Climate crisis

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘A national scandal’: how US climate funding could make water pollution worse

      by

      ‘A national scandal’: how US climate funding could make water pollution worse The Inflation Reduction Act was hailed for its climate funding – but some are concerned several provisions will worsen a growing environmental disasterThe $369bn Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) was applauded by a chorus of US organizations and activists enthusiastic about the generous funding earmarked for projects designed to mitigate climate change and improve environmental health.But some researchers and activists are raising concerns that several provisions of the new law will actually worsen a growing environmental disaster in the nation’s heartland by increasing the tide of farm-related pollution washing into waterways and groundwater.US dairy policies drive small farms to ‘get big or get out’ as monopolies get rich Read moreThe sweeping new statute, which includes more than $140bn in incentives designed to promote renewable fuels and cleaner electricity generation, could slash greenhouse gas emissions 40% below 2005 levels by the end of the decade. But in its efforts to promote climate-friendly agriculture, it also promotes corn-fed ethanol refineries and manure-based energy production that could unintentionally supercharge fertilizer and fecal contamination.“It’s going to end up in the water,” Rebecca Ohrtman, a water quality specialist from Iowa, said of the contaminants from crop production and what are commonly called “confined animal feeding operations” (CAFOs). Ohrtman spent much of her career as a water protection coordinator with the state of Iowa. “I can’t believe they’re going to provide all this funding with no strings attached.”The Great Lakes and midwest regions face nothing short of a water quality emergency, say those on the frontlines. Farming-related contaminants have already fouled thousands of drinking water wells from Minnesota to Missouri, and virtually every waterway in Iowa is degraded with little regulation to rein in the pollutants.“It’s already a national emergency and a national scandal,” said Emma Schmit, a senior organizer in the Midwest for Food and Water Watch, an environmental advocacy group. “When we test our waterways, the main pollutants are E coli and nitrates and phosphorus from agriculture. These are pathogens and contaminants that can cause serious issues for people. We’re about to give large corporate farms carte blanche to make it worse.”A threat to clean waterHow can legislation billed as an environmental protection statute risk being a primary threat to clean water? The answer is that there could be seemingly unintended consequences of investments to reduce greenhouse gases and replace fossil fuels with cleaner options.There are two particular farm-related provisions in the IRA that won’t put more food on the table, but will nevertheless impact water quality in the midwest. One will incentivize producing more ethanol, a renewable fuel, from corn. Another will move to limit emissions of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, by processing manure generated by massive livestock and poultry farms. Wastes from these could end up polluting waterways.The incentive for more corn production is particularly worrisome as farmers typically make heavy use of nitrogen fertilizers when growing corn, said Chris Jones, a research engineer and water quality specialist at the University of Iowa.“Anytime we incentivize production of a nutrient-hungry crop, you’re going to get nutrient pollution,” Jones said. “Corn loses a lot of nutrients to the environment. We know that for a certainty. We’re incentivizing further production. We’re going to get more pollution. You don’t need to be a genius to know that.”Corn is the most heavily fertilized row crop in America, accounting for 11bn lb of commercial nitrogen fertilizer applied to farmland annually, with nine of the 11bn lb applied in the midwest, according to the USDA. State and federal research shows that up to 70% of applied nitrogen runs off the land and into streams, rivers and groundwater.Agricultural nutrient pollution is the primary reason that the Clean Water Act has not come close to meeting its “fishable and swimmable” goal for US surface waters. Because of waivers written into the Clean Water Act, which last year marked its 50th anniversary, nutrient runoff from arable farms and smaller livestock operations are completely unregulated. (Large livestock operators, meanwhile, are given broad discretion by states for managing and spreading manure.)Boosting corn acreage, to create more ethanol, is one of the Biden administration’s goals. It wants to increase ethanol production from 15bn gallons in 2022 to 21bn gallons this year, and 23bn gallons by 2025, principally to meet the administration’s national energy strategy for ethanol to be a primary feedstock for producing “sustainable” fuel for airlines.Though the $1.01 a gallon tax credit provided in the new law is a win for corn and ethanol producers, the administration’s plan for ethanol is a big problem for water. Corn farmers already apply more than 4bn lb of nitrogen fertilizer to produce the current national supply of ethanol. Based on this usage rate, refining five billion more gallons of ethanol could lead to 1.5bn more pounds of fertilizer being applied to fields in corn-growing states. That would exacerbate the water quality issues plaguing the region.