global warming

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      How to Stay Cool Indoors During the Heat Wave

      by

      Summer officially starts on Thursday, and this season is predicted to be hotter than normal — a heat wave across the country this week is expected to affect millions of Americans. In New York, the temperature is forecast to reach 96 degrees by Friday. On Monday, Chicago hit a record-breaking 97 degrees.More than just uncomfortable, the heat can be dangerous and at worst deadly, and it’s only becoming more of a threat with climate change causing rising temperatures. Prolonged exposure to or physical exertion in excessive heat can cause heatstroke, according to the Mayo Clinic. Starting Tuesday, cooling centers — indoor, air-conditioned spaces for public use — will be open during the day in New York. The city’s fire department is also turning some fire hydrants into water sprinklers. If you’re staying at home, here’s what you can do to stay as cool as possible indoors, whether you have an AC or not.What’s the ideal temperature for your home?While you should do what feels most comfortable for you, Carrier, an air-conditioner manufacturer, suggests on its website that 72 degrees is the generally accepted “comfortable indoor temperature for many people.” It continues, “It strikes a good balance between comfort and energy efficiency, making it a popular choice for residential settings.”If you’re away from your home, set your thermostat for higher than usual to save energy and to prevent your AC unit from potentially busting. At night, because heat can disrupt sleep, 60 to 67 degrees is recommended by the Cleveland Clinic.How do you keep your furry friends safe?It depends on the animal, and its size and type, but pets are generally less tolerant of higher temperatures than humans.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Exxon Suit Over Activist Investor’s Climate Proposal Is Dismissed

      by

      A federal judge ruled that the case was moot after the investor, Arjuna Capital, withdrew the proposal with a promise not to try again.A federal judge in Texas on Monday dismissed a lawsuit that Exxon Mobil had filed against an activist investor, Arjuna Capital, over a shareholder proposal that called for cuts in the oil giant’s greenhouse gas emissions.Judge Mark T. Pittman of U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas ruled that because Arjuna had withdrawn its proposal and had vowed not to submit similar proposals, Exxon’s claim was moot.“The trend of shareholder activism in this country isn’t going anywhere,” Judge Pittman wrote, but he added that “the court cannot advise Exxon of its rights without a live case or controversy to trigger jurisdiction.”Exxon sued Arjuna and another investor, Follow This, in January to stop their nonbinding resolution from going to a vote of shareholders. A month earlier, Arjuna had filed a proposal for the resolution, which called on Exxon to accelerate its plans to reduce its carbon emissions “and to summarize new plans, targets and timetables,” according to Exxon’s complaint. Follow This then joined in support, the complaint said.In its complaint, Exxon said the proposal “does not seek to improve ExxonMobil’s economic performance or create shareholder value.”“Defendants’ overarching objective is to force Exxon Mobil to change the nature of its ordinary business or to go out of business entirely,” the company said.Judge Pittman dismissed Follow This, which is based in the Netherlands, from the lawsuit in May but allowed the case against Arjuna to continue.Arjuna withdrew the proposal and moved for a dismissal of the lawsuit, which the judge denied “because the proposal’s withdrawal didn’t foreclose the same conduct moving forward.” Arjuna then promised not to put forth similar proposals and said its pledge “forecloses even the remotest chance of another proposal” related to Exxon’s carbon emissions.Judge Pittman’s ruling followed a hearing held on Monday to determine whether Arjuna’s promise made Exxon’s complaint moot.Alain Delaquérière More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Is the Fight Against Big Oil Headed to the Supreme Court?

      by

      The Supreme Court may soon decide the fate of dozens of cases brought by cities and states that seek to hold fossil fuel companies accountable.Over the past several years, dozens of cities and states have sued big oil companies, seeking to hold the producers of fossil fuels accountable for their role in causing climate change. All of the cases follow more or less the same script: they claim that oil companies like Exxon and Chevron deceived the public by concealing their understanding of the devastating effects of global warming, and seek to make those companies pay for the billions of dollars in damages now being caused by rising seas and extreme weather. So far, none of those cases has gone to trial. But this week, a closely watched case out of Hawaii took what could be a pivotal step toward the Supreme Court and have a cascading effect on the legal fight to hold fossil fuel companies accountable.The case was brought by the city of Honolulu against Sunoco and other big oil companies in 2020. Last year, the Hawaii state supreme court ruled the case could go to trial. But a coalition of energy firms, including ExxonMobil and Chevron, appealed that decision, asking the U.S. Supreme Court to stop the case from moving forward. On Monday, the Supreme Court asked the Biden administration’s solicitor general for its opinion on the appeals. That may sound like a technicality. But to legal experts, it’s a sign that the case has the attention of the justices. The Supreme Court reviews many appeals each year, but only seeks input from the solicitor general in cases it is actively considering taking up. We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 188 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      If Paris Agreement Goals Are Missed, Hudson Bay Polar Bears Could Go Extinct, Study Says

      by

      One group in Hudson Bay might have roughly decade left because sea ice is becoming too thin to support them as they hunt, according to new research. Polar bears in the Southern Hudson Bay could go extinct as early as the 2030s because the sea ice that helps them hunt for food is thinning, a new study suggests.“We’ve known that the loss of Arctic sea ice would spell disaster for polar bears, so this might be the first subpopulation that disappears,” said Julienne Stroeve, the lead author of the study, which was published Thursday in the journal Communications Earth & Environment.Last month, the eastern half of Hudson Bay, home to the world’s most-studied polar bears, went ice free a month earlier than usual.Polar bears are used to an ice-free season of about four months when they rely on fat reserves until ice reforms and they can hunt blubber-rich seals from the floes. But the presence of sea ice doesn’t guarantee the bears will be able to hunt; it needs to be thick enough to support them.While earlier studies looked at the expanse of sea ice coverage to determine the survivability of the species, Dr. Stroeve and her colleagues used climate models from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s most recent report to project when the remaining ice would be too thin for the bears to hunt successfully.While there is no consensus on how much ice is needed to support an adult male polar bear, the study relied on field research to determine a base line of about 10 centimeters, or just under four inches. We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Chemical Makers Sue Over Rule to Rid Water of ‘Forever Chemicals’

      by

      Industry groups said the E.P.A. had exceeded its authority in requiring the drinking-water cleanup. The chemicals, known as PFAS, are linked to cancer and health risks.Chemical and manufacturing groups sued the federal government late Monday over a landmark drinking-water standard that would require cleanup of so-called forever chemicals linked to cancer and other health risks.The industry groups said that the government was exceeding its authority under the Safe Drinking Water Act by requiring that municipal water systems all but remove six synthetic chemicals, known by the acronym PFAS, that are present in the tap water of hundreds of millions of Americans.The Environmental Protection Agency has said that the new standard, put in place in April, will prevent thousands of deaths and reduce tens of thousands of serious illnesses.The E.P.A.’s cleanup standard was also expected to prompt a wave of litigation against chemical manufacturers by water utilities nationwide trying to recoup their cleanup costs. Utilities have also challenged the stringent new standard, questioning the underlying science and citing the cost of filtering the toxic chemicals out of drinking water.In a joint filing late Monday, the American Chemistry Council and National Association of Manufacturers said the E.P.A. rule was “arbitrary, capricious and an abuse of discretion.” The petition was filed in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.In a separate petition, the American Water Works Association and the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies said the E.P.A. had “significantly underestimated the costs” of