of a rapidly changing climate system. Indeed, who can accept the reality of a deadening planet right under their feet; for example, massive drought caused by global warming has put 75% of Spain’s surface area at risk of desertification. As such, the devastation of mega risks requires a universal treaty to confront reality and to do something positive.

    This article is an abbreviated version of the Mega Risks, as identified by the Council. The full list resembles science fiction simply because it does not seem real to people. Nobody wants to believe the worst can happen. But truth is stranger than fiction. The threats posed by mega risks are real and active and advanced; e.g., major commercial waterways throughout the world like the Rhine and Danube and Loir have been threatened because of severe drought, which is far-reaching, for example, the Panama Canal was forced to reduce shipping traffic (August 2023) because or severe drought conditions and experienced huge traffic jams with dozens of ships backed up at both the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.  World drought hits world shipping!

    Of additional ‘remarkable’ interest, one of the items found in the list of Mega Risks is Mass Delusion. After all, it’s a hollow world without regard for reality: “The inability of people to understand the deadly threats that now confront us all is the greatest barrier to global action for a safe human future. Disinformation, lies, and false beliefs pose an existential risk to our survival.” (The Mega Risks by The Council for the Human Future, Prof. John Hewson – Chair, Prof. Bob Douglas, Prof. Robyn Alders, Julian Cribb.)

    In large measure, Mega Risks revolve around the human footprint, which has grown so large that it now consumes 1.75 earths. Yes, humans are using the equivalent resources of more than one planet to survive. The human ecological footprint crossed the line into biocapacity deficit way back in the late 1970s. The planet no longer regenerates fast enough to carry the necessary ecological assets to support human life because of unsustainable excessive demand plus ecosystem abuse, misuse, and degradation. In other words, the planet is running on reserves built up over millennia and will one day be running on fumes… to be followed by the threat of mass extinction. It’s indisputable that Earth’s resources are finite especially as biocapacity regeneration is overwhelmed by human demand in concert with reckless misuse and disregard for ecosystems.

    For example, the oceans are a dumping ground for plastics and chemicals and toxic radioactivity and have been nearly drained of life: According to the Marine Stewardship Council, depletion of fish stocks is the most urgent threat to the world’s oceans. Ninety-three percent (93%) of the world’s major marine fish stocks are classified as fully exploited, overexploited, or significantly depleted. “Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) fishing is a pervasive, far-reaching security threat.” (Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing, United States Coast Guard, 2022.)

    It’s obvious that sustainable fishing plus putting a stop to using the ocean as an open sewer, especially dumping radioactive toxicity (Japan’s Fukushima*), as well as ecological sustainable farming, as well as sustainable use of all natural resources is the only way forward, but it does not have strong enough sponsorship, in fact, quite the opposite! There is no sponsorship that’s powerful enough to make a positive impact that’s meaningful for nature and its ecosystems, not enough to save the planet from proactive mega risks. There are many NGOs that support nature, like the Sierra Club or Greenpeace, nevertheless, widespread collapsing ecosystems still tell a sorrowful tale.

    *Why should anybody anywhere in the world be permitted to discharge large quantities of contaminated toxic water that’s been filtered for ‘most radioactive particles’ directly from a broken-down nuclear power plant into the ocean under any circumstances?

    It’s never been more important to address the issue of global warming, especially in consideration of the repercussions, for example, Electricite de France SA threatened (August 21st) to reduce nuclear output (70% French electricity) as a heat wave affecting a large part of the country warmed rivers used for cooling its reactors. Ergo, connecting the dots: too much heat diminishes nuclear power capability which threatens home and business air conditioning needed to escape the same heat that cripples the nuclear power plants, a vicious circle. Global warming is nuclear power’s nemesis (beware of the nuclear energy trap).

    The Council for the Human Future is aware of the risks and intends to create enough awareness in the world to help maintain a functioning Earth System. The Council does not pretend to have all the answers but does know it is important to create an awareness and a vehicle to expand knowledge of what can be done. As things stand, there is no formal worldwide organization other than The Council for the Human Future exclusively dedicated to itemizing the full panoply of mega risks to the planet with a mission of organizing humanity under one umbrella to do something constructive.

    Yes, at first blush, it seems pretentious that a handful of people can save the planet, but as Margaret Mead famously said: “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.”

    Please sign the petition to Save a Habitable Earth for our Children. It’s never been more important. People are signing up every hour.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • It’s been well over a year now since the health scare dubbed the Covid-19 pandemic has had any widespread impact upon the lives of the vast majority of humanity. Since the “fog of war” has lifted, so to speak, there has been very little introspection regarding the knee-jerk authoritarianism imposed upon humanity in the liberal press or mainstream academia. Eerie parallels connect the panic stirred up during the health crisis with the reaction to 9/11. There is also plenty of circumstantial evidence of prior knowledge and pre-planning for both of these events. In their wake, mass hysteria, government propaganda, tyranny, censorship, and irrational belief systems spawned out of each, supported by ruling class interests and mass media mouthpieces.

    Although many policies related to the global war on terror and the pandemic certainly have fascistic and totalitarian impulses, there are key differences. Whereas the fascist and totalitarian rely on a single despot, and the marginalization of minority groups, postmodern tyranny operates according to the flows of late capitalism: diversity and inclusion are encouraged; power is spread through a corporate oligarchy, as well as political, military, and now medical hierarchies; and devastating economic and social effects are engendered by “absent causes”; i.e., abstract engines of capital: stock fluctuations, algorithms, financial instruments and various Finance/Insurance/Real Estate (FIRE) sector bubbles and scams. The public is predictably bewildered by a revolving cast of bureaucrats and elites with varying amounts of sociopathic and narcissistic traits; however, the personal attributes of the cast members are extraneous to capital accumulation, imperialism, and the liquidation of nature. It is fine to use phrases like fascist or totalitarian in response to government policies for rhetorical effect; however, most Americans do not feel that way or use that terminology, which harkens back to a simpler era of boot stamping. We are rather enmeshed in a dictatorship of capital.

    A related aspect of what we may call postmodern tyranny is the absence of metanarratives. The establishment props up whatever narrative suits their interest in the moment, but is able to cast them off at the first serious grumblings from the public. From about 2001-2011, the global war on terror dominated; from 2011-2016, it was “regime change” in Syria and Libya with a little ISIS and feigned horror at Russia taking Crimea sprinkled in; from 2016-2020, the overblown Russiagate connection; from 2020-2022, Covid-19; and now the Ukraine-Russia war, in which we are told NATO and the US are completely innocent allies who did not start, provoke, and manipulate the geopolitical chessboard going back decades, and who only want to assist the helpless Ukrainians.

    Yet after two years of being subjected to the tyrannical orders of an authoritarian medical panic orchestrated by the ruling classes, transnational political puppets, as well as the establishment medical “experts” who espoused fraudulent and laughable claims over and over, people worldwide are waking up to the health scare as well as the US proxy war in Ukraine. There are many striking similarities between the 9/11 false flag attack and the Covid-19 global health freak-out. Both events led to mass hysteria and a globalized form of ostrich syndrome, where denial and collective hallucination became the norm, paving the way for deeper imperial tyranny and mass obedience. Recently, many who supported government policies and narratives including lockdowns, travel bans, vaccine mandates, and health passports are asking for “Pandemic Amnesty” regarding their panic-inducing and tyrannical behavior; and admitting they were dead wrong, even as they championed ridiculous and deadly policies and demonized anyone who tried to stand in their way.

    Revisiting the “Catalyst”

    The parallels between government reactions to 9/11 and the Sars-CoV-2 pandemic are uncanny. Prior to 9/11, a sizable chunk of US citizens would not have put up with domestic mass surveillance. Similarly, prior to the health crisis of 2020, populations would have been very skeptical of mandatory lockdowns, absurd masking rules, and coercive vaccine mandates and propaganda; as well as blocking off access to travel, public spaces, and businesses with vaccine passports. Most interpret this as government exploiting a crisis, rather than governments’ prior knowledge and pre-planning of the events. However, from the start, the ready-made, manufactured hysteria and propaganda suggests a collusion of military-intelligence, industrial, financial, and medical forces of industry and government.

    The economic indicators had been blinking red for months before even January of 2020, going back to the repo crisis of September 2019. Quoting an investor in CNBC from March 2020:

    The virus was the catalyst but it’s not the cause,’ said Christopher Whalen, founder of Whalen Global Advisors. ‘Both bonds and equities were inflated rather dramatically by our friends at the Fed. You’re seeing the end game for monetary policy here, which is at a certain point you have to stop. Otherwise you get grotesque asset bubbles like we saw, and the engine just runs out of fuel.’ [Emphasis mine]

    Reuters concurs, with a major figure at the Fed blurting the quiet part out loud: “Pandemic aid was also ‘banking bailout‘”. The liberal/left site The Intercept sums up the game quite well, explaining that the CARES Act of March 2020 allows for:

    Direct purchases of corporate debt — the first nongovernment bond-buying in the Fed’s history — would now be allowed. Companies have swelled their borrowing in recent years, and experts have identified this as a source of serious economic risk. A sudden shock like the pandemic that wiped out revenues would not only cause bankruptcies, but also accelerate bond defaults, broadening stress throughout the financial system.

    Further on in the piece, the author notes how the CARES Act calls for an “Exchange Stabilization Fund”. Worth 454 billion, the money is leveraged just like a major bank, allowing for:

    A $4.5 trillion slush fund would be created, equity markets ballooned. The total value of the stock market cratered to 103 percent of GDP, about $21.8 trillion, on March 23. By April 30 it was back to 136.3 percent of GDP, or $28.9 trillion. By that metric, $7.1 trillion in stock market wealth has been created in that period.

    In other words, the US saw the writing on the wall coming from China: the economic slowdown and shuttering of factories which began in January 2020 was finally affecting the US stock market, which had cratered by mid-March 2020. Only the exaggeration of a pandemic, a sloughing off of millions of jobs, and new spigots opening for the banking sector, would allow for corporations to maintain profitability. Debt restructuring was inevitable and the only way to accomplish this was to railroad legislation through Congress, not a difficult task considering our lawmakers are essentially lobbyists for major multinational corporations. Large companies got billions in aid while workers and small businesses fell into ruin.

    Once the medical agenda was set, panic set in, and it turns out overcrowding nursing homes, firing one million medical workers and 40 million total US workers, blaring apocalyptic propaganda non-stop, censoring any talk of vitamin and supplement use, imposing stressful lockdowns, and turning patients away from doctors can have an effect on worldwide mortality. Hardly anyone in the medical community was willing to confront those inconvenient truths, and those that did were censored further.

    It was known very soon after March 2020 what the infection fatality rate would be: a very low percentage, perhaps twice the rate from seasonal influenza. World elites did not care- they had an agenda in hand.  Regardless of the seriousness, capitalist elites wouldn’t have put 40 million Americans out of work and imploded the economy without a plan. And they had one ready-made: a 5 trillion dollar plan. Later on, US elites would not have advocated for coercive vaccine mandates – get the shot or lose your job – unless the word came down from the very highest echelons of the elite, and although many, if not most, of the establishment bought it wholesale, it’s clear that the federal government was not going to leave states to make decisions based off the inputs of local county and state health officials. The word came down from on high; there certainly was obvious collusion to centralize and organize the Covid dogma, yes, a “conspiracy”, because asking the public to “trust the science” only takes you so far when conflicting and contradictory data about the danger of the virus is staring them right in the face.

    Given the unreliability of the initial tests for Sars-CoV-2, the deliberate use of too many PCR cycles per test, and the simple fact that it’s quite probable that multiple benign strains and variants of coronaviruses resulted in positive tests, it’s easy to see how a global pandemic was manufactured at the outset. From the very beginning, government propaganda emanating from the medical, military, and intelligence establishments were obviously coordinated, centralized, and directed to coerce and cow citizens into submission to a globalized, medical cult. Local and national news all parroted the same line, and a global groupthink biosecurity agenda was pushed to the forefront of society. It’s important to remember that before the declared emergency, to “quarantine” involved restricting access to the sick, not the whole of society.

    The language was not only Orwellian, but was written from scripts in the Department of Defense and Intelligence community. We were told to “shelter in place”, and doctors and nurses were on the “frontlines” of the fight. These were certainly designed to conjure images of war and create an impassioned atmosphere where dissent was marginalized, repeating the lockstep ideological conformity that occurred after 9/11. Phrases like social distancing and contact tracing entered the lexicon with barely a grumble. Hilariously, after more than a year of putting up with absurd and ever-changing laws, Britain toyed with the idea of offering its citizens “Freedom Passes” for those compliant enough to test frequently, their reward being the “freedom” to leave their own home.

    Canadian and British reporting confirms the unethical propaganda to coerce, scare, and guilt-trip civilian populations. One UK psychologist dubbed their government program “totalitarian”. Every mainstream news outlet in the US from March 2020 to February 2022 resembled a liberal version of the Sinclair broadcasting scandal from 2018, where the media conglomerate, which has a known right-wing bias, made 193 local news anchors repeat the same minute-long script, word-for-word, warning of “false news” and “fake stories” proliferating on social media and mainstream news, echoing Trump’s rhetoric at the time.

    Natural immunity was scoffed at, gathering in public was outlawed, visitors to households were forbidden, a vaccine was deemed to be the only response to the threat, and even health advocates who gave common-sense reminders to take vitamins and supplements were derided as unserious crackpots.

    A pertinent question to think about is this: given the uptick in supposed deaths from Sars-CoV-2 around March 2020, was a global upheaval of lockdowns, travel restrictions, limited movement outside one’s home, and caps on gatherings justified? With hindsight, many if not the majority of Americans now say no. However, the fact remains that many astute observers were calling the bluff of the World Health Organization, the CDC, and the medical and national security establishments from the beginning. Those voices were censored and silenced by a corporatist oligarchy bent on imposing pain on small business and the average citizen. Millions lost their livelihoods and small businesses never recovered.

    Another related question: how and why was the medical establishment so driven to combat an acute health threat caused by the virus Sars-CoV-2, but lies dormant when global poverty is clearly the number one cause of death in the world, followed by cancer and heart disease? We were led to believe the world could be turned upside down to fight a virus, yet nothing can be done to alleviate the leading causes of death, poverty: structural, chronic health issues are off the table, as they are caused by capitalism’s inexorable drive to profit, pollute, and impoverish the majority of the Earth’s inhabitants.