“We’re putting more and more pressure on the productivity of agriculture to produce more corn, more livestock for our fuel,” said John Ikerd, professor emeritus of agricultural economics at the University of Missouri. “It’s also producing more pollution. Any other industry that creates this amount of pollution and represented this level of risk to public health would be heavily regulated.”Congress didn’t add any additional safeguards for water in the Inflation Reduction Act.LivestockThe law’s effect on large cattle and other livestock feeding operations also is worrisome.The country’s large livestock operations, primarily centered in the midwest, produce hundreds of billions of gallons of untreated liquid manure and tens of millions of tons of solid manure that are spread over farmland with scant oversight. Manure contains nitrogen, phosphorus, and dangerous pathogens that can also run off and contaminate waters across the region.In 2016, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) identified phosphorus and nitrogen discharges from US farmland as “the single greatest challenge to our nation’s water quality”.For millions of Americans in the heartland already contending with dirty water, the new law risks making the country’s most severe surface and groundwater pollution worse, according to water quality experts.This is because another feature of the IRA is a flurry of tax incentives to generate renewable energy from biodigesters – large tanks where bacteria and heat help convert organic waste to methane.The American Biogas Council, an industry trade group, counts 2,300 biodigesters in operation in the US. With tax credits in the new climate law, the council estimates 15,000 more could be installed, including nearly 8,600 on large dairy, hog, and poultry farms. The methane produced could be used by electricity producers in rural regions.But biodigesters don’t reduce the volume of waste. The same amount of liquid and solid manure that goes into biodigesters is returned as “digestate” The liquid waste contains more concentrated forms of phosphorus and nitrogen and is used as fertilizer on farmland close to where it was produced and where it will drain into waters in the Midwest.The incentives are sure to lead to more biodigesters. The American Biogas Council, an industry trade group, counts 2,300 biodigesters in operation in the US. With tax credits in the new climate law, the council envisions that 15,000 more will be installed, including nearly 8,600 on large dairy, hog and poultry farms.Even though digesters provide livestock farmers with a new source of revenue, the Biogas Council asserts that the extra cash will not lead to an expansion of intensive animal farming operations and more manure.“That would mean that farms are buying cows to produce manure to put into the biogas system,” said Patrick Serfass, the council’s executive director. “I guarantee you that no one is doing that.”But limited real world evidence suggests that biodigesters are a powerful incentive to increase the number of animals – and the amount of manure – at industrialized livestock operations.Last year, after Iowa enacted a new law that encouraged livestock operations to install biodigesters, five of the nine dairies awarded construction permits said they would also increase the size of their herds. The USDA did not respond to questions raised about the effects of the new statute on water pollution. Corn and livestock industry executives did not respond to interview requests.‘Conservation’ programsIn approving the Inflation Reduction Act, neither the Biden administration nor Congress wholly ignored the risk to water. The law enables the USDA to fund its $19.5bn climate smart program, a portion of which is devoted to “managing nutrients”.The law also provides $18bn for decades-old “conservation” programs. “The Inflation Reduction Act provides major incentives for a broad range of different practices and strategies for managing nutrients, guarding water quality and keeping carbon in the soil,” US senator Debbie Stabenow, the Michigan Democrat and chairwoman of the Senate agriculture committee, said. “There are a lot of strategies that work but there are not enough farmers participating because there hasn’t been enough money to fund all the requests.”Indeed, the climate smart program includes $300 million for organic and sustainable farm practices, the largest investment ever made by the federal government for environmentally sensitive crop and livestock production. But while that $300 million has been allotted to dozens of growers, as well as other research and planning projects, these farms ultimately account for just a few thousand acres of the more than 100 million acres of cropland in the Corn Belt and Great Lakes states.Most of the USDA “climate smart” and conservation programs support existing voluntary “best management practices” that include not plowing before planting, raising cover crops, and planting buffer strips to soak up excess nutrients. But best management practices, initially designed to control soil erosion, have been largely ineffective at reducing phosphorus in streams in the Great Lakes states.In fact, installing best management practices to impede discharges from fields can make conditions worse. Two years ago, during the annual meeting of researchers studying Lake Erie’s harmful algal blooms, Deanna Osmond, a crop and soil scientist at North Carolina State University, reported that the most popular best management practices thought to curb runoff actually increased nutrient concentrations that cause harmful blooms.For instance, buffer strips planted on field edges increased the amount of phosphorus draining into ditches and streams. The same thing occurred with planting cover crops. “Conservation practices have potential tradeoffs,” Osmond said. “We have to acknowledge these tradeoffs.”These best management practices, moreover, have never been especially popular with corn growers and livestock producers in the nine-state corn belt from the Dakotas to Missouri. Just 2.2m of Iowa’s 30m acres of farmland, for example, were planted with cover crops, according to the most recent analysis by the state agriculture department.“We’ve got an industrial agriculture system that’s regulated as if it were still scattered, independent, diversified small family farms,” said Ikerd, the agricultural economist. “It’s not. Industrial agriculture focuses on production and profitability. Not public health. Not conservation. Not the environment.”
      This report, co-published with the New Lede and Circle of Blue, was made possible by an investigative reporting fellowship awarded by the Alicia Patterson Foundation
      TopicsUS politicsOur unequal earthClimate crisisfeaturesReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      John Kerry: rich countries must respond to developing world anger over climate