    Even the WHO admits that ¼ of total deaths today are attributable to “unhealthy environments”; i.e., conditions of extreme poverty, preventable disease, starvation, and malnutrition. In 2012 that was 12.6 million deaths per year, but the total is undoubtedly higher today, probably about 20 million.  The WHO also concedes about 2 million people in China alone die from air pollution every year, with about 6.7 million deaths per year worldwide. Where is the outcry and global mobilization to stop these much deadlier problems?

    Could there have been a more rational path, where people over the age of say, 60 or 65, the most likely to be affected, could have been shielded with voluntary plans to restrict interpersonal contact, as well as given access to the best care and medicine, while the rest of the world would be allowed to carry on without draconian measures? Surely medical professionals in the US could have developed a plan in conjunction with governments which allowed for freedom of movement, as in Sweden and Japan. The path, however, was blocked by the national security state in conjunction with unelected health authorities, Big Tech, Big Pharma, and global capitalists eager to institute repressive measures and rake in trillions from a restructuring of the world economy. The global economy needed a “Great Reset” to centralize and buy-up small businesses for pennies on the dollar, and the financial system was reeling going back to September of 2019. Disturbingly, this sequence of events is reminiscent of the last time the national security state remade the world, after 9/11.

    The Mask Comes Off

    Many leftists pointed out that the work stoppage from the lockdowns would allow us time to reflect on the inhumanity, overproduction, alienation, and exploitation inherent to capitalism. No doubt this was true. What most overlooked, however, was the ridiculousness of having the poor and working classes keep on working while the remote-working, white-collar privileged classes were offered a respite from the grind of work culture. There was, and is, an inherent inequality and power imbalance in having restaurants and drivers deliver packages and food to one’s doorstep while chastising those same people who refused to mask (even outdoors, absurdly).

    The middle and upper class guilty pleasures of living in a consumerist society cocooned at home with streaming TV and take-out overwhelmed the need for solidarity with the poor and working classes, who were in many cases unable and unwilling to shelter or get an experimental injection from a government that has treated the poor and minorities as human guinea pigs or worse for the entirety of its history.

    The felt need for security against an acute contagion, while resisting to grapple with the complexities and culpability of being part of a global-imperial-capitalist death machine, epitomized the Western Left position. Other than the obvious responses: “This is why we need universal health care!” etc., there was barely anyone talking about the number one cause of real pandemics: our proximity to inhumane and unsanitary animal agriculture. The collective, fear-based knee-jerk response was to inhumanely slaughter tens of millions of animals: estimates suggest more than 10 million hens, perhaps 5-10 million pigs, and 17 million mink were killed due to “overproduction”, and in the case of mink, to the possibility of the spread of Sars-CoV-2.

    A Brief Recap of our 21st Century Dystopia

    Twenty three years ago, many people around the world had high hopes as a new millennium dawned. The year 2000 was ushered in, and to untrained eyes, the global outlook looked rosy. The Fukuyaman “end of history” narrative still dominated after nearly a decade of unopposed US dominance in world financial markets and military and political hegemony. There were no major wars among world powers and the global economy provided new avenues of wealth for the middle classes around the world.

    The party didn’t last long. It turned out that globalization, that catch-all term trotted out over and over by both liberal internationalists and conservative realists to defend the seemingly interminable reign of capitalists, had plenty of cracks in the foundation. The notion that Western states were “democratic republics” caring for citizens’ interests began to crumble. The diminishing returns of capitalism as well as brazen corporate and government corruption began to disrupt the confidence of the global middle classes. The consent of the governed could no longer be assured; and as the façade of democratic legitimacy collapsed, Western governments, headed by the US, began to look for a new ideological force to justify neoliberal capitalism.

    World events took a swift turn for the worse starting from the very first months of the new millennium. In March 2000 the dot-com bubble burst, with losses eventually reaching 1.75 trillion in the US alone; this rippled through the world economy. The total loss in market capitalization was estimated to be 5 trillion by the end of the recession in 2002. Over 2.2 million jobs were lost in the US and unemployment continued to climb into mid-2003.

    In November of 2000 the contested Bush-Gore election ran into a stalemate. A judicial coup in the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Bush 5-4, effectively stopping the recount. There was relatively little public push-back, and the lack of any real resistance from the Democratic party machine solidified the coup, and the “Bush-Cheney junta”, as the late Gore Vidal called it, steamrolled into power.

    The true events of September 11th, 2001 may always remain partially shrouded in mystery, yet some tell-tale signs point to the obvious: a conspiracy in which the US government played an active role in orchestrating the sequence of events we call 9/11. Any cursory look at the “conspiracy theories” and the 9/11 truth movements’ findings shows the glaring holes in the official story. Examining and absorbing all the evidence leads to the inevitable conclusion- the events of 9/11 was a false flag, orchestrated by our own government, and the perpetrators are still at large, much like the JFK assassination.

    Most everyone over thirty remembers what came next, even though most are loath to recall. The Bush regime blamed Al Qaeda before the end of the night, news broadcasts showed the towers falling non-stop, and color coded terror alerts became our “new normal” (we’ll get to the next iteration shortly). An axis of evil was rolled out; any country who vaguely opposed US imperialism was put on the naughty list, and a new “crusade” was decreed, with explicit threats “if you’re not with us, you’re against us.” Shortly after, the mysterious anthrax attacks swept the nation, and captivated the US, even as it became crystal clear that the type of anthrax used was a highly weaponized version coming from a US biolab, which could only mean it was deliberately stolen and released by high elements within our own government.

    The state of emergency became normalized immediately. A new surveillance state was constructed, the Patriot Act and AUMF allowed for extra-judicial assassination, torture, and spy programs began to expand globally. Officially war was declared against Iraq and Afghanistan; unofficially, Special Forces and black ops spread to approximately 130 nations. The empire was expanding and on the move- especially in the Middle East, Central Asia, and North Africa, where control over access to fossil fuels alongside the continuing supremacy of the petrodollar is paramount in maintaining global hegemony today.

    The Permanent State of Emergency/Exception

    Power loves catastrophe: the running theme here being that when non-natural disasters occur, Western governments quickly rally and conspire in order to procure quick profits, maintain control, and flex power over weaker nations.

    In our era, authoritarian regimes have argued for the permanent suspension of the rights of their own citizens, as well as human rights and international law. This concept was popularized by Giorgio Agamben in his 2005 book, State of Exception. Agamben uses the example of Nazi jurist Carl Schmitt’s definition of sovereignty: the sovereign is the one who decides on the exception. By abrogating the rights of their own citizens in response to an emergency, both nominally democratic and dictatorial regimes can use the threat of future catastrophes to install permanent police states, declare martial law, and normalize what used to be considered extralegal into the framework of law in the name of national security.

    The imperial core settled on a tried and true model: programming the public to accept that every catastrophe caused by the capitalist global system is an emergency that must be responded to with an increasingly authoritarian society. Police state tactics, lifted from Nazi Germany, became normalized as the economic, political, and ideological forces backing the War on Terror saw little resistance from a mystified and fearful citizenry. This process is known as a state of exception, originally codified in law by the Nazi jurist Carl Schmitt. A succinct definition can be found here:

    [The state of exception] defines a special condition in which the juridical order is actually suspended due to an emergency or a serious crisis threatening the state. In such a situation, the sovereign, i.e. the executive power, prevails over the others and the basic laws and norms can be violated by the state while facing the crisis.

    Nearly every major significant political flash point of the last twenty two years was used as an excuse to broaden and deepen the national security state and corporate rule. This process has effectively disempowered the western masses to such a degree that the majority of Western populations, including many in the middle classes, have effectively neo-feudal, debtor relationships to state and market forces.

    The author Naomi Klein described the new, globalized, neoliberal model quite well in her 2007 book The Shock Doctrine, where disaster capitalism becomes a force for “creative destruction”, leading entire continents into debt spirals with World Bank and IMF loans while at the same time militarizing and financializing Western economies to serve the interests of Wall Street and the Pentagon while destroying small businesses and parasitizing off the working classes.  Soon after, President Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emmanuel, said the quiet part out loud discussing the financial crisis, when he referred to the trillions in public money used to prop up our unregulated banking system. He blurted out:

    You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that [is] it’s an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before.

    How can we define our time? Again, the phrase postmodern tyranny fits better than describing the present moment as totalitarian or fascist. Those two words have become so overused, interchanged, that they’ve lost much meaning and luster for people today. Although many of the various government responses to 9/11 and Covid certainly have elements of totalitarian, fascist, and dictatorial regimes, the terminology is outdated in a sense. It no longer fits the historical moment and hardly anyone really sees Joe Biden or Emmanuel Macron as totalitarian leaders. No single despot is necessary for the system to continue. We are facing is a dictatorship of money, an oligarchy dedicated to ensuring the smooth movement of capital. We live in a pyramid scheme, economically and socially: a system of petty tyrants consisting of your boss, your mayor, your landlord, your HOA president, etc. In fact, added together there are millions of petty tyrants in the US alone; the bourgeoisie and their millions of enforcers: judges, the police and military, politicians, lawyers, all who serve private property, an unjust hierarchy of labor, and, as we’ve seen, most doctors who were eager to impose and rubber-stamp the petty diktats we’ve enshrined into law.

    2019: Global Protests Mushroom

    Besides well-documented evidence such as US funding of coronavirus research, Event 201, and many other suspicious activities, there is one other piece of circumstantial evidence that ties into prior knowledge and pre-planning the pandemic. In 2019, global protests reached a height unsurpassed in modern history, with one commentator dubbing that year “The Age of Mass Protests”. On December 30, 2019, Robin Wright published a column in The New Yorker entitled: “The Story of 2019: Protests in Every Corner of the Globe”. One highlight from the piece claims:

    “‘People in more countries are using people power than any time in recorded history. Nonviolent mass movements are the primary challenges to governments today,’ Erica Chenoweth, a political scientist at Harvard, told me. ‘This represents a pronounced shift in the global landscape of dissent.’”

    The Washington Post dubbed 2019 “The year of the global street protest”. Bloomberg proclaimed that “A Year of Protests Sparked Change Around the Globe“. Massive disruptions to governments occurred in Iraq, Iran, Hong Kong, Sudan, Algeria, Chile, and many other nations. Ordinary people were becoming a nuisance to the smooth movement of capital. Governments were forced to face challenges they’d been ignoring for decades, as rising food, housing, heating, and materials costs skyrocketed globally. All of a sudden, in January 2020, the looming specter of a “global pandemic” put a stop to all of it, instantaneously.

    The positives for governments were obvious. No more protests. No public gatherings. No more pesky citizens demanding lower prices on goods, for more social programs, and protesting unjust taxes and authoritarian rulers. Without any in-person organizing, the momentum of people power from 2019 quickly died out.

    Shifting the Goalposts: From “Two Weeks to Flatten the Curve” to Biosecurity State

    Similar to 9/11, the justification for and continued adherence to official government propaganda rested on total obedience and social conformity: peer pressure at the familial, community, workplace, and public levels all contributed to an atmosphere of hysteria, panic, and paranoia. Shortly after 9/11, the US government shifted priorities from an invasion of Afghanistan and ousting the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, to an invasion of Iraq in 2003 which cost perhaps 1 million Iraqi lives, then to a global war on terror (remember US General Wesley Clark’s admission that the Pentagon’s intention was to invade nation’s dubbed as the “axis of evil” and take out “seven countries in five years”). Torture and mass surveillance was sanctioned and cheered, the Patriot Act and AUMF rammed through Congress.

    As soon as the pandemic was announced in March 2020, the goalposts kept moving, from a period where we were told two weeks of isolation would be enough to flatten the curve of infection to nearly two years of absurd rules for masking, lockdowns, public gatherings, household gatherings, vaccines, and passports. The hokum kept piling up, as increasingly illogical “expert opinions” were rolled out to “protect” us, or so we were told. It soon became clear that the lockdowns themselves were killing plenty of people. Many credible “medical experts” who believed in the seriousness of the pandemic were blunt about the lockdowns: they were a form of democide”, with many estimating that approximately one-third of the excessive deaths were caused by the lockdowns. Routine checkups were avoided, nursing homes were overcrowded, the elderly were being neglected, and unnecessary, and over a million healthcare workers were laid off precisely when they would have been most useful, at least according to the official narrative.

    The irrational masking mandates were completely unscientific, especially the outdoor masking requirements in major cities, and, ludicrously, beaches as well as various outdoor recreation areas. Regardless, it wasn’t until December 2021 that a major mainstream medical figure admitted the obvious: “cloth masks are useless” and little more than facial decorations. The mask was the signifier of the good citizen for two years; anyone who disagreed was tarred and feathered without regard for the actual science. Many analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were done with previous viruses. Not to mention the basic fact that the infection and fatality rates were basically the same for the 39 US states that imposed mask mandates versus the 11 that did not.

    The conflation of case fatality rate (CFR) with infection fatality rate (IFR) in the mainstream media made the disease appear far more deadly than it actually was. The actual chance of young and healthy adults dying from Covid-19 was minuscule.

    Social distancing became de rigueur among the ruling classes, as well as the upper-middle chattering class effete liberals (and sadly, many leftists) even as the chance of moderate to severe illness in health young or even middle-aged people was almost nil. The specter of the postmodern alienated, affluent Western subject, with all their bundles of anxieties and neuroses, began to unspool, implode; a process of involution nurturing the solipsistic narcissism inherent in late capitalism.

    The sociopathic tendencies of our elites, heightened and distilled through centuries of class war in Western culture, spilled out into the open. The upper-middle professional classes, alert to the tendencies of their overlords’ desires to distance themselves from the rabble, were eager to parrot the diktats of their rulers. The upper-class winners condemned themselves to a path of neo-Victorian purity politics. The clean must be segregated from the dirty. The educated believers in “science” are clearly rational; the anti-vax hordes certainly must be acting out of pure self-interest and resentment.  Needless to say, little to no self-examination was made of the panicked overreaction of the well-to-do liberal authoritarians, which frankly fell within a spectrum of agoraphobic and hypochondriac behavior.

    The death rates were complete junk science, overestimated for the sake of juicing up the atmosphere of pandemonium, not to mention the monetary rewards for hospitals and healthcare corporations. As many know by now, “dying with” Covid became conflated with “dying from” the virus, with doctors pressured to include Sars-CoV-2 on death certificates.

    Pushing the experimental vaccine onto healthy children and young adults was completely unnecessary, and harmful. The risks of heart problems outweighed the negligible benefits of the vaccine for the young. This was obvious from the beginning and the medical establishment continued its role as a propaganda arm of Big Pharma rather than objectively viewing the facts. One study showed a laughable, embarrassing efficacy of 12% for 5-11 year olds.

    UN Estimate of Extreme Hunger, Food Insecurity, and Starvation

    Shortly after the lockdowns began in March 2020, the UN World Food Program put out a warning:

    The number of people facing acute food insecurity (IPC/CH 3 or worse) stands to rise to 265 million in 2020, up by 130 million from the 135 million in 2019, as a result of the economic impact of COVID-19, according to a WFP projection. The estimate was announced alongside the release of the Global Report on Food Crises, produced by WFP and 15 other humanitarian and development partners.

    In effect, the government and private architects of lockdowns were fully prepared to sacrifice hundreds of millions of younger, poorer minorities in less-developed countries to shield older, richer, whiter populations in developed nations from the very low potential of sickness, and yes, possible death. While many leftists are quick to point out economic “sacrifice zones” where labor violations are the norm and economic exploitation is rampant, they were mainly silent regarding the potential of mass death, starvation, and the explosion of extreme poverty due to lockdown policies. In fact, many leftists gleefully supported lockdowns and restrictions against the unvaccinated; and were either completely unaware or feigned ignorance of the economic devastation they unleashed.

    The Africa  Paradox

    The obvious data sets to look at regarding the efficacy of the experimental vaccines would be the West, with very high levels of vaccination, versus Africa, which had extremely low percentages. While obviously many countries had incomplete information due to lack of resources, it becomes obvious that the vaccines had zero effect on transmission or reduction in deaths. In fact, the mortality rates in African nations are so low that experts simply shrug them off. A holistic view would put the excess deaths from “Covid-19” squarely on the unhealthy lifestyles, toxic food supply, the unregulated chemical industries, and stressful conditions endemic to Western living.

    Agamben’s Laments

    Right off the bat, Giorgio Agamben questioned the motives behind the lockdowns, rightly pointing out that the fear of death and the elevation of science as the new religion had reduced communities and governments to quantifying basic survival – “bare life” – as more valuable than tangible human freedoms. As he put it in a March 2020 blog post:

    Fear is a bad advisor, but it brings up many things you pretended not to see. The first thing that the wave of panic that has paralyzed the country clearly shows is that our society no longer believes in anything but bare life. It is clear that Italians are willing to sacrifice practically everything, normal living conditions, social relationships, work, even friendships, affections and religious and political convictions at the risk of falling ill. Bare life – and the fear of losing it – is not something that unites men, but blinds and separates them.

    In May 2020, Agamben expands on the notion of medicine as a modern cult- and its many parallels with Christian dogmas.

    It is immediately evident that we are dealing here with a cultic practice and not with a rational scientific requirement. By far the most frequent cause of mortality in our country is cardio-vascular disease and it is known that these could decrease if a healthier lifestyle were practiced and if one adhered to a particular diet. But it had never occurred to any doctor that this form of life and diet, which they recommended to patients, would become the subject of legal legislation, which decreed ex lege [as a matter of law] what one must eat and how one must live, transforming the whole existence into a health obligation. Precisely this has been done and, at least for now, people have accepted as if it were obvious to give up their freedom of movement, work, friendships, love, social relationships, their religious and political convictions.

    Even the mealy-mouthed World Health Organization was forced to admit in October 2020 that lockdowns were extremely detrimental to poor and minority communities globally and should be used as a “very, very last resort”. This did not stop governments and medical advisors from clamoring for more restrictions and shutdowns for seventeen more months, even as Agamben and many others, including many experts who signed the Great Barrington Declaration, were speaking out against political overreach.

    Latour’s Dress Rehearsal: Right for the Wrong Reasons

    In a widely cited article from March 2020, French sociologist Bruno Latour asked an interesting question regarding the lockdowns: “Is This a Dress Rehearsal?” The problem in his formulation, of course, is that he believes governments innocently imposed the lockdown protocols in response to a clear and present danger; as well as his belief that governments will, in the future, impose lockdowns in response to climate change with reductions in carbon emissions in mind. Rather, we should realize that governments, colluding with the mega rich and multinational corporations, imposed lockdowns in order to profit off the collapse and resurgence of the stock markets, discipline the public in order to accept draconian “new normal” policies, and accelerate the process of biometric IDs, all-encompassing surveillance, a drop in living standards, and advance a social credit system based on rewards and punishments.

    The old panem et circenses method of distracting the masses can no longer hold together an increasingly polarized society breaking into “post-truth” enclaves where distrust and paranoia spawn out of late-capitalist alienation and exploitation. A society in which two of the biggest overarching political narratives are as ridiculous as Q-Anon and Russiagate has no business dismissing the obvious conspiracy and collusion involved in promulgating an exaggerated and manufactured pandemic.

    Latour is correct in claiming that this is a sort of dress rehearsal. Sadly, like many a typical liberal, he assumes governments had our best interest at heart, and are reacting to objective facts and medical realities. In the near future, governments will probably enact travel restrictions and lockdowns not only to reduce carbon emissions, but rather to train citizens to accept food rations, lack of fossil fuels due to high prices and supply issues, lower living standards, and lack of goods and provisions. In this process of disciplining and punishing masses, many will be forced to accept whatever government edicts are enacted, at the risk of job loss, social isolation, or worse, just as we witnessed during the pandemic. The next lockdown could be designed and pre-planned precisely to stave off protests, rebellions, and revolutions which will spring up as the rot in capitalism deepens.

    Medical Tyranny? WHO’s asking?

    A recent report shows that a private foundation set up to finance the World Health Organization, called the WHO Foundation, explains that 40% of donations came from anonymous donors. The potential for conflicts of interest is inevitable, as obviously only individuals and groups connected to Big Pharma would want to anonymize where their slush funds go to.

    A global Pandemic Treaty is being formulated by the WHO in order to force nations to accept the next pandemic, if global elites are so foolish as to try and institute another round of medical authoritarianism.

    Much like 9/11, the lead-up to the Covid-19 “event” as well as its early stages remain clouded in secrecy, misinformation, and a web of lies. We were all shown images of dead Chinese citizens lying in the streets, although it’s unclear if this was from the virus, or even from the city of Wuhan or Hubei province in some cases. We were told the virus originated in a wet market in the city center, although now we know that link has never been proven, and was most likely thrown out as a hypothesis to satisfy public opinion, but more likely was a cynical intelligence ploy, a classic case of misdirection, especially since we know now that a secretive US medical intelligence unit admitted to tracking Covid in November 2019, and possibly much earlier.

    When a global pandemic was declared by the World Health Organization on March 11, 2020, there were around 118,000 global cases and under 5,000 declared deaths. Relatively speaking those numbers were quite low and there was no reason to declare Sars-CoV-2 a public health emergency based on the figures. The estimated death rates were pulled completely out of thin air by a complete fraud, Neil Ferguson of the Imperial College of London, who broke lockdown rules which he helped to implement.

    PCR tests were declared the gold standard even though Kary Mullis, one of its inventors, declared publicly that the tests were not made to prove the existence of active infections. Further, the cycling for the tests was deliberately set too high, which resulted in untold amounts of false positive cases. Death rates miraculously shot up for “Covid-19” because doctors and coroners were pressured to list the disease as a cause of death even without a positive test; any “suspected case” could be listed. Flu, pneumonia, and every other respiratory disease magically disappeared and Covid filled in the gap, boosting the figures.

    Not to mention, the effect of declaring a global pandemic necessarily induced a stress response from the global population, which, along with the late-winter (March-April) time frame in the northern hemisphere, definitely contributed to the excess deaths. In fact, many established medical organizations freely admit that the lockdowns were responsible for a significant percentage (many say up to one third) of excess deaths, yet somehow have managed to absolve themselves of responsibility for clamoring for the lockdowns like trained seals. Along with the loss of jobs, home confinement, and lack of community, it should be noted that just as yelling fire in a crowded movie theater is almost certain to cause some sort of violent event, screaming “pandemic” through a 24/7 news cycle will do the same.

    Much like the daily reporting in the aftermath of 9/11, with nightly news explaining the nation’s risk of terror attacks as red, orange, or yellow, the daily cases, hospitalizations, and deaths; we all remember the 24/7 circus designed to frighten the population and maintain obedience. In this deliberately instilled, panic-stricken environment, the ruling class fundamentally altered the landscape: following a short downturn in the stock market, the digital economy and tech firms quickly rebounded and boomed- the tech sector, Big Pharma, web services companies, and basically all major corporations tangentially related to providing services on the internet struck gold.

    Within weeks, the need for a vaccine was trotted out. Many seasonal viruses come and go within months, yet somehow the medical establishment was able to figure out that only a vaccine would be able to stop this disease. The pharmaceutical companies were simply trying to profit off a new media-hyped and establishment-protected exaggerated pandemic. The fact that so many corners were cut, with no long-term studies, all to market unproven mRNA technology did not seem to faze at least half of the public, who openly clamored for lockdowns, vaccines, passports, and authoritarian measures which would be unthinkable a few years prior.

    Ridiculous masking mandates came into effect- masking outdoors was mandatory in many cities globally. No scientific basis was ever presented. Vaccine passports were likewise implemented even though natural immunity was found to be 27 times greater in some instances. Were health authorities simply trying to be overly cautious, or were there more sinister agendas at play? Were institutional medical practices imposed simply to make profits for pharmaceutical corporations?

    The simple fact that an unproven, dangerous vaccine was pushed and mandated at various levels- and that it was swallowed so comfortably by so many- simply shows how effective modern propaganda can be. No guns were needed- but you could lose your job, standing in the community, your friends, family, and social relations. A vast social experiment was conducted and anyone who dared to question “the science”, instead of blindly placing trust in a capitalist health system where profits have always taken precedence over people’s interests, was demonized.

    The frenzy around Covid-19 may indeed have had a bit of luck, at least here in the US. It was, of course, President Trump that downplayed the virus at the start. Therefore, anyone else aligning with his views on Covid was seen as a repugnant narcissist, an uncaring dullard willing to put corporate profits over human life. Imagine an alternate universe where Trump or a right-wing, authoritarian, US presidential figure like him took the virus extremely seriously, with Chinese-style lockdowns. Would people still have clamored for mandatory shots, and for friends, family, and co-workers to be excommunicated from society? Probably not, but we’ll never know.

    Vaccine passports threatened to segregate society based on a frankly fascist vision of the clean versus unclean. Anti-vaccine activists and regular people who refused to take an experimental injection were wrongly vilified. As many pointed out, the lack of reduction of transmission in the vaccinated made the whole prospect of compulsory vaccination pointless, unscientific, counterproductive, and just plain wrong.

    In November 2021, the conflict came to a head as Biden, speaking to the unvaccinated, remarked: “We’ve been patient. But our patience is wearing thin. And your refusal has cost all of us.” He proposed a plan for weekly testing or vaccination of all workers in every US company with over 100 employees, as well as a mandate for around 17 million health care workers.

    The Postmodern Subject: Manufacturing the Hyperreal

    The parallels between 9/11 and Covid-19 go far beyond their initial propaganda campaigns. Ultimately, part of the reason contemporary propaganda is so effective lies in the psychological structure of postmodern consciousness. Safety, stability, and security are seen as the final end products of mass civilization. Even one of the great charlatans of the 1990s, Francis Fukuyama, was astute enough to note the parallels between the postmodern subject and Nietzsche’s notion of the “last man”.

    Today, the veneer of idealistic concepts such as freedom, democracy, and equality which were supposed to undergird and inspire the collective to greater heights is wearing off in the face of massive global inequality, environmental disasters, climate catastrophe, and vicious media propaganda campaigns. As material living standards stagnate and crumble even in the developed world, increasing numbers of people are forced to compete for the same resources, perpetuating a scarcity-based mindset in the populace. Nearly all socioeconomic questions are framed as zero-sum, binary, black-and-white contests between good and evil where little nuance or questions of morality are allowed into the public arena.

    In this fragile social environment, it’s not surprising that citizens flock to ready-made narratives and propaganda campaigns. Ruling class propaganda is swallowed uncritically, precisely because it obfuscates, masks, and numbs the pain of living in late-stage capitalist collapse. One of the reasons Western liberals and even most of the “Left” fell for the farce that was the over-hyped, medical global Psy-op we call the Covid-19 pandemic is because the postmodern subject has now delved so far into the hyperreal; where symbols, social relations, and even science become cheap imitations of themselves. This is precisely why so many people, at the beginning of the lockdowns in March 2020, remarked that they “felt like they were living in a movie.” Media-induced pseudo-events can no longer be distinguished from severe medical emergencies today, just as twenty two years ago the mass panic after 9/11 produced the same fog of war and irrational hatred of the other.

    Imbued with meaning and purpose, the mask-wearing, jab-taking, “papers-please”, vaccine passport-bearing citizen could now feel a common cause with others in the community; artificially induced feelings of well-being conjured up through media organs and distilled into catchy slogans like “trust the science”. The sign-value of “doing the right thing” became a potent force; and this was weaponized by the establishment to suit various agendas.

    Many of these agendas were, in fact, actual conspiracies to: establish a permanent biosecurity state; set up a soft version of martial law where people’s movements are restricted and tracked; manufacture a false narrative of safe vaccines to bankroll a new industry for mRNA technologies, create a pathway to health passports, digital IDs, central bank digital currencies, and social credit systems; destroy the working class and middle class small businesses, and psychically prepare the global populace for a fall in living standards, a fall in access to goods, services, and resources, as well as rationing; provide an excuse to ban protests; continue the broad militarization of society, as well as the implementation of a global regime of ideological compliance and obedience.

    Big Pharma, Wall Street, Silicon Valley, and the military and intelligence communities were colluding to fleece the poor and working classes- the fact that one can’t find a smoking gun for each of these interlocking and moving parts of the economy and government doesn’t refute this basic fact. All the while, corporate America continued enriching the one percent who gained trillions during the pandemic. Medical-authoritarian edicts were issued without any actual science behind them. Surveillance and population control have always been at the forefront of elite agendas for managing 21st century life. Global flows of people, information, goods, and revolutionary thought can no longer be stage-managed by tyrannical capitalist elites as conditions deteriorate around the planet. A show must be put on every ten to twenty years.

    The many faces and branding strategies of the global elite come into full view: the “new normal”, “own nothing and be happy”, “mask up”, “follow the science”, and the “lockstep” scenario for implementing planetary tyranny are seen by the ruling class as necessary steps to secure profits and control in increasingly unstable economic and political landscapes. Their techno-feudal dreams are our nightmares as the drudgery of capitalist labor and the vagaries of imperial war continue on. Our masters offer little respite for the masses of humanity, as they’ve imposed a totalizing spectacle. Cult-like behavior dominated after 9/11; overblown fears of terrorism and anti-Muslim racism permeated the country, just as a year or two ago, overblown fears of the virus and authoritarian-based dislike and instant dismissal of anyone skeptical of Big Pharma and the government continued to dominate.