      by

      John Kerry: rich countries must respond to developing world anger over climateUS climate envoy says there needs to be work on details of ‘loss and damage’ fund in 2023 People in developing countries are feeling increasingly angry and “victimised” by the climate crisis, the US climate envoy John Kerry has warned, and rich countries must respond urgently.“I’ve been chronicling the increased frustration and anger of island states and vulnerable countries and small African nations and others around the world that feel victimised by the fact that they are a minuscule component of emissions,” he said. “And yet [they are] paying a very high price. Seventeen of the 20 most affected countries in the world, by the climate crisis, are in Africa, and yet 48 sub-Saharan countries total 0.55% of all emissions.”The Cop27 UN climate summit in Egypt in November was nearly derailed by a bitter row between rich and poor nations over “loss and damage”, the term for the most severe impacts of climate disaster, and the means of rescuing and rebuilding poor nations afflicted by them.The US, the EU, the UK and other rich nations eventually agreed to a new fund for loss and damage, without saying how much money would be in the fund or where the finance would come from.Kerry said the US was committed to helping the developing world with loss and damage, but that the details of the fund would need more work in 2023.“How can you look somebody in the eye, with a straight face, and not accept the notion that there are damages, there are losses?” he asked. “We see them all around the world. You see them in heightened sea levels, we see them in fires, we see them in floods, in Pakistan and elsewhere. We see them in the higher intensity of storms.”But he added: “How you manage [loss and damage] is still at issue: how do you approach this challenge of the financial arrangements. But it was important to acknowledge that they’re there and we have to work at this in good faith.”Kerry was speaking to the Guardian in London in December. The White House faces severe problems in raising climate finance through Congress, with a Republican-controlled House of Representatives likely to prove unwilling to disburse funds. The likely difficulties were presaged in a finance bill passed just before Christmas, which contained less than $1bn in climate funds.At Cop27, Kerry suggested international markets for carbon offsets and the private sector might provide additional sources of funding. However, those discussions are at an early stage, and likely to be fraught.Next year’s Cop28 talks will be held in the United Arab Emirates, a major oil producer. Some have raised concerns that this could open up opportunities for oil lobbyists to slow progress. There were more than 630 fossil fuel lobbyists at Cop27 in Sharm el-Sheikh, and pushback from oil-producing countries prevented stronger resolutions from being passed on the phase-down of fossil fuels and on reaffirming the global target of limiting temperature rises to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.Kerry rebuffed such concerns. “I think it’s ideal that UAE, which is an oil- and gas-producing nation, has had the courage to stand up and say, ‘We’re going to lead a Cop that’s going to address this challenge,’” he said. “They’re on the cutting edge of a lot of [low-carbon technology], they’ve invested vast sums in renewable energy, they’re on the cutting edge of research into nuclear, green hydrogen, batteries,” he said. “I think it’s a really great statement that a country that has had great wealth produced as a result of the old energy economy is now looking to the new energy economy. And is going to be the site of an honest discussion about it.”While discussions on climate finance are urgently needed, cutting emissions must also be a key focus, Kerry insisted. “We can’t walk away from [that],” he said. “You can’t take a holiday [from cutting emissions] because if you do, you’re simply contributing much greater levels of loss and damage and making it harder for the planet as a whole to meet this crisis.”Kerry said he “regretted” that there “was not an adequate collective focus” on cutting emissions at Cop27. But he said that if countries met their commitments on emissions, the target of limiting temperature rises to 1.5C could still be met.‘Extreme event’: warm January weather breaks records across EuropeRead moreSome scientists and observers of the climate talks warned after Cop27 that the 1.5C target was being lost. Kerry rejected that view, but agreed that it would require far greater efforts.“[The 1.5C target] is on life support – it’s still feasible, but only if we make better choices,” he said. Not all of the G20 group of the world’s biggest economies, which are also responsible for about 80% of global emissions, were coming up with the necessary targets and measures to meet them, he said. Limiting heating to 1.5C was, he said, “within the realm of possibility, but only if we get countries to step up across the board”.US cooperation with China, the world’s biggest emitter, would be key to that, he added. “China presents a real challenge because of the levels of their overall emissions and their use of coal. We’ve got to find a way to work with China cooperatively.”TopicsClimate crisisJohn KerryCop27US politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      US fails to give money promised for developing countries to ease climate impacts

      by

      US fails to give money promised for developing countries to ease climate impactsSpending bill passed by Senate includes less than $1bn in climate assistance for poorer nations even though Biden promised $11.4bn The US has risked alienating developing countries hit hardest by the climate crisis, after Congress delivered just a fraction of the money promised by Joe Biden to help poorer nations adapt to worsening storms, floods and droughts.Biden has promised $11.4bn each year for developing countries to ease climate impacts and help them shift to renewable energy but the vast $1.7tn spending bill to keep the US government running, passed by the Senate on Thursday, includes less than $1bn in climate assistance for these countries.The bill, which is expected to pass the House and be signed by the president, includes $270m for adaptation programs, largely for countries in Asia and the Pacific islands, along with $260m in clean energy investment, aimed at Africa. Another $185m will go on “sustainable landscapes programs”.The failure to so far meet Biden’s pledge risks undermining the White House’s insistence that the US is committed to helping deal with the fallout of a climate crisis that it is a leading instigator of, through its huge historical and ongoing greenhouse gas emissions. Developing countries will need anything from $340bn to $2tn a year by 2030, according to various studies, to cope with the cascading impacts of global heating.Saleemul Huq, director of the International Centre for Climate Change and Development, based in Bangladesh, said that the US’ fair share of climate aid is far beyond even what Biden promised. “So one billion is really an insult to the developing countries,” he said. “The paltry allocation of only $1bn to support the developing countries is extremely disappointing.”US environmental groups have welcomed elements of the spending bill, including a large increase in the budgets of the Environmental Protection Agency and department of interior, as well as $600m for water infrastructure in Jackson, Mississippi, but criticized the glaring lack of climate aid.“Funding levels for international climate aid are woefully inadequate to meet our global commitments or do our fair share to support under-resourced countries bearing the brunt of climate impacts,” said Sara Chieffo, vice-president of government affairs at the League of Conservation Voters.Biden’s administration had made the climate spending a priority, with John Kerry, the US’s climate envoy, dispatched to lobby lawmakers. Both Biden and Kerry attended the UN Cop27 climate talks in Egypt last month and vowed the US would step up its assistance. “The climate crisis is hitting hardest those countries and communities that have the fewest resources to respond and to recover,” Biden noted in his speech to delegates at the summit, repeating his promise to extract the required money from Congress.Administration officials say the goal is to deliver the assistance by 2024 and that money could come from other sources than direct appropriations from Congress. But the likelihood of doing this becomes far more remote once Republicans, who have largely rejected the idea of providing further aid for climate damages, gain control of the House of Representatives in January.A White House spokeswoman said that the $11bn target is “a top priority for us and critical to the success of president Biden’s climate agenda. And the president has made clear that he is going to fight to see this fully funded.“Over the past several weeks and throughout the past weekend, members of the administration worked to secure funding in (financial year) 2023 that puts us on a path to achieving this goal. We will continue to work with Congress to make achieving this goal in (financial year) 2024 a reality.”TopicsClimate crisisUS politicsJoe BidennewsReuse this content More

    • 200 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Here are some crucial issues we’re covering in 2023 – with your help | Betsy Reed

      by

      Here are some crucial issues we’re covering in 2023 – with your helpBetsy ReedThe new Guardian US editor sets out some of our key priorities for 2023, including abortion rights, the climate crisis and investigations into the powers shaping American life