    Even as the narrative has shifted, and the farce that was the reaction to a relatively mild virus receded, the potential for propaganda and fear campaigns against the global collective remains. It is precisely the qualities of postmodernity, such as the end of meta-narratives, de-realization of the subject, hyperreality, the nature of the spectacle, and pseudo-events, guided by ruling class interests, and imposed on us by capitalism, which allow for the recurrence of these paradigm-shifting forces to dominate social life. The parallels of two of the biggest geopolitical events of the 21st century, 9/11 and the Covid-19 health scare, reveal the foundations of global regimes of cruelty, domination, and oppression. And there certainly isn’t much “new” or “normal” about any of it.

  • Pablum.

    “Jill and I send our deepest condolences to the families…” buh buh bup bup buhhh.

    “…our prayers are with those who have seen their homes…” yada yada yada.

    “…grateful to the brave firefighters and first responders…” wretch, gag, hurl.

    Weak. fucking. tea.

    And it took this papier-mâché president of ours a day AFTER the Hawaiian Congressional delegation BEGGED him to send help to get around to declaring the Maui fires a disaster and start directing federal resources to assist with evacuation and fire suppression efforts.

    It’s tempting to say that President Biden missed an opportunity to climb on board the side of ecological right and deliver the decisive, compelling statement on climate change the nation is ready to hear. But he didn’t just miss an opportunity; he seemed to studiously avoid making the connection that’s glaringly obvious to any observer with a sixth grader’s grasp of American history.

    People who’d been through the flash inferno that was Lahaina, Hawaii said it looked like a bomb had gone off.

    Like they’d been under attack.

    Like a war zone.

    And it all happened almost without warning.

    The exact date and circumstances could not, of course, be predicted, but there has been ample warning. Hawaii Governor Josh Green rightly tied the disaster to global warming, saying, “Climate change is here…”

    But President Biden is the only one who could have said the words that would prepare the People for the mass mobilization needed to pull the planet back from the brink of complete environmental collapse. And the window of time to say those words was very, very slim.

    “Yesterday, August 8th, 2023 — a date which will live in infamy — the United States of America was suddenly attacked…”

    America and the world would have cheered to hear him say that.

    It took President Franklin Delano Roosevelt less than 24 hours after Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor to grasp the need for oratory so potent that few people are ever in a position to command it, and then step up to the microphone with exactly the right message. In six minutes and thirty seconds, FDR didn’t just commit “all available Federal assets” to help local efforts responding to the attack. He persuaded an entire nation of the need to dedicate every energy in every sector of American life to crushing an existential threat to life and liberty.

    The formerly slow-motion threat of the climate crisis is now at least an order of magnitude more dire than the combined might of the Axis powers. The People of the Unites States, despite the doubts of a raft of media simps, aren’t just prepared for the radical lifestyle change required to save 75 percent of life on Earth; we have been waiting for someone to fire the starting gun on the race to avert the worst outcomes of temperature rise and give us our marching orders already, ffs.

    I have no doubt that the trogs who’ve been clinging to climate denialism would be silenced under the crush of public shaming the same way opposition to entry into WWII fairly evaporated on December 8, 1941. When the Commander in Chief identifies the enemy and announces that every red-blooded American has a duty to get in line and pitch in, grumblers will find themselves quickly cancelled by the vast majority of the public that finally feels like they have something to do to help stave off climate catastrophe. But we have to actually have a program to follow.

    Remember (or remember hearing about) Victory Gardens? Even my grandmother, who had a postage stamp of a yard managed to transform a little patch of clay and gravel into a defiant vegetable plot to help out with the war effort. They were more or less a rhetorical tool back in the Great War, but now, encouraging people to plant Climate Gardens would have a very real effect in keeping more carbon out of the atmosphere. As if in response to some secret command, cities and towns across the country have been rushing to set up bicycle lanes, in many cases causing confusion and ire. Seems like the perfect time to dust off the old “When you ride alone, you ride with Hitler” posters and modify them to attach excessive personal motoring to a low-grade treasonous aid to the enemies that are greenhouse gases.

    Unfortunately, for any of this mobilization to work, the person sitting in the big chair in the Oval Office has to have NOT lost all credibility when it comes to the climate crisis. President Biden himself called climate change an “existential threat,” and, admittedly, rolled back the anti-environmental executive orders issued by his predecessor. Ultimately, though, his track record on climate can be described as inconsistent at best.

    Joe Biden approved a massive oil-and-gas drilling project in Alaska that critics have described as a “carbon bomb.”

    He threw environmental activists under the bus in green-lighting the Mountain Valley Pipeline in order to secure Sen. Joe Manchin’s vote on the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, after Manchin sided with Republicans to kill the Build Back Better Act, which would have been…well, better for the environment.

    Biden’s Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, Jared Bernstein, has boasted that the administration had permitted more oil and gas wells in its first two years than former President Donald Trump in his first two.

    The Biden administration orchestrated the largest-ever auction of large swaths of federal waters in the Gulf of Mexico for oil drilling.

    The President failed to heed the advice of his own EPA when it proposed aggressive limits on pollution from cars and light trucks, requiring higher fuel efficiency standards for vehicles starting in 2023. He refused to sign on to a multi-country agreement requiring higher fuel efficiency standards for buses and large trucks — some of the worst-polluting vehicles on the road. Fifteen countries signed a pledge to make all new commercial trucks electric by 2040 after the COP26 summit in Glasgow. The U.S. abstained.

    Though the Biden administration can take credit for putting the kibosh on TC Energy’s Keystone XL pipeline, the president failed to take action against Canadian energy behemoth Enbridge’s Line 3 pipeline, traversing some of the most pristine, environmentally delicate areas of Minnesota, 200 river crossings, eight state forests, and the Mississippi River’s headwaters. By all informed accounts, Line 3 will have every bit as dangerous impact on greenhouse gas levels as Keystone XL would have been.

    No one who has taken these positions can be said to be serious about stabilizing the climate.

    So it would seem even to casual White House observers that this is a presidential administration handily captured by the fossil fuel industry in one way or another. Certainly Biden’s close associates in the financial industry, heavily invested in many of the most egregiously destructive projects, must be thrilled that the former “Senator from MBNA,” all grown up now, continues to deliver the political bacon beneficial to the bankers and Wall Street.

    While I don’t believe that some momentum can’t be harnessed from the Maui fires to generate action in the fight to keep the world below 2.5º Celsius above Pre-Industrial Averages, we all need to be acutely aware that Biden failed this week to rise to the level of climate seriousness that’s absolutely necessary to actually inspire, motivate, reassure, and ultimately lead the United States and world in the radically different direction we need to go if we are to avert a civilization-ending downward spiral. This species needs to stop screwing around and fighting disastrous wars (over fossil fuels, mainly), and decide once and for all to commit to meaningful solutions, painful though the required adjustments and sacrifices may be at first.

    And these solutions are somehow going to have to come from the People, apparent as it is that the one leader whose job it is to issue an historic, ringing rallying cry, to spearhead the drastic changes needed to protect the future of his own people, can do no more than mumble trite sound bites in politicalese.

    • This essay was initially published at The Greylock Glass

  • Al Gore, former US VP, recently held a TED talk in anticipation of COP28, the upcoming Conference of the Parties, aka: UNFCCC or 2023 United Nations Climate Conference, November 30th – December 12th, 2023, to be held at Expo City, Dubai. It increasingly looks to be a freakish show of multi-dimensional illusions and fakery that the world of climate science is falling for. After all, a crowd of 80,000 is expected to gather to resolve the climate crisis hosted by an active climate crisis participant named Abu Dhabi National Oil Company.

    It should be noted that COPs have been annual events since 1995 when CO2 emissions were 21 Gt, which is 21 billion metric tons (for perspective purposes, according to NASA, one gigaton equals 10,000 fully loaded US aircraft carriers). The scorecard since then is not at all impressive. Global CO2 emissions have gone up every year without fail following every COP for nearly three decades, currently at 36 Gt. That’s up 70% since COPs started.  This is getting to be tiresome. In other words, COPs somehow mysteriously serve to accelerate carbon emissions. Maybe stop COP. After all, these are very expensive affaires that increasingly serve as photo ops for prime ministers and presidents, kinda like the Red Carpet for the Oscars.

    Al Gore’s TED speech d/d August 2023: What the Fossil Fuel Industry Doesn’t Want You to Know. FYI- Al gets very heated when discussing the oil industry.  FYI2- Al delivers an upbeat ending to his TED speech by explaining how society can get out of the global heat jam, and he highlights good things that are already happening. Good news is found in the final minutes of his 25:44 talk and in his opening remarks.

    Before commencing on a tirade about the insanity of holding climate change talks in one of the world’s oil kingdoms with prospects that oil sheiks are going to pull the wool over everybody’s eyes, a synopsis of Al Gore’s encouraging words:

    At one point when discussing mitigation efforts, he says: “So, will we succeed?”

    Al’s answer: “Amazingly good news… What if we could stop the increase in temperatures?”

    Response to his own query: “Yes, we can.”

    Accordingly: “If we get to true net zero, astonishingly, global temperatures will stop going up with a lag time of as little as three to five years. They used to think that positive feedback loops would keep that process going. No, it will not! The temperatures will stop going up. The ice will continue melting and some other things will continue, but we can stop the increase of temperatures. Even better, if we stay at true net zero in as little as 30 years, half of all the human caused CO2 will come out of the atmosphere into the upper ocean and the trees and vegetation.” (Footnote: Success depends upon several “ifs”.)

    Therefore, according to former VP Gore: People should “not be vulnerable to despair” because humans have “a will to act.” Moreover, “the will to act is itself a renewable resource.” Accordingly, as further stated: We have everything we need and proven deployment models to reduce emissions 50% by 2030. It will require (1) more solar and wind (2) more regenerative agriculture (3) more EVs (4) more charging stations (5) more energy storage (6) more green hydrogen (7) and more electrolyzers to produce it.

    Renewables already account for 90% of all new electricity generation installed each year, worldwide. In fact, renewable energy ascends nearly vertical on a graph. For example, just seven years ago, there was one Gigafactory. There are now 195 Gigafactories and another 300 in the pipeline. Gigafactories produce batteries for electric vehicles. Indeed, it is true, renewables are a growth industry. Just ask Wall Street, which handsomely profits.

    But, according to the International Energy Agency, in the face of all that good news, the rapid growth rate mentioned by Al Gore is lagging the timeline needed to hit net zero emissions by 2050: “To achieve this, annual renewable energy use must increase at an average rate of about 13% during 2023-2030, twice as much as the average over the past 5 years.” 1

    Not only is the current scale of renewables off center, too slow, but COP28 is likely to deceive the public about the intentions of the oil industry, which puts a very big question mark on all assumptions of net zero achievement. However, before VP Gore castigates oil magnates, he heaps praise on America’s (Biden’s) Inflation Reduction Act, which he calculates will directly and indirectly be worth up to $1.2 trillion in renewable benefits, and both Australia and Brazil have turned very pro-renewable with more aggressive installations directed at net zero emissions. As noted by Gore, there is plenty of good news; e.g., China reaching its goals ahead of schedule, but here’s the catch: “In spite of this progress, the emissions are still going up and the crisis is still getting worse faster than we are deploying the solutions.” (This is the most direct, honest assessment by VP Gore in his TED speech).

    For over 50 years fossil fuels have consistently been >80% of world energy supply. “Global energy demand rose 1% last year and record renewables growth did nothing to shift the dominance of fossil fuels, which still accounted for 82% of supply, according to the industry’s Statistical Review of World Energy.” 2

    To solve the persistent problem of excessive fossil fuel emissions, Gore suggests looking at the obstacles, which includes unrelenting opposition by the fossil fuel industry. Even though many people think they are onside and trying to help, he begs to differ: “Let me tell you … on every piece of legislation at every level of government, they’re in there with their lobbyists and revolving door colleagues doing everything possible to slow down progress. They have used fraud on a massive scale; they’ve used falsehoods on an industrial scale, and they’ve used their legacy political and economic networks… to capture the policy-making process.” (Al Gore)

    Gore also mentions a direct hard-hitting statement by UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres: “The fossil fuel industry is the polluted heart of the climate crisis.”

    As stated by Gore, for decades the fossil fuel companies have had the damning evidence of poisonous fossil fuels yet decided to lie to the public to make more money. “It’s as simple as that.” And now they have seized control of the COP process, especially this year’s COP in Dubai. Concern has been building about this for quite some time. Last year in Egypt, the fossil fuel interests had more delegates at COP than the combined delegations of the 10 most affected climate-impacted countries. Which can only be categorized as an upside-down climate conference.

    Making matters even more exasperating, this year’s host (Dubai) has appointed the president of COP28 despite blatant conflict of interest. It’s the CEO of Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (DNOC) Dr. Sultan Al Jaber. For reference purposes, DNOC’s emissions are larger than ExxonMobil. How is it possible for climate scientists to attend an event to halt CO2 that’s hosted by the CEO of one of the world’s largest emitters of CO2?

    According to former VP Gore: Dhabi National Oil Company “has no credible plan whatsoever to reduce emissions.” In fact, they plan to increase their emissions via increased fossil fuel production by as much as 50% by 2030. This matches the time frame when the world is attempting to reduce emissions by 50% by 2030. It’s a massive clash of interests, as climate scientists from around the world attend COP28 in the backyard of massive CO2 emissions and plans to increase production by 50%.

    Paradoxically, Dr. Jaber oversees both. Yes, he’s in charge of reducing emissions as well as increasing emissions. Al Gore’s response to that peculiar setup: “Wait a minute, do you take us as a bunch of fools?” In fact, the fossil fuel industry has captured the COP process and is intentionally slowing it down, period! Gore: “We need to do something about it.”

    Last year at COP, the petrostates vetoed any references to a “fossil-fuel phase-down” in COP resolutions. Since that’s reality, then why hold COP in the first instance? Climate scientists shouldn’t be used as pawns to promote oil industry trickery.

    Al Gore: “The climate crisis is a fossil fuel crisis.” There’s no other way to look at it.

    The newest scam by the fossil fuel industry is a storyline that fossil fuels are not the problem; it’s the emissions that are the problem. Umm- Duh! They recommend capturing the emissions and everything will be hunky dory. For example, Abu Dhabi claims they reduced emissions from oil and gas production from 2005-2014 by 99.2% even as they produced more of both. Climate Trade (which launched the first Carbon API in the world) measures these things: Here’s the truth, “By 2030, Abu Dhabi National Oil Company’s grand plan for Carbon Capture and Sequestration will capture only 1.4% of current emissions.” (TED talk @ 11:46)

    Gore’s outburst regarding Abu Dhabi National Oil’s sleight of hand: “Do they think we don’t see what they’re doing… don’t understand what they’re doing?”

    Moreover, here in the US, the EPA gave US utilities a regulatory mandate to either stop burning coal or capture the emissions. But capture’s not that simple: According to the EPA’s own description of carbon capture: “It’s technologies that are not economically or technically feasible for widespread use.”

    The technology for CCS has been around for 50 years, but the cost has never declined. Whereas, usually as technologies develop and improve over time, costs per unit decrease. According to a study by Oxford University, CCS is what’s classified as a “non-improving technology.” It’s not readily available for “cost-effective practical use.” And now petrostates talk about direct air capture, which, by the way, uses huge amounts of energy. Energy companies claim DAC gives them an excuse to never stop producing oil. More to the point, they’ll never stop producing as long as this fabrication is publicly accepted.

    In strong opposition, Gore showed a photo of a DAC unit in Iceland, which will be enhanced enough in 7 years so that each DAC unit will be able to capture 27 seconds worth of annual emissions. (TED talk 15:00) Are you kidding me!!!

    On a cost-effective basis, DAC is not credible. Moreover, the biggest obstacle to DAC is physics, CO2 makes up ~0.035% of the air, meaning DACs will vacuum the other 99.96% to get ~0.035% out of the air. (TED talk 16:00) Oh, please! It’s a bad joke and cannot possibly meet the scale required just to keep up with current emissions.

    Meanwhile oil companies are using DAC to effectively gaslight the public.

    DAC is a sizeable task that’s nearly impossible to fully comprehend and, in fact, impossible to wrap arms around because it’s the planet that’s at issue; it’s really big! The scale of infrastructure that’s required to make a significant difference is beyond a Marshall Plan prototype, which would be a blip on direct air capture’s radar. According to renowned physicist Klaus Lackner, director of the Center for Negative Carbon Emissions, to stay abreast of current emissions: “If you built a hundred million trailer-size units you could actually keep up with current emissions.” 3  End-to-end 100,000,000 units will circumnavigate the planet 44 times. Oh, sure!

    According to The World Benchmark Alliance and the Carbon Disclosure Project: “The oil and gas sector has made almost no progress towards the Paris Agreement goals since 2021… There has been little advance in oil, and alarmingly, even some decline in oil and gas companies’ progress on limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees.”

    The host of COP28, Abu Dhabi National Oil Company, is rated as one of the least responsible of all the oil and gas companies. “It no longer voluntarily reports any emissions data… it scores an anemic 3.8 on a 1-to-100 scale for transition plans.”

    The global allocation of capital is another major obstacle to overcoming a very sticky climate disaster scenario that’s already unfolding right before our eyes. As it happens, global warming embarrassingly arrived too early to the party. Meanwhile, last year governments around the world subsidized fossil fuel by more than one trillion dollars. And since Paris ’15, the 60 largest global banks have committed $5.5T to fossil fuel investments. Confusingly, 49 of the 60 banks signed net zero pledges… Why?

    Al Gore did not mention the grueling fact that the climate system has already gone off the rails way earlier than expected. Realistically, how much time is left?

    And when will the Conference of the Parties toss out, or ignore, if that’s possible, special interests; e.g., oil companies lurking behind every curtain, and thereafter base policy decisions upon science, which would be a positive change in COP’s approach to tackling the biggest threat since an asteroid slammed into the Yucatán Peninsula in Mexico?

    END NOTES

  • Hawaiian state Attorney General Anne Lopez on Friday announced her office will conduct a “comprehensive review of critical decision-making and standing policies leading up to, during, and after the wildfires on Maui and Hawaii,” which have killed dozens of people. “The Department of the Attorney General shares the grief felt by all in Hawaii, and our hearts go out to everyone affected by this…

    Source

  • The Far-Right takeover of the Republican Party has readied a battle plan for 2025 that will crucify commitments to fight global heat; namely, Project 2025 / Presidential Transition Project, a 920-page formal proposal to take over and reconstruct government via abandonment and/or defunding of federal agencies that protect the nation’s health and environment.

    Project 2025’s call to arms: “The long march of cultural Marxism through our institutions has come to pass. The federal government is a behemoth, weaponized against American citizens and conservative values, with freedom and liberty under siege as never before.”  1

    “That ‘cultural Marxism’ is a crude slander, referring to something that does not exist, unfortunately does not mean actual people are not being set up to pay the price, as scapegoats to appease a rising sense of anger and anxiety. And for that reason, ‘cultural Marxism’ is not only a sad diversion from framing legitimate grievances but also a dangerous lure in an increasingly unhinged moment.”  2

    Project 2025 wants to “save the country” by marshalling forces on “day-one” of a newly elected Republican administration, pulling the plug, deconstructing/destroying the administrative state. The Heritage Foundation, which compiled the plan, intends to speak for the people of the nation via enactment of Project 2025 hitting the ground running on the day of the swearing-in of the next Republican president, anticipated January 2025 in a hopeful repeat of the Republican idealized presidency of 1981-89 when Ronald Reagan served as “the embodiment of the ideas and principles Heritage holds dear.”  3

    Heritage Foundation’s enduring influence strikes hard, but at times subtly, hidden, secretively far and wide throughout America’s political landscape, like a sponge soaking up and spewing out agenda for all of America, school boards, local, state, and federal positions of influence over lives of Americans, often times, whether they know it or not. So therefore, is Heritage positive or negative for the country? Hmm. Regardless, no other NGO’s clout compares, as Heritage buys, with hard (and dark) dollars, governmental policy as easily as shopping at Costco.

    Therefore, as a result, and certainly inclusive of Heritage, America harks back to the feudal vassal socio-economic system of a 1,000 years ago, a simplistic lifestyle with the monarch providing defense for vassals that, in turn, obey the monarch’s every wish/command, rugged individualism reigns supreme, overlaying governmental functionaries not required. Grin and bear it, you’re on your own, buster!

    Project 2025 has its sights set on the Biden Inflation Reduction Act with massive volleys of canon fire loaded, cocked, and directly aimed at Biden’s plans to reduce emissions and fund clean energy. “More than 350 right-wing thinkers” (hmm, really?) contributed to Project 2025 tactics designed to (1) block wind and solar power from the electrical grid (2) gut the EPA (3) eliminate the Dept. of Energy’s renewable energy offices (4) prohibit universal adoption of California’s tailpipe standards (5) transfer federal environmental duties to states (6) increase fossil fuel infrastructure.

    Project 2025 is the consummate antithesis of Paris ’15, and so much more by taking a baseball bat to the federal bureaucracy and shifting very tenuous authority to individual states. In Project 2025’s own words: “If enacted, it could decimate the federal government’s climate work, stymie the transition to clean energy and shift agencies toward nurturing the fossil fuel industry rather than regulating it.”  4 Once again, repeating the obvious, it’s the primo absolute perfect antidote to Paris ’15.

    Essentially, Project 2025 is a major fundamental shift in government, moving federal agencies away from public health protection and environmental regulations that interfere with free market capitalism, under a manifest plan: Why should government dictate policy to the free market? With Project 2025, this impediment of federal government regulation over free enterprise is severely reduced or removed, for example, gutting the Dept. of Energy via huge cuts in key divisions that pertain to clean renewable energy and cuts to the DOE’s Grid Development Office, stopping grid expansion of renewable resources; meanwhile, natural gas infrastructure will be expanded???

    But if renewables are evil (no federal support) and natural gas is good (gobs of federal support) then where and how is a distinction drawn between governmental influence “hands on” versus “hands off” don’t tread on me? So then, is Project 2025 a case study in contradictions?

    Moreover, the plan adheres to a long-standing feudalistic practice of snitching to gain favor with the mighty monarch. One proposed snitch idea offers incentives to untrained non-professional vassals that “identify scientific flaws and research misconduct.” This incentivizes opponents of governmental regulations to target research. For example, challenging EPA regulations about risks to public health from industrial pollution. Proposal 2025 will turn the screws ever harder by requiring scientific studies to be “transparent and reproducible,” making it nearly impossible to produce credible analyses of public health issues that require private data that cannot legally be disclosed to the public. Ipso facto, critical scientific studies that could/should protect the public are hog-tied and tossed into a humongous dust bin.

    Already, Project 2025 is assembling thousands upon thousands of vassals that will dependably follow orders, with razor-sharp salutes, starting day-one. This is a powerful overwhelming surprising departure from the lead-up to the 2016 presidency election: “Project 2025 is not a white paper. We are not tinkering at the edges. We are writing a battle plan, and we are marshalling our forces.” 5 A battle plan including 20,000+ combatant black shirts.

    In tacit support of Project 2025, GOP presidential candidates, when queried about global warming, express indifference: 6 No guts, no opinion.

    While in office, Trump unwound more than 100 existing environmental regulations, setting a record for dismantling federal agencies. Project 2025 is perfectly sculpted for his return with sledgehammer in hand to pummel federal agencies with much more gusto than before!

    Still, a hard question remains whether Americans will vote to goose-up global heat.

    Will they?

    END NOTES:

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • As humanity recons with a never ending cavalcade of catastrophes, large segments of the population have succumbed to despair or distraction through culture wars or a series of vain cultural phenomena. [Insert Barbenheimer joke here.]

    Many youth, particularly in France, have channeled this hopelessness into rage. For the past several months the country had been seeing a series of strikes and riots in response to the raising of the retirement age, and these riots intensified in late June after the police murder of 17-year-old Nahel Merzouk during a traffic stop. As the dust settles, inept politicians blame bad parenting and TikTok.

    Meanwhile in Peru, protesters from around the country have gathered in Lima calling for the resignation of President Dina Boluarte and the dissolution of congress.

  • Nuclear reactors are directly in the line of fire of global warming.

    In fact, nuclear reactors cannot survive global warming. But that’s only the start of serious issues with the world’s newly found love affair with nuclear energy. This article examines the likelihood of nuclear energy as a fixit for global warming, or is it a victim?

    The world is turning to nuclear energy as one solution for raging global warming, which has been in the news on a real time basis drying up commercial rivers, depleting major reservoirs and spreading wildfires like there’s no tomorrow. Yet, that’s only a sampling of global warming knockoffs. Significantly, it’s getting worse by the year, and there are some who wonder how much worse before the climate system literally implodes with destructive capacity beyond Hollywood’s wildest imagination.

    In consequence, nuclear energy’s popularity is on the rise in concert with rising global temperatures. The hotter it gets the more supporters jump on the bandwagon, but there are plenty of reasons to believe it’s a fool’s paradise. History will likely judge this worldwide movement for nuclear energy as one of the biggest traps of all-time. Nevertheless, the nuclear energy trap is coming onstream faster and faster and without much opposition. Maybe there should be some.

    A Gallup survey found 55% of U.S. adults in support of nuclear energy, which is the highest in over a decade. The Biden administration views nuclear as a key climate solution to net zero. Japan is restarting its idled plants and plans on building more as it commences the absolute insanity of releasing radioactive toxic water in storage tanks at Fukushima’s TEPCO nuclear plant directly into the readily available, right-next-door Pacific Ocean, as its neighbors squeal and many smart scientists squirm. Meanwhile, China, with 24 nuclear energy plants currently under construction, ambitiously plans to build at least 150 new reactors over the next 15 years. India is planning to commission 20 reactors by 2031. Worldwide, 60 new reactors are under construction.

    Nuclear energy is on the move at a time when more and more exposure of cancer cases and deaths become public knowledge, as follows:

    • A BBC Future Planet article d/d July 25, 2019, The True Toll of the Chernobyl Disaster: “According to the official, internationally recognized death toll, just 31 people died as an immediate result of Chernobyl while the UN estimates that only 50 deaths can be directly attributed to the disaster. In 2005, it predicted a further 4,000 might eventually die as a result of the radiation exposure… Brown’s research, however, suggests Chernobyl has cast a far longer shadow.”
    • “The number of deaths in subsequent decades remains in dispute. The lowest estimates are 4,000; others 90,000 and up to 200,000.” 1
    • According to an article in USA Today d/d February 24, 2022, What Happened at Chernobyl? What to Know About Nuclear Disaster: “At least 28 people were killed by the disaster, but thousands more have died from cancer as a result of radiation that spread after the explosion and fire. The effects of radiation on the environment and humans is still being studied.”

    In time, Fukushima will reflect statistics, often times second-third-fourth generations.

    According to Chernobyl Children International, 6,000 newborns are born every year in Ukraine with congenital heart defects called “Chernobyl Heart.”

    The newest nuclear energy craze is Small Modular Reactors to be built and installed throughout the world. Thereby, the entire planet could easily go nuclear energy at every mining site, on every ship, and every favorite shopping mall or telephone booth. Just imagine a world filled with small nuclear energy plants! No problem, until there is one.

    Meanwhile, America’s left is onboard the let’s go-for-it nuclear cruise ship. The acid test of America’s left-leaning greenish advocates suddenly in favor of nuclear energy is leftist-leaning California, the birthplace of America’s anti-nuclear movement, which decided to extend the life of Diablo Canyon nuclear reactor, the state’s last nuclear energy plant, rather than close it down. Beyond this shift of allegiance to nuclear in greenish California, National Public Radio ran a report on the outbreak of support for nuclear, August 30, 2022, entitled: Why Even Environmentalists are Supporting Nuclear Energy Today.

    But on a cautionary note, nuclear energy has an adversarial voice that’s difficult to ignore: “Multiple and unexpected failures are built into society’s complex and tightly coupled nuclear reactor systems. Such accidents are unavoidable and cannot be designed around.” 2

    The widespread rousing excitement over nuclear energy is a trap. In part because global warming is the kiss of death for reactors. Global warming and nuclear energy clash, incompatible, mutually destructive. Global warming is the enemy of nuclear energy, out to destroy it by drying rivers and overheating ocean waters amidst rising seas that cascade onto shoreline reactors a la Fukushima. Reactors only survive at the mercy of cool waters, and they’re seriously challenged/damaged by increasing levels of ocean surges. Nuclear reactors are not drought-tolerant, which is one of global warming’s biggest weapons.