      This Giving Tuesday, please consider a year-end gift to the Guardian to support our journalism in the coming year
      On election night this November, the Guardian’s reporters fanned out across the country, keeping close watch on key races targeted by the election-denial movement instigated by Donald Trump. Candidates who embraced Trump’s “big lie” about the 2020 election sought control over pivotal offices that would allow them to tip the balance toward Trump when he tries to reclaim the presidency in 2024.To the relief of our readers, as well as millions of Americans, their efforts failed spectacularly.Across the country, many Americans rejected campaigns based on lies and racist demagoguery. Voters flocked to the polls to protest the supreme court’s attack on abortion rights in its reversal of Roe v Wade earlier this year. Reproductive freedom and democracy proved more resilient than many dour pundits had predicted.But if we pause to celebrate this outcome, we should also reflect on how we arrived at such a dangerous moment – and how much danger remains. Authoritarian forces, emboldened by Trump but long predating him, still possess cultural influence and institutional power. As the legendary activist and scholar Frances Fox Piven recently told the Guardian’s Ed Pilkington, the fight over elemental democracy is far from over. “The fascist mob doesn’t have to be the majority to set in motion the kinds of policies that crush democracy,” she said.As the new editor of Guardian US, I’m determined to dedicate our journalistic resources to the scrutiny of those dangerous forces in 2023 – with your help. This Giving Tuesday, please consider a year-end gift to the Guardian to support our journalism in the coming year.Here are three of my priorities for the Guardian US newsroom in 2023:
      Abortion rights. There are few areas where Trump’s damaging legacy is more evident than reproductive rights. His appointments to the supreme court, made with the intention of ending the constitutional right to abortion, will profoundly affect the health and freedom of people in this country for years to come. We’ll be reporting on the human impact of abortion bans – and the inspiring movement that is fighting back.
      The climate crisis. Despite the Biden administration’s landmark law to decarbonize the US economy, fossil fuel emissions continue to rise, and Republican control of the House of Representatives will bring with it aggressive attempts to roll back progress. We’ll be closely tracking the implementation of the Inflation Reduction Act, including efforts by the fossil fuel industry and the right wing to stymie change. We will also double down on our groundbreaking environmental justice coverage, exposing how communities that lack racial and economic privilege bear the brunt of government and corporate negligence.
      Investigations. In 2023, we’ll be digging deeper into the powers secretly shaping the contours of American life. We know a lot, for example, about the toxins tainting our food and water – but it takes a different kind of reporting to pin down the corporate actors responsible for spreading them, and the government regulators who have failed to protect the public. From police unions to gun manufacturers to crypto titans to rightwing pressure groups, we will reveal the influential networks whose machinations lie at the root of the crises we report on every day, whether it’s racism in the criminal justice system or soaring economic inequality.
      I’m thrilled to work at the Guardian because I know it’s a special place with a unique role in the global media ecosystem. At this moment of jeopardy for democratic values, we don’t settle for milquetoast, down-the-middle journalism that engages in false equivalence in the name of neutrality. We know there is a right and a wrong side in the fight against racism and climate destruction and for democracy and reproductive justice. Our newsroom is passionately dedicated to delivering timely, fair, accurate reporting to readers who care about the issues we cover as much as we do.Our business model reflects our values, too. Rather than relying on billionaire owners or pursuing profits to appease shareholders, we depend on support from readers. Your donations are the reason we are able to carry on with our work. If you can, please consider a gift to fund our reporting in 2023. We are very grateful.TopicsUS newsAbortionClimate crisisInvestigative journalismUS politicsThe GuardiancommentReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Qatar’s World Cup of woe: inside the 18 November Guardian Weekly

      by

      Qatar’s World Cup of woe: inside the 18 November Guardian WeeklyGeopolitical football. Plus: a world beyond 8 billion people
      Get the Guardian Weekly magazine delivered to your home address Ordinarily a football World Cup would be a moment for celebration, a time to savour sport’s power to unite nations and a glorious distraction from the problems of the day. Not this time: the 2022 tournament has been mired in controversy since it was awarded to Qatar 12 years ago. The small but ultra-wealthy Middle Eastern state thought that hosting the world’s most-watched sporting event would showcase it as a major player on the global stage. But instead Qatar has come in for severe criticism on a number of fronts, in particular for its treatment of migrant workers, anti LGBTQ+ laws, and restrictions on freedom of speech.“A deflated football in the desert seemed like a perfect metaphor to capture the controversy,” says illustrator Barry Downard of his cover artwork for this week’s Guardian Weekly magazine.In a special report, Patrick Wintour asks whether Qatar has lost at geopolitical football before the action has even begun. The cartoonist David Squires brilliantly brings to life the plight of a migrant worker turned whistleblower and, in the final reckoning, sports writer Jonathan Liew tries to salvage some actual football from the diplomatic wreckage.On that theme, further back in the features section there’s a reminder of what the game should be about as we meet some of the young people who will be cheering on their teams from afar.Another dubious global milestone was reached this week as the world’s population passed 8 billion, according to UN estimates. In a the first of a series of dispatches from the frontline of population growth, Hannah Ellis-Petersen reports from India, which next year will overtake China as the planet’s most populous nation, on what the shift means for the world.The US midterm elections saw the Democrats fare better than expected, retaining control of the Senate despite looking likely to lose control of the House by a small margin to the Republicans. The more consequential outcome may be for Donald Trump: Chris McGreal and David Smith ask if the former president’s grip on the GOP is weakening, and if his rival Ron DeSantis’s time may be coming.If your settlement is at existential risk from climate change, is the answer to move it? Guardian Australia’s Pacific editor Kate Lyons visits Fiji’s vulnerable Pacific islands, where communities have started to do just that – discovering that it is not nearly as simple as it sounds.Get the Guardian Weekly magazine delivered to your home addressTopicsQatarInside Guardian WeeklyWorld CupWorld Cup 2022Middle East and north AfricaPopulationIndiaChinaReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Pelosi accuses Republicans of treating climate crisis like ‘it’s all a hoax’ at Cop27