    The truth about nuclear energy’s fallibility is enunciated in a recent interview with one of the world’s leading experts Dr. Paul Dorfman, chair of the Nuclear Consulting Group, former secretary to the UK Scientific Advisory Committee on Internal Radiation, and Visiting Fellow, University of Sussex, who said:

    It’s important to understand that nuclear is very likely to be a significant climate casualty.  For cooling purposes nuclear reactors need to be situated by large bodies of water, which means either by the coast or inland by rivers or large water courses. Sea levels are rising much quicker than we had thought and inland the rivers are heating up, potentially drying up, and also subject to significant flooding and flash-flooding and inundation. The key issue for coastal nuclear is storm surge, which is basically where atmospheric conditions meet high tide, which is essentially what happened in Fukushima. 3

    In recent years, nuclear plants across Northern Europe have been forced to shut down or reduce output because seawater became too warm to safely cool the reactor cores. Over the past decade, the Millstone energy plant in Connecticut saw a series of shutdowns on hot summer days until regulators raised the temperature limit of its cooling waters by 5 degrees Fahrenheit. 4

    France is an example of nuclear energy going wrong. The French Court of Auditors’ Report on the Safety and Operation of France’s Fifty-six (56) Reactors recently highlighted an increasingly unstable supply of water necessary for the country’s cooling reactors. 5

    In France, Loire River is the longest river in the country at 625 miles. As of early 2023, global warming had clobbered the river, some areas completely dry with flow rate down to 1/20th of normal. Some of the country’s nuclear energy plants depend upon the river for cooling purposes. To date, forced shutdowns have only occurred in the summer, but France’s Court of Auditors warned that such events are likely to become 3-to-4 times more frequent unless global warming somehow subsides, yet France’s environmental minister thinks 4°C is on the horizon for the country. Moreover, for the first time since 1980, France has been a net importer of electricity, losing its 40-year net exporter status as its celebrated nuclear energy capability (70% electricity for France) caved-in to global warming.

    Since water-cooled (95% of the 436) conventional nuclear energy reactors are vulnerable to global warming, then is a molten salt reactor a magical solution?

    Answer: No, it is not!

    The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists published a detailed analysis of molten salt reactors entitled: “Molten Salt Reactors Were Trouble in the 1960s – and Remain in Trouble Today”, June 20, 2022. The lengthy article traces the attempted development of molten salt reactors dating back to the 1950s. The various avenues of experimentation with halting results consumes paragraph after paragraph. For example, here’s one excerpt:

    These problems remain relevant. Even today, no material can perform satisfactorily in the high-radiation high-temperature, and corrosive environment inside a molten salt reactor. In 2018, scientists at the Idaho National Laboratory conducted an extensive review of different materials and, in the end, could only recommend that ‘a systematic development program be initiated.’ In other words, fifty years after the molten salt reactor was shut down, technical experts still have questions about materials development for a new molten salt reactor design. 6

    In conclusion, the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists claims that if molten salt reactors are constructed, they are unlikely to operate reliably and would result in various safety and security risks and would produce several different waste streams, all of which require extensive processing and serious disposal challenges. Accordingly, according to the Bulletin: “Investing in molten salt reactors is not worth the cost or the effort.”

    If not large-scale reactors, will Small Modular Reactors (“SMR”) save the day?

    According to a 2021 article in The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists: SMRs are at an early stage of development and are speculative technologies. It will take at least a decade to get them off drawing boards into serious production and longer to determine if they really work according to plans. It’s too slow and too costly to meet climate deadlines.

    Stanford News published a SMR study: “Stanford-led Research Finds Small Modular Reactors Will Exacerbate Challenges of Highly Radioactive Nuclear Waste”The study concludes that SMRs will generate more radioactive waste than conventional nuclear energy plants. “Our results show that most small modular reactor designs will actually increase the volume of nuclear waste in need of management and disposal, by factors of 2 to 30 for the reactors in our case study.” (Stanford)

    A SMR analysis by Bent Flyvbjerg, the leading global academic in megaproject failures and successes, consulted on over 100 mega projects: 7

    Then, to satisfy the overwhelming popularity to go nuclear, are any modern “advanced” nuclear reactor designs worth pursuing?

    Answer: No. According to a study by the Union of Concerned Scientists: “Report Finds That ‘Advanced’ Nuclear Reactor Designs Are No Better Than Current Reactors— and Some Are Worse”, March 18, 2021. The 140-page report highlights studies of (1) sodium-cooled reactors (2) molten salt-fueled reactors (3) high-temperature gas-cooled reactors and whether they meet the requirements of (a) safer (b) more secure (c) lower risk of nuclear proliferation and terrorism than the existing fleet of nuclear reactors. None of the three satisfactorily passed the study.

    Additionally, the report analyzed unsubstantiated claims developers are making about designs and using little hard evidence to advance their causes. For example, Bill Gates’ statements about the 345-megawatt Natrium claiming it will produce less nuclear waste and be safer than conventional light-water reactors. The UCS report found the sodium-cooled fast reactor Natrium to be less “uranium-efficient,” and it would not reduce the amount of waste, and it’s subject to serious safety problems not at issue with conventional light-water reactors;  e.g., sodium coolant can burn when exposed to air or water, and its fast-reactor could experience uncontrollable energy increases leading to rapid core melting, which is the overriding bane of nuclear energy.

    According to the Union of Concerned Scientists: Timing is another killer of contemporary designs. According to requirements to be met by federal regulators, it could take up to 20 years and billions of dollars to commercialize non-light-water reactors, fuel cycle facilities, and related infrastructure. Timing, timing, timing is everything when it comes to meeting the necessity of reaching net zero emissions as global warming is not waiting around for solutions. It is accelerating like never before as stated by Dr. James Hansen (Columbia University): “There has been a staggering increase in Earth’s energy imbalance.” Hansen’s formula supporting that statement points to a distinct possibility of 1.5C right around the corner. Which begs the question: How long does it take to plan, approve, build, and commission a nuclear reactor? Oh, well!

    In conclusion, the Union of Concerned Scientists recommends:

    The DOE and Congress should consider spending more research and development dollars on improving the safety and security of light-water reactors, rather than on commercializing immature, overhyped non-light-water reactor designs.

    As usual in cases with extremely difficult circumstances dealing with nature there are no easy answers but plenty of traps. In that regard, is nuclear energy a Trojan Horse for devastating global warming?

    END NOTES

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Algeria, Croatia, France, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain, Tunisia, and Turkey. What do these nine countries have in common? All of them are currently battling deadly infernos made worse by the fossil fuel-driven climate emergency. And yet, governments worldwide continue to greenlight new coal, oil, and gas production — exacerbating planet-heating pollution and ensuring that heatwaves, wildfires…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • A buoy positioned roughly 40 miles south of Miami recorded a sea surface temperature of 101.1°F earlier this week, stunning scientists who say the reading could mark the latest in a string of global records as fossil fuel-driven extreme weather around the world brings unprecedented heat. Meteorologist Jeff Masters wrote that the temperature in Florida’s Manatee Bay reached hot tub levels on Monday…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Rolling Stone

    In the dead of winter, the Antarctic Peninsula, an 800-mile extension of the Antarctic continent, temperatures hit 32°F. 1

    Global warming has been on a hot streak, accelerating its record-setting impact on the planet over the past couple of years. And even though it’s winter down below, Antarctica has joined the party. The icy continent, as large as the U.S. and Mexico combined, is the coldest continent on Earth with a mean annual interior temperature of -71F.

    According to the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), despite mid-winter conditions, Antarctica’s sea ice is at record lows; in fact, 17% below average for this time of year. Alas, only recently, within the past few years, scientists believed East Antarctica, the mother ship of the continent, solid, unwavering, the coldest place on Earth nearly impregnable to any kind of crash for the foreseeable future. But that theory has been tossed out because it does not hold up any longer. 2

    Over the decades, ice shelf collapse in East Antarctica was not a concern. On the other hand, West Antarctica’s geological setting is a different story with brand-name glaciers Pine Island Glacier and Thwaites Glacier tipsy, threatening, under scrutiny.

    Yet, in 2022 the Conger Ice Shelf/East Antarctica bit the dust. “The Conger collapse is the first observed in East Antarctica since the era of satellite imagery began in 1979″, said Catherine Walker, a glaciologist at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts. 3

    All of which prompts a very logical query as to whether coastal cities of the world support a coordinated plan to rein-in fossil fuel usage, the root cause of planetary heat that ultimately brings flooding to coastal cities. Umm- No such plan exists. Glaciologists privately say the full extent of the tipsy dynamics of ice sheets are not included in models for sea level rise; e.g., missing from IPCC calculations. However, if included, projections of sea levels increase by up to 200% over current projections. 4 That’s very big trouble.

    Antarctica is starting to succumb to global heat much earlier than expected. It’s overwhelmed by the human footprint emitting greenhouse gases with abandon, for example, human CO2 emitted into the atmosphere: (a) 5 billion tons in 1950 (b) 25 billion tons in 2000 (c) 37 billion tons in 2022.

    As a result, Greenland slumps in a hyper melt mode. Coincidentally, at the same time as Greenland slumps, America’s congressional Republican Party threatens big cuts to climate funding in President Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act that allocated $375B to fight global warming. They want to cut climate funding at the same time as global heat celebrates all-time hotness across the world. The paradox is too obvious to ignore. Yet, paradox or contradiction, as it were, may not be strong enough language to fully explain the depths of degeneracy.

    In sharp contrast to America’s helpless misinformed, the China Meteorological Administration’s Blue Book on Climate Change rolled out only recently. Here’s what China says:

    It is essential for us to unite with the international community to confront climate change. On the one hand, we need to strengthen our scientific understanding and continue conducting in-depth research on climate change. Besides this, we must actively adapt to climate change by enhancing our capacity to cope with climate risks and disasters. Most importantly, we need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through various means to mitigate climate warming. We can start by taking action on an individual level and collaborating with society as a whole to alleviate the impact of climate change. 5

    China’s “breath of fresh air” is in sharp contrast to America’s Republican-backed initiative of 17 amendments whacking Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, demonstrating the preposterousness of shallow infantile blabber versus mature adult foresight.

    Meantime, according to very smart scientists: “Greenland’s melt rate has gone into hyperdrive in the past few years.” 6 Its average melt rate from 2017-2020 was +20% more per year than at the start of the decade and an astounding seven (7) times more than the 1990s. That’s super-duper speed for a big chunk of ice perceived as stationary. It should scare the living daylights out of the mayors of the world’s ten most vulnerable coastal cities, e.g., New York City, Miami, Bangkok, Amsterdam, Ho Chi Minh City, Cardiff, New Orleans, Manila, London, and Shenzhen.

    “The new figures ‘are pretty disastrous really,’” said study co-author Ruth Mottram, a climate scientist at the Danish Meteorological Institute. 7

    “This is a devastating trajectory,” said U.S. National Snow and Ice Center Deputy Lead Scientist Twila Moon, who wasn’t part of the study. 8

    Meanwhile, the World Meteorological Organization reported Antarctica sea ice at record lows in the middle of winter (record lows in the winter???). According to Marilyn Raphael, Antarctica sea ice analyst at UCLA: “It’s not something that we should be comfortable with. It shouldn’t be as warm as it is. If that warming continues, it will make things go akilter.” 9

    Antarctica going “akilter” refers to its significance to the rest of the planet. After all, it is home to 190 feet of frozen sea level rise. As if that’s not enough, what happens in Antarctica reshapes weather patterns around the world, and come to think of it, worldwide weather patterns are already in a tizzy. Antarctica determines ocean currents that destine important nutrients to nourish global fisheries, and it directly influences atmospheric circulation patterns for clouds, rainfall, and temperatures throughout the planet. All of that is already akilter.

    “The sea ice and atmosphere and ocean… We just haven’t quite seen the size of the changes that are coming,” Jeremy Bassis, professor of Climate and Space Sciences, University of Michigan. 10

    All of which brings to surface a very big question mark about 1.2°C above pre-industrial. According to the European Union’s Copernicus Climate Change Service, annual average global temperature reached 1.2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial in 2022. Well, excuse me, but if East Antarctica’s cracked, West Antarctica’s shaky, the Peninsula’s warm, and Greenland’s in hyper meltdown, then what’s gonna happen if the world approaches the 1.5C upper limit suggested by the IPCC? More to the point, what’s gonna stop it?

    According to James Hansen, the world’s leading climate scientist: “There has been a staggering increase in Earth’s energy imbalance.”11 Hansen’s dot-plot graph appears to put 1.5°C smack dab into the mid/late 2020s. That’s way-way ahead of the IPCC’s schedule. Ergo, if the worldwide climate disaster scene of 2022/23 is what happens at 1.2C, then what happens at 1.5C?

    By now, everybody’s aware (well, almost everybody) since the start of the 21st century, human-generated global warming has overtaken, overwhelmed nature’s true course. A prime example: The Pine Island Glacier in West Antarctica was stable for 60 years of observation until all-of-a-sudden in 2015-2020 it retreated by 18 miles in only five years in celebration of its two-year birthday of CO2 crossing over 400 ppm for the first time in human history, May 2013.12

    Beware of the Antarctic summer!

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • On a trip to Japan in 2014, approaching the third anniversary of the Fukishima nuclear disaster, Noam Chomsky told an audience that:

    ‘Governments regard their own citizens as their main enemy.’

    What he meant was that states do not wish their own populations to know and understand the details of government policies, for fear of provoking an adverse public reaction that would limit or derail the state’s ability to do whatever it wants.

    Chomsky cited the example of the Iraqi city of Fallujah that was twice brutally attacked by overwhelming US firepower in the Iraq war, including white phosphorus munitions. US forces left behind huge numbers of dead and a toxic legacy of deadly radiation that caused considerably raised levels of birth defects and cancer. But:

    ‘The US government denies it [culpability for these war crimes].’

    Likewise, added Chomsky:

    ‘In 1961, the United States began chemical warfare in Vietnam, South Vietnam, chemical warfare to destroy crops and livestock. That went on for seven years. The level of poison—they used the most extreme carcinogen known: dioxin. And this went on for years. There’s enormous effects in South Vietnam. There are children today being born in Saigon hospitals, deformed children, and horrible deformations. Government refuses to investigate. They’ve investigated effects on American soldiers, but not on the South Vietnamese. And there’s almost no study of it, except for independent citizens’ groups.’

    Governments protect themselves by concealing such damning information, meanwhile even surveilling their own citizens. As Chomsky noted:

    ‘That’s why you have state secret laws. Citizens are not supposed to know what their government is doing to them. Just to give one final example, when Edward Snowden’s revelations [about surveillance of US citizens by the US National Security Agency] appeared, the head of U.S. intelligence, James Clapper, testified before Congress that no telephone communications of Americans are being monitored. It was an outlandish lie. Lying to Congress is a felony; should go to jail for years. Not a word. Governments are supposed to lie to their citizens.’

    Then again, as the US journalist I.F. Stone observed:

    ‘All governments lie.’

    A truth that he reiterated when he wrote:

    ‘Every government is run by liars and nothing they say should be believed.’

    Chomsky emphasised the warning about state spying on citizens in another interview:

    ‘Governments should not have this capacity. But governments will use whatever technology is available to them to combat their primary enemy – which is their own population.’

    As was revealed by Snowden, this state surveillance has been carried out via ‘direct access’ to systems run by tech giants, including Microsoft, Apple and Google.

    Chomsky added:

    ‘They [governments and corporations] take whatever is available, and in no time it is being used against us, the population. Governments are not representative. They have their own power, serving segments of the population that are dominant and rich.’

    The notion that governments – and corporations – fear the general population might seem strange. But it is encapsulated in the famous verse from Percy Bysshe Shelley’s poem, ‘The Masque of Anarchy’:

    ‘Rise, like lions after slumber
    In unvanquishable number!
    Shake your chains to earth like dew
    Which in sleep had fallen on you:
    Ye are many—they are few!’

    Shelley wrote the poem, subtitled ‘Written on the Occasion of the Massacre at Manchester’, on hearing of the Peterloo Massacre in 1819. Eighteen people were killed by cavalry charging into a crowd of around 60,000 people who had gathered to demand parliamentary reform.

    In recent years, Corbyn famously quoted this verse on several occasions, including at Glastonbury in 2017; in particular, the stirring final line, ‘Ye are many—they are few!’.

    To protect their own self-image of strength and impregnability, it is vital that governments and corporations conceal their fear of public power. Just occasionally, however, it slips out. Thus, a recent gathering of global elites at the five-star Savoy hotel in London was warned of ‘pitchforks and torches’ unless inequality is tackled.

    The image of huge crowds of peasants swarming the strongholds of the super-rich might sound like a scene from ‘The Simpsons’. But ‘progressive advisers’ told the wealthy Savoy conference attendees that:

    ‘There was a “real risk of actual insurrection” and “civil disruption” if the yawning inequality gap between rich and poor was allowed to widen as a result of energy and food price hikes hitting squeezed households.’

    Julia Davies, a founding member of Patriotic Millionaires UK, a group of super-rich people calling for the introduction of a wealth tax, warned that global poverty and the climate emergency were going to get ‘so much worse’ unless the wealthy did more to help poorer citizens.

    She continued:

    ‘Everyone can say it is somebody else’s responsibility. But it is the wealthiest in society who are the people who can actually really do something about it.’

    The implication here is that it is incumbent upon the rich to save the rest of us. Salvation will not, and cannot, come from the unwashed multitudes below.

    This was put in more palatable terms when another contributor advocated ‘a clear methodology for investing philanthropic capital’. So, essentially an improved form of charity is being proposed; not a fundamental restructuring of class and economic power that would deliver true justice.

    A Fake Labour Leader

    As we have pointed out before, there is no threat of such justice happening under a likely future Labour government led by Sir Keir Starmer, seemingly the establishment’s favoured choice for maintaining the status quo.

    Jonathan Cook summed it up succinctly:

    ‘Starmer has overseen the rush by the party back into the arms of the establishment. He has ostentatiously embraced patriotism and the flag.

    ‘He demands lockstep support for Nato. Labour policy is once again in thrall to big business, and against strikes by workers. And, since the death of the Queen, Starmer has sought to bow as low as possible before the new king without toppling over.’

    After Just Stop Oil protests had temporarily interrupted two tennis matches at Wimbledon, Starmer was quick to condemn them:

    ‘I can’t wait for them to stop their antics, frankly. You know, they’re interrupting iconic sporting events that are part of our history, tradition and massively looked forward to across the nation. I absolutely condemn the way they go about their tactics.’

    The Leader of His Majesty’s Most Loyal Opposition added:

    ‘And I have to say it’s riddled with an arrogance that only they have the sort of right to force their argument on other people in this way.’

    Presumably, if Starmer had been around during the women’s emancipation movement, he would have condemned the actions of suffragette Emily Davison for hindering the progress of the king’s horse at Epsom racecourse.

    Similarly, when the wedding of George Osborne, the Tory chief architect of ‘austerity’ which contributed to 335,000 excess deaths, was briefly interrupted by an orange confetti-wielding woman, Labour’s shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves was swift out of the blocks:

    ‘I have got no time for Just Stop Oil. To be honest, I think it is a bit pathetic and quite tedious disrupting tennis, snooker, other people’s weddings.’

    For the record, Just Stop Oil said they had nothing to do with the Osborne wedding confetti, but they praised the woman’s actions.

    The campaign group added:

    ‘Perhaps the press could focus on something more important now? Like the current government’s plans to licence over 100 new oil and gas projects, which will result in excess deaths the likes of which we have never seen. Or the fact that the UN Secretary General has said that “climate change is out of control” as we’ve just seen the hottest average temperatures since records began. Or the fact that Canadian wildfires have now burned down an area the size of Portugal….We are in catastrophically dangerous territory…’

    Like Tony Blair in the 1990s, Starmer has been cosying up to media mogul Rupert Murdoch, according to a largely welcoming account in the Observer. Starmer is being given advice and urged in an even more neoliberal direction by Peter Mandelson, the Machiavellian Labour lurker. Mandelson had been a big player in Blair’s general election victories in 1997, 2001 and 2005. In January this year, Mandelson hailed Starmer as ‘a strong and assertive leader’ and praised him for having ‘seen off the Corbynites, the anti Semites and the rest.’

    As for Starmer trying to curry favour with Murdoch, Mark Seddon, Director of the Centre for United Nations Studies at the University of Buckingham, warned via Twitter:

    ‘This may impress The Observer, but it certainly doesn’t those of us who saw all of this before with Blair’s grovelling to Murdoch. History repeats itself, first as a tragedy, second as a farce.’

    He added:

    ‘When I became editor of Tribune I went to meet him [Starmer]. I thought he was shallow and lacked any hinterland. My opinion of him has only got worse in the intervening years.’

    Indeed, Starmer is the epitome of a shallow, fake politician. The major exception to Starmer’s fakery is his genuine commitment to be a safe pair of hands for established power. Further evidence, if it were needed, was his reaction to a polite protest by two young climate activists standing behind him as he gave a speech earlier this month. Holding up a banner, they said:

    ‘No more u-turns, we need a Green New Deal now.’

    Their clear message was that society needs to take serious action immediately in the face of the climate emergency. Starmer’s response was farcical:

    ‘We did that last month.’

    Did what exactly last month? Claiming that he would block new North Sea oil and gas exploration might sound like a decent, minimal first step to addressing the climate crisis. But coming from a politician who serially breaks promises, it is hardly convincing. Indeed, Starmer is already ‘in retreat’ as he has been at pains to reassure oil company Equinor that he would not block the Rosebank oil and gas field west of Shetland, expected to produce 300 million barrels of oil, if he becomes Prime Minister.

    Continuing his corporate charm offensive, Starmer has sought to reassure fossil fuel CEOs in recent weeks:

    ‘Let me be clear: those who think we should somehow simply end domestic oil and gas production in Britain are wrong. Under Labour’s plans, they will play a crucial part in our energy mix for decades to come.’

    When asked by one of the climate protesters at Starmer’s speech which side he was on, the Labour leader gave a response that would not ruffle any Big Business feathers:

    ‘We are on the side of economic growth.’

    Starmer promised the protesters he would speak with them afterwards. He didn’t. Unsurprisingly, it was yet another broken promise.

    Concluding Remarks

    Over many years, Media Lens has repeatedly drawn attention to the latest warnings by climate scientists, many of whom are increasingly disturbed and scared. We have also highlighted the refusal by governments and their corporate-financial allies to do anything, other than escalate the crisis. Meanwhile, the establishment media, although reporting the latest climate findings, have performed their usual role of normalising the unthinkable and propping up the system of turbo-capitalism that is leading humanity to extinction.

    As mentioned above, some flickerings of concern can be observed from within the establishment, urging ‘philanthropic’ action before the public revolts with ‘pitchforks and torches’. Moreover, financial institutions are being warned that their economic models are ‘implausible’ and show a serious ‘disconnect’ from reality given the climate emergency. In particular:

    ‘the consequences of passing climate “tipping points” — self-reinforcing and irreversible negative planetary changes — are often not captured by the models’.

    Meanwhile, the planet keeps heating up to dangerous levels. 3 July was the world’s hottest ever day in recorded history. Reuters reported that the average global temperature reached 17.01 degrees Celsius, surpassing the August 2016 record of 16.92C.

    Climate scientist Friederike Otto, of the Grantham Institute for Climate Change and the Environment at Imperial College London, said starkly:

    ‘It’s a death sentence for people and ecosystems.’

    The current extreme temperatures – exceeding 50C in parts of the US and China – is ‘the new normal’, said World Meteorological Organization Secretary-General Prof Petteri Taalas. He added:

    ‘The extreme weather – an increasingly frequent occurrence in our warming climate – is having a major impact on human health, ecosystems, economies, agriculture, energy and water supplies.’

    As writer Matthew Todd observed:

    ‘Unfortunately most broadcast media are now at the “OK, this is because of climate change” stage, when what is actually appropriate is “A global emergency needs to be declared and a World-War-like Marshall plan to save us needs to be enacted across all nations of the planet”.’

    A sliver of truth emerged from the outgoing energy editor of the Financial Times:

    ‘Capitalism won’t deliver the energy transition fast enough.’

    We have always advocated peaceful protest, and we still do. But, as the public becomes more oppressed, violated and disregarded, is the threat of ‘pitchforks and torches’ going to be a factor in delivering the changes needed in society?

    Perhaps we can take solace from the lyrics of a beautiful song by The Smile, sung by Radiohead’s Thom Yorke:

    ‘Free in the knowledge that one day this will end

    Free in the knowledge that everything is change

    And this was just a bad moment’

    And, once again, let us identify the cynical use of fear by those who currently rule the world, and the possibility of change when we come together:

    ‘A face using fear

    To try to keep control

    When we get together

    Well, then who knows’

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Monday, July 3, was the hottest day in recorded history, beating out all-time highs since at least 1979 and beating the previous record set in 2016, data shows. But it only held that record for a day as it was swiftly beaten by July 4, which eclipsed Monday’s record in a reminder of how swiftly the global climate is warming — and how this record will only continue to be topped.

    Source

  • Why are we at Media Lens utterly terrified by climate collapse while other people we know are mildly concerned, blithely indifferent or cockily contrarian?

    The simple answer is that we are doing this full-time and ‘doing this’ includes reading the unfiltered reports and thoughts of top climate scientists on social media all day, every day.

    Whenever we take a break from social media, the tendrils of the corporate body-snatchers again start to insinuate themselves. We are soothed by entertainment, by infotainment, by presstitute prestidigitation normalising the unthinkable. Despite a mountain of evidence, we are assured that the crisis is under the management of fundamentally decent, rational leaders. Yes, dear reader, our sense of crisis also abates.

    There are two key responses to news of the latest climate disasters:

    ‘It’s bad, but not that bad. It’s manageable and we can carry on pretty much as normal.’

    An alternative take:

    ‘No, it is that bad. This is just the ball starting to roll – it will gather more and more and more momentum, and it won’t stop. We need drastic change now!

    The second of these is inarguably correct. The first is the underlying message delivered by state-corporate media that have an existential vested interest in the status quo, in discouraging us from seeking serious change. And this is exactly why the level of public alarm does not yet reflect the terrifying, rollercoaster reality depicted in the soaring and crashing graphs measuring temperatures and ice coverage.

    Professor Bill McGuire, Emeritus Professor of Geophysical and Climate Hazards at University College London, tweeted last month:

    ‘I hope to God I am wrong, but to me, it is looking increasingly as if we have reached some sort of tipping point, with the global temperature, sea-surface temperature, ice loss, and other parameters, all going through the roof.’

    McGuire was responding to reports headlined by CNN thus:

    ‘Four alarming charts that show just how extreme the climate is right now’

    The report noted:

    ‘We’re only halfway through 2023 and so many climate records are being broken, some scientists are sounding the alarm, fearing it could be a sign of a planet warming much more rapidly than expected.’

    The ‘four alarming charts’ showed that global air temperatures have risen to record levels in 2023. Oceans are also heating up to record levels and show no sign of stopping. Antarctic sea ice is at record lows. And atmospheric carbon dioxide levels hit a new record high in 2023. But many of these records are not merely being broken, they are being obliterated. Brian McNoldy, an expert in hurricanes and sea level rise at the University of Miami Rosenstiel School, captured it exactly:

    ‘I know there are a million people sharing temperature anomaly charts and maps lately, but there’s a good reason for that. This is totally bonkers and people who look at this stuff routinely can’t believe their eyes. Something very weird is happening.’

    At around the same time, nearly 110 million Americans in the United States were reported to be living in an area the US weather service flagged as ‘experiencing extreme heat’, with at least 100 people having died as a result in Mexico where temperatures came close to 50C. So far this year, the overall heat-related deaths in Mexico are almost triple the figures in 2022.

    Professor McGuire tweeted of this crisis:

    ‘Unfortunately, you ain’t seen nuthin’ yet.’

    CNN notes that some scientists ‘have said while the records are alarming, they are not unexpected due to both the continued rise of planet-heating pollution and the arrival of the natural climate phenomenon El Niño, which has a global heating effect’.

    Ryan Stauffer, a NASA scientist studying air pollution and ozone, tweeted an extraordinary map of the United States with huge swathes of territory impacted by extreme heat while other massive areas are suffering from poor air quality thanks to 500 Canadian wildfires, half of which are still out of control. The fires have burned 8 million hectares of land, almost the size of Austria, releasing 160 million tonnes of carbon into the atmosphere. The area destroyed is greater than the combined area burned in 2016, 2019, 2020 and 2022, according to the Canadian Interagency Forest Fire Centre. Indeed, the area is 11 times the Canadian average for the same period over previous years.

    Stauffer commented:

    ‘What a map. Welcome to the new pyrocene?’