      by

      Pelosi accuses Republicans of treating climate crisis like ‘it’s all a hoax’ at Cop27Democrat makes surprise appearance at climate summit as midterms forecasts predict Republicans will take the House Nancy Pelosi has accused Republicans of treating the climate crisis like “it’s all a hoax” while at the Cop27 climate talks in Egypt, where the US delegation is attempting to remain upbeat about continued progress on dealing with global heating despite uncertainty over the midterm election results.Pelosi, the speaker of the House of Representatives, made a surprise appearance at the climate summit in Sharm el-Sheikh on Thursday. The trip may be one of Pelosi’s last as speaker, with most forecasts predicting Republicans will eke out a narrow majority in the House.There has been “shall we say, a disagreement on the subject” of the climate crisis between the parties, Pelosi said at Cop27, adding that Republicans have said “‘Why are we having this discussion? There is no climate crisis. It’s all a hoax.’ We have to get over that. This is urgent, long overdue.“So we cannot just have any political disagreement or the power of the fossil fuel industry cramping our style as we go forward with this, but to show a path that gets us to where we need to be,” Pelosi said. Pelosi’s appearance at Cop27 comes at a critical point for the future of democracy in the US and the future of the planet. Joe Biden was able to pass the country’s most significant piece of climate legislation this year because Democrats have the majority in both the House and the Senate. With that set to change, the mounting anger at the US for obstructing meaningful global climate action, despite being the world’s largest polluter and richest country, may only get worse.Kathy Castor, a Democrat from Florida who chairs the House subcommittee on the climate crisis, predicted Republicans would axe her committee should they gain power. “They have not really been partners in tackling the climate crisis, and it’s inexplicable because the world’s top scientists tell us we are running out of time,” Castor said.Biden will appear at Cop27 on Friday and a delegation of his cabinet members have already descended upon Sharm el-Sheikh to stress to other, skeptical, countries that the US, which has swerved erratically on climate policy over the years and under Donald Trump completely abandoned the crisis, will still be engaged on fighting global heating even if Republicans do secure Congress.“I think the United States is seen favorably here based on the actions taken in the last two years,” Michael Regan, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), told the Guardian.Regan, who appearing at a number of events at Cop27, cited the inflation reduction act, which includes more than $370bn in climate spending, and the administration’s actions to promote environmental justice.“Polls suggest climate change isn’t a top-tier issue, but most families are focused on keeping a roof over their heads and putting food on the table … so it’s not surprising some issues were registering a little higher than climate change,” Regan said of the midterm elections.“But climate change hasn’t fallen off the list, it’s still a top priority. You don’t even have to trust scientists any more, you just have to look out of the window or put on the news. People are smart enough to see this isn’t some long-term conspiracy theory.”Faced with inconclusive midterm election results, the mood among many veteran climate activists and negotiators from developing countries is one of indifference, as they have seen little difference between the Democrats and Republicans over the past three decades when it comes to the most crucial climate issues like finance and market solutions.Representatives of developing countries have criticized the US at Cop27 for repeatedly failing to deliver promised funding to help them deal with the crippling impacts of floods, fires and droughts, as well as transition to clean energy. Poorer nations are pushing for “loss and damage” finance to help them cope with the climate crisis. John Kerry, the US climate envoy, has admitted that further funding would be unlikely should Republicans gain control of Congress.“The main difference is that at least the Democrats don’t deny climate change, and of course it matters inside America as without the Democrats the Inflation Reduction Act would not have passed, but on the global stage it makes no difference,” said Meena Raman, a climate policy expert from Third World Network and adviser to developing countries at the Cop summits.“It’s the same negotiators, the same blockages, the same bullying, and even now the planet is burning, the US doesn’t change and gets what it wants. It continues to deny its historic responsibility, emphasize the private sector and loans, and uses China as the bogeyman to distract attention away from its unfulfilled pledges.”US greenhouse gas emissions are rising, with plans to vastly expand gas production and fines for oil companies which don’t up extraction.Asad Rehman, director of War on Want and a coordinator of the climate justice groups at Cop27, said: “We are faced with a choice of Republicans who are climate denialists whilst the Democrats are mitigation denialists – happy to speak about the climate emergency but it’s simply hollow words.“From Bush to Biden the USA continues to block real finance, tinker with its emissions and are sacrificing billions to climate catastrophe while expanding fossil fuels which will sacrifice billions to climate catastrophe.”TopicsNancy PelosiCop27Climate crisisUS midterm elections 2022US politicsRepublicansDemocratsnewsReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Many Republicans think climate crisis is a hoax, says Nancy Pelosi – video

      by

      Speaking at a Cop27 panel discussion, the speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, said it was difficult to predict how the results of the midterm elections would affect US action on climate change, but that such action was ‘long overdue’. ‘We have had, shall we say, a disagreement on the subject,’ said Pelosi, referring to the Democrats and the Republicans. ‘When Kathy [Castor, a congresswoman] had her bill on the floor, our [Republican] colleagues said why are we having this discussion, there is no climate crisis, it’s all a hoax.’