    Three major US cities, Chicago, Detroit and Washington DC, were ranked as the top three worst places in the world for air quality. According to the air tracking service IQAir, all three cities’ air being classified as ‘unhealthy’. Atmospheric scientist, Matthew Cappucci commented:

    ‘D.C. and much of the U.S. will be facing intermittent smoke all summer long – probably until October.’

    In Texas, a vast heat dome killing at least 12 people has sent demand for power to a record high as homes and businesses turned up the air conditioning. Under a heat dome, wind patterns trap high pressure in a particular area stretching 5 to 10 miles in altitude and across hundreds or thousands of miles horizontally. These wind patterns are generated by the jet stream, a band of fast-moving air high in the atmosphere, which usually moves in a wavelike pattern. The Financial Times reports:

    ‘When the waves become larger, they can move more slowly and eventually become stationary, leading to hot or cold air becoming trapped.’

    Michael Mann, a Professor of Earth and Environmental Science at the University of Pennsylvania, said that climate change was bringing more persistent ‘stuck’ summer jet stream patterns, leading to hot sinking air becoming trapped over one region.

    On Democracy Now! science writer Susan Joy Hassol warned that a collapse of Texas’s overstrained electric grid under the heat dome would result in ‘widespread death’:

    ‘The Texas grid appears to be very vulnerable to a heat event like this because it doesn’t have the capacity to bring in power from other places. And this heat dome is really expanding. They say 50 million people are already exposed to dangerous heat by this heat dome.’

    Hassol’s warning recalls comments made in March 2022, when it was widely reported that both poles of the planet had experienced very extreme heat dome events. While the Arctic heat wave saw temperatures an astonishing 30 degrees C (86 degrees F) above normal, temperatures in Antarctica were 34 degrees C (93.2 degrees F) above normal. Professor Jeffrey Kargel, senior scientist at the Planetary Science Institute, Tucson, Arizona, commented:

    ‘It seems to be a new weather phenomenon, and it is not included in current climate models. If it happened twice in two years, I’ll say it will happen again, and again, in various parts of the globe.’

    As though echoing Hassol, Kargel added that we must ask what would happen if a similar event struck Houston, Texas, say, in the middle of summer, when the normal high is 95 degrees F:

    ‘Okay, let’s just consider the 2021 event… The epicenter of the 2021 event was in Lytton, BC, where the worst day reached a temperature 44 degrees F (24.4 degrees C) warmer than the normal high temperature for late June. Just do simple addition: 95 + 44 = 139 F [59.4 degrees C] … Considering Houston’s normal humidity, I’ll venture a guess: step outdoors in that, even in the shade, and you’ll be dead in a few minutes.’

    Kargel continued:

    ‘Now, with temperatures possibly attaining the 130’s in Houston, I’ll take it as a given that the electrical grid will collapse. So, no cooling of buildings. There will be some thermal inertia which keeps building interiors cooler than the outside daytime high, but will very many people survive high humidity and indoors temperature say, even in the low 120’s F?

    ‘How many people would die if the heat dome spanned from Houston to Atlanta? Or Charleston, South Carolina to Boston? Or New Delhi to Ho Chi Minh City?’

    Happy British Sunbathers Anticipate Another ‘Sizzler’

    Meanwhile, in Britain, the UK has just had the hottest June on record, the Met Office confirmed. The average monthly temperature of 15.8C (60.4F) exceeded the previous highest average June temperature recorded by 0.9C. Previously, heat records were broken by tiny fractions of a degree – almost one degree is an enormous jump.

    Worse may soon be on the way. Over standard pictures of happy sunbathers in deckchairs on Bournemouth beach, a Daily Mirror headline read:

    ‘UK facing scorching “heat dome” with the chance of a 40C hot weather blast in just weeks’

    The report noted that ‘global temperatures are breaking records – and are likely to continue breaking records’. Jim Dale, British Weather Services’ senior meteorological consultant, said:

    ‘… there’s… every chance we’ll break the 35C mark in the second week of July and August. That’s a 50/50 chance.

    ‘The 40C degrees is more likely in August than in July. But there’s everything to play for as far as the summer is concerned.’

    The Mirror noted that the first two weeks of August were the most likely time to see a repeat of last year’s 40 degree C event that the paper described jovially as a ‘sizzler’.

    Responding to our comment on the Mirror’s upbeat focus on happy sunbathers, a tweeter replied:

    ‘Happy working-class people enjoying the summer sunshine. Can’t be having that, can we @medialens?’

    To put that comment and the term ‘sizzler’ in perspective, Juley Fulcher, worker health and safety advocate for progressive non-profit Public Citizen, estimates that heat exposure is responsible for as many as 2,000 worker fatalities in the US each year and as many as 170,000 injuries – many of them arising from indoor work in restaurants and warehouses, as well as outside jobs. Fulcher said:

    ‘It’s a huge problem. Action is long overdue.’

    Last November, Dr Hans Henri P. Kluge, the World Health Organisation’s Regional Director for Europe, commented of Europe:

    ‘Based on country data submitted so far, it is estimated that at least 15,000 people died specifically due to the heat in 2022. Among those, nearly 4,000 deaths in Spain, more than 1,000 in Portugal, more than 3,200 in the United Kingdom, and around 4,500 deaths in Germany were reported by health authorities during the 3 months of summer.

    ‘This estimate is expected to increase as more countries report on excess deaths due to heat.’

    Professional journalists aside, many people are increasingly concerned about climate collapse for a simple, very good reason. A shocking new survey by the Society of Actuaries Research Institute has found that 53% of Americans reported that extreme weather events – including hurricanes, tornadoes, heatwaves, wildfires and flooding – have adversely affected their health. Moreover, more than half of the respondents reported negative impacts on their property (51%), communities (58%) and feelings of general safety (65%) from extreme weather events.

    42% have experienced short-term injury or illness

    23% report complications to an existing chronic condition

    15% have suffered a long-term injury or a new chronic condition.

    Meanwhile, in 2022 alone, five oil companies ⁠- ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell, BP, and TotalEnergies ⁠- more than doubled their profits to an all-time historic record of $200 billion.

    How bad is the current situation? Two years ago, Bill McGuire wrote a deeply honest and moving open letter to his climate scientist colleagues. It could not be clearer from his comments, that climate scientists are not telling the truth (and not in the way the climate deniers mean!):

    ‘In truth, the reason you have never liked to stick your head above the parapet is for fear of being shot at by your peers. As a fellow scientist I understand that – I really do. There is nothing worse than being ridiculed within your own community. It can, I know, mean loss of prestige, a squeeze on funding, and a closing down of opportunities for advancement. I understand, therefore, why you continue to play down anything that might draw attention, why you lie low, tow [sic – toe] the party line.

    ‘I know, too, what you really think and feel about climate change, because I have talked to many of you in private, and the response – without exception – has been that the true situation is far worse than you are prepared to admit in public. So, behind the facade, I know that you are torn between speaking out and holding back, that you are as desperate as anyone for the measures to be taken that the science demands. Most of all, I know that you fear, as much as anybody else, for your children’s future in the world of climate chaos they will be forced to inhabit.’

    It’s not just climate scientists. We need everyone to start speaking out, to expose the corporate media illusion of normality, to demand action immediately.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Shortly after midnight this past Friday, guards found 37-year-old Elizabeth Hagerty dead in her unair-conditioned Texas prison cell. The day before, temperatures had reached nearly 100 degrees. Hagerty was scheduled for parole on August 2. She had been sentenced to four years in prison for not meeting the many requirements of her 10-year probation sentence for a fight with an ex-girlfriend.

    Source

  • Oceans of the world are in a dangerous red zone that exceeds safe limits for marine and terrestrial life because of excessive heat. Several statements by climate scientists show heightened concerns about how this plays out, as 2023 could be a major inflection point with global warming suddenly turning much worse. For example, the recent work of Annalisa Bracco, Ph.D., Professor School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Georgia Tech, Ocean Heat Is Off The Charts – Here’s What That Means for Humans and Ecosystems Around the World, Phys.org, June 21, 2023.

    The backgrounder for ocean heat taking center stage includes major developed countries that haven’t done nearly enough to cool things down despite Paris ’15 commitments to cut emissions, which, in most cases. have proven to be nothing more than hollow promises, as multi-billion-dollar subsidies for fossil fuels continue unabated, no pushback for one of the most subsidized industries in the world, assuredly the most subsidized industry in the U.S.

    Therefore, a question arises whether this dereliction of duty or a failure to meet Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) at the heart of the Paris Agreement, Article 4, Paragraph 2, merits an ad hoc international emergency meeting to pull out all the stops to fight global warming. After all Paris ’15 hasn’t done the job.

    Two-thirds of the planet consists of ocean that’s under attack by heat-seeking missiles of human and/or natural origin of greenhouse gases, CO2, CH4, and more. There are 10 primary greenhouse gases and more beyond that. Furthermore, the oceans have absorbed 90% of global heat for far too long; it’s starting to push back, erupting throughout the planet in a preview of a climate change horror movie that’ll outdo Don’t Look Up principally because Don’t Look Up’s asteroid was instantaneous with a precise target, whereas, global warming’s a thousand cuts across the planet; it hits everywhere.

    Based upon the script for Don’t Look Up (2021 Best Picture Nominee), leaders of the world should be held accountable for ignoring science, which is clearly exposed for all to see in the film version starring Meryl Streep, Leonardo DiCaprio, Cate Blanchett, and Jennifer Lawrence. World leaders knew but did nothing. They must have known, not the actors, but real-world leaders that attended annual Conference of the Parties -COP- climate meetings, over 100 world leaders at COP27 last year, with UN Secretary-General António Auterres warning, time and again, and again, and again, ad nauseum:The world is headed for climate catastrophe without urgent action.”

    We now know that most world leaders sought photo ops, nothing more! Here’s the proof: Global emissions, the feedstock for global warming, continue setting new records every year. Only humans can control this. In May 2023, CO2 hit a new record high of 424 ppm according to Mauna Loa monthly mean data by NOAA Monitoring Lab. As a result, ocean heat is off the charts, puzzling climate scientists, wondering whether it’s a temporary phenomenon or a new era of devastating global heat sweeping the world that won’t stop. Ocean temperatures are the highest in the 40 years of satellite monitoring.

    The North Atlantic had its warmest May in over 150 years, up to 9°F above normal, registered by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) as Category 4 “extreme” and Category 5 “beyond extreme”. Alarmingly, water temps in early June soared even higher than in May. “The North Atlantic heat wave is part of a rapid warming of global ocean waters since March that has scientists confused about the cause and concerned about its impacts.” (‘Beyond Extreme’ Ocean Heat Wave in North Atlantic is Worst in 170 Years, Boston Globe, June 23, 2023.)

    “NOAA said in a report last week…  it appears to have continued at a record pace during June. The chance of seeing such warm sea surface temperatures is 1-in-256,000 according to Brian McNoldy, a hurricane researcher at the University of Miami, who said, ‘this is beyond extraordinary.” Ibid.

    According to Dr. Annalisa Bracco/Georgia Tech: “The impact is breaking through in disruptive ways around the world.” For example, the Sea of Japan is a staggering 4°C above average, and Indian monsoons are way below normal strength, thus depleting South Asian crops. The marine heat wave along the eastern North Atlantic inhibits rainfall across Spain, France, England, and the whole of the Scandinavian peninsula. Sea surface temps are running 1-3°C above normal from Europe to the coast of Africa.

    El Niño is starting to come into play as equatorial Pacific Ocean warm waters weaken trade winds in the tropics, affecting oceans around the world. The past three years of La Niña with cooler equatorial Pacific waters is over and no longer masking global warming.

    A major contributor is abnormally low Arctic sea ice. A dark water background absorbs enormous quantities of solar radiation in contrast to ice that reflects 80-90% back to outer space. Alas, the world’s largest reflector of solar radiation has been humbled by global warming. There is a school of thought making the rounds that the Atlantic and Arctic Oceans are merging with negative implications for sea life and weather patterns for the entire Northern Hemisphere going haywire.

    Dr. Bracco visited NORCE climate center in Bergen, Norway in June for two weeks to meet other ocean scientists. Warm waters across the eastern North Atlantic resulted in sunny, hot weather in Scandinavia when typically up to 70% of days experience downpours, but not now. As a result, the agricultural sector of Norway is preparing for drought conditions as bad as four years ago when they lost 40% of crop yield.

    Dr. Bracco’s experience included a trip across the country: “Our train from Bergen to Oslo had a two-hour delay because the brakes of one car overheated and the 90 F (32 C) temperatures approaching the capital were too high to allow them to cool down.”

    Ocean heat is hitting South Asia especially hard. Ironically, India felt compelled in 2022 to reopen >100 coal mines to meet energy demands for artificial cooling of buildings, as overloaded grids and widespread power outages hit well ahead of this year’s onslaught. Thereby, global warming brings forth a vicious Sisyphean frustration cycle, forcing humans to burn additional fossil fuels emitting more CO2 to stay cool but enhancing buildup of more heat. It’s a horrendous losing proposition, comparable to Sisyphus repeatedly trying to roll a boulder up the mountainside only to see it roll back down.

    A recent CNN headline focused on human risks: “Humans Approaching Limits of ‘Survivability’ as Swelting Heatwaves Engulf Parts of Asia, CNN, June 26, 2023. It conforms to a recent UN IPCC warning: “Increased heatwaves, droughts and floods are already exceeding plants’ and animals’ tolerance thresholds. These weather extremes are occurring simultaneously, causing cascading impacts that are increasingly difficult to manage.” (“In South Asia, Record Heat Threatens Future of Farming”, UN Environment Programme, June 26, 2023.)

    “Limits of survivability” and “exceeding plant and animal tolerance thresholds” are phrases that increasingly haunt news stories throughout the world. When does this become an emergency?

    What’s the next step for the world’s political leaders? Oh yes, of course, UNFCCC COP28 convenes November 30-December 12, 2023, in Dubai, United Arab Emirates (UAE), a global climate event (in oil-rich Dubai) expecting over 140 heads of state, over 80,000 delegates and 5,000 media professionals, which will be record COP turnout with more heavy-duty-brass than attended the Super Bowl. You gotta wonder how hard they’ll debate the brutal impact of 37B tons of CO2 emitted into the atmosphere in 2022, up 50% since 25B tons was emitted in 2000 and a 7-fold increase since 5B tons was emitted in 1950 (“How the World Passed a Carbon Threshold and Why It Matters”, YaleEnvironment360, January 24, 2017.)

    Thus far, within one human lifetime the scorecard for annual CO2 emissions is progressively 5 billion tons, 25 billion tons, 37 billion tons.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.