      Cop27: climate justice activists call for fossil fuel ‘criminals’ to be kicked out of conference – live More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      US voters hit hardest by climate crisis: ‘I need politicians to care about this’

      by

      US voters hit hardest by climate crisis: ‘I need politicians to care about this’The devastating effects of climate change are motivating how voters cast their ballots in the midterm elections Across the US, temperature records tumbled in a summer of heatwaves, enormous floods drowned entire towns and, in the west, an ongoing drought is now so severe that corpses are being uncovered in rapidly drying reservoirs.Despite these increasingly ominous signs, the climate crisis has struggled to gain much visibility in the lead-up to next week’s midterm elections. “Many voters are more focused on things like inflation, understandably, because people are struggling to get by in this economy,” said Geoffrey Henderson, an expert in climate policy at Duke University.Republican candidates on climate: ‘fake science’ to ‘carbon is healthy’Read moreBut, Henderson added, this will still be a “very high-stakes election for climate change”, with probable Republican control of at least one chamber of Congress likely to result in the gumming up of Joe Biden’s climate agenda. While the president managed to get a huge climate bill passed in the summer, any further legislation or even moves to implement the Inflation Reduction Act, will face obstruction. We spoke to six voters to ask what the climate crisis means for them ahead of the midterms.Wendy Johnson, Phoenix, ArizonaJohnson, 62, is the executive director of the Justa Center – a non-profit organization supporting homeless seniors in Phoenix, America’s hottest city, where it’s getting hotter, drier and deadlier. Returning to live in her home town five years ago after several decades, it’s become clear to Johnson that the climate crisis is hitting Phoenix hard, yet still isn’t a top priority for most voters or elected officials.“It’s obviously hotter in Phoenix than in the 1980s, but there are still too many people who deny climate change and keep voting for their pocketbooks. I see the effects everywhere: at work, elderly homeless people have come in with first and second degree burns from the asphalt or cement which is 30 degrees hotter than the just bearable 105F ambient temperature,” she said.She also described helping elderly people with dehydration, young kids collapsing while playing football or at band practice, and electricity bills doubling. “Climate change is everywhere but it’s still a peripheral issue for most people in the midterm elections.”Inflation hit 13% in Phoenix earlier this year – a record for any US city according to data going back 20 years – exacerbating the climate and homelessness crises driving heat deaths which have almost doubled since 2019.Johnson, who describes herself as a conservative Democrat, has looked into the climate credentials of all the candidates including the down-ticket races, which include the unintended consequences of some seemingly progressive climate pledges, like the displacement of families by a proposed light rail service. But Johnson fears that she’s in the minority.“Election deniers are the same people who still deny climate change, and if we can’t move them despite the proven facts, then for many election integrity is the most important thing.”Alyssa Quintyne, Fairbanks, AlaskaQuintyne is a community organiser in Fairbanks, a city with some of the worst air pollution in the country. This summer, as a record number of blazes enveloped the state after a record-breaking dry spell in the Fairbanks region, Quintyne said she had to really grapple with the meaning of climate crisis. The air had always been bad in her town due to wood-burning stoves and wildfires, but this year was unprecedented. “Things get worse and worse, year after year. And it can happen subtly until it catches you off guard.”Quintyne, 28, has a heart condition that has been linked to air pollution, as well as respiratory issues. “It’s ridiculous that climate change has become such a partisan issue, when really, this is really about are you able to breathe,” she said.In recent years, Quintyne has also seen severe winter storms damage her home and the homes of neighbors and family members; she has seen friends who don’t have the same health issues she does struggle with breathing difficulties as heatwaves and wildfire, fueled by global heating, exacerbate pollution.Of the independent and Democratic candidates for governor, Quintyne said she was still deciding who will strike the right balance between helping uplift and transition the state’s economy – which remains heavily dependent on oil and gas extraction – and prioritizing environmental justice. “I’m still teetering,” she said. “I’m still asking questions.”But above all, in a state that until recently has elected mostly conservative and moderate politicians, she’s looking for candidates who are open to working with environmental activists. “Having a candidate that is at least listening to you to understand where you are coming from, that’s incredibly important,” she said.Edith Tapia, El Paso, TexasLiving in the border city of El Paso, Tapia has noticed several environmental changes in recent years: the change of seasons has felt delayed and unpredictable, and the warmer weather has felt more prominent. Then, there’s the storms. “Every couple of years, [there are] these big snowstorms – or freezes – that shut everything down,” Tapia said. Because El Paso is on a separate electrical grid from the rest of Texas, the city was largely spared power outages during the freeze of 2021. “But Juárez [wasn’t],” said Tapia, referring to the Mexican city across the border from El Paso.Tapia works on both sides of the US-Mexico border as a technical adviser for a humanitarian organization, and saw up close what a freeze can do. Colleagues in Juárez were left without water or gas for multiple days. Additionally, she’s seen power outages in El Paso during extremely hot summer months. Despite the prevalence of environmental and climate issues facing the border region, and Texas more broadly, Tapia hasn’t seen any candidates campaigning on taking bolder climate action. “No candidate, at least that I’ve heard [of], is using this information as a major selling point,” said Tapia.In 2020, a mayoral candidate ran on the issue of fighting climate change in El Paso. “I thought she was excellent,” said Tapia, although the candidate ultimately lost. In general, Tapia notes that climate is on the minds of voters and candidates alike, but not always at first glance. “It is [there], but you have to dig a little deeper,” she said.Shelley Hunter, Quincy, CaliforniaIn the aftermath of the Dixie Fire, Hunter’s hotel, the Quincy Featherbed Inn, was first frequented by fatigued firefighters and now has been filled by construction workers and displaced neighbors. “We have turned to hopefulness instead of being victimized,” she said. But it hasn’t been easy. “Quincy is just trying to survive,” she added.Many of the restaurants have shuttered. Residents are moving away. Tourists that fuel the town’s economy are in shorter supply. “It is not just the fire – it is the pandemic and inflation and the lack of labor is just a perfect storm to impact everyone.”A lifelong Democrat, Hunter is now exploring a political shift in response to the change in circumstances she’s experienced. With increasing threats posed by the climate crisis, which have made water more scarce, spurred the rise in megafires like the Dixie, and spiked temperatures, Hunter fears for her both livelihood and her life. That, she said, has made voting more complicated.“It feels like it is one extreme to the other,” she said of the Democrats and Republicans, who she feels split messaging between climate consciousness and small business support respectively. “Climate change is real. It is happening and it is going to affect everybody,” she said. “And, it’s getting harder and harder to stay in business.”As an early voter who was vocal about her support of the Democratic governor, Gavin Newsom, Hunter cast votes for Republicans down-ballot for the first time this year. It helped that former president Trump wasn’t on the ballot, she said, noting her refusal to vote for candidates supportive of him. But her belief that conservatives will help her small business survive the bumpy road ahead is a complicated one. She’s looking for moderates who can address a multitude of concerns in the face of escalating catastrophes.“It is a shift for me,” she said. But anybody who denies climate change I am not voting for – let’s get real here.Sophie Swope, Bethel, AlaskaSwope is a city councilmember in Bethel, a western Alaskan city in a region that has been warming three to four times faster than the lower 48 states. Melting permafrost and storms have wreaked havoc on infrastructure, and the ground under Swope has literally cracked and shifted. In recent years, Swope, who is Yupik and a member of the Orutsararmiut tribe, has seen erosion and flooding displace homes, schools and even entire villages surrounding Bethel. “Climate change is happening before our eyes,” she said.Swope, 24, said she was looking for candidates who possess an understanding of how the climate crisis is affecting rural and tribal communities, their livelihood and their survival. She’s especially excited to vote for Mary Peltola, the Democratic candidate for Alaska’s sole seat in the US House of Representatives. This summer, Peltola, who is also Yupik and from Bethel, became the first Alaska Native to be elected to Congress. “She has fished in our rivers for the majority of her life,” Swope said. “She understands how precious all of our natural resources are.”Swope founded a non-profit to oppose the development of the Donlin Gold mine – which if completed would be the largest open pit goldmine in the world. In a state where the economy is enmeshed with extractive industries, and where the people live at the Arctic edge of the climate crisis, Swope is also wary of candidates who prioritize development over the health of communities and ecosystems. “I understand that there is a need for mining and extraction at some level,” she said. “But we have to keep in mind how in Alaska every piece of land is precious.”Stuart Palley, Orange county, CaliforniaPhotographer Stuart Palley has been on the frontline of disasters for nearly a decade, capturing the devastation and escalation of wildfires in the west from behind his camera. For Palley, a lifelong Californian, the crisis is also personal. He’s watched as lands he loves turned to moonscapes, seen infernos swallow whole towns and lamented the loss of thousands-year-old trees that succumbed to firestorms. A self-described progressive, bearing witness to countless catastrophes has brought the climate crisis into sharper focus for Palley and the issue is now central to how he vets candidates from either party.“It is important to me that a candidate actually has a plan,” he said, emphasizing that that includes a greater acknowledgment of the intersectionality between climate action and equity and inclusion. “I tend to vote Democrat but there are independents and even the Green party that have better platforms,” he added, noting that his home district’s distinctly purple hue has at times skewed his support blue.“Our district is such a purple district and such a swing district for Congress and the county board of supervisors that the margin is down to a few thousand votes.”But even beyond the scope of his work, he’s worried about California’s treasured landscapes and ecosystems, including Joshua Tree national park near his home, bear the brunt of a warming world. “A lot of these areas are under threat,” he said, adding “I need politicians to care about this.” So, Palley plans to cast his votes with an eye toward the escalating threats looming now and in the future – with full knowledge of what’s at stake.“What’s the point of anything else if we don’t have a livable planet?”TopicsUS midterm elections 2022Climate crisisUS politicsfeaturesReuse this content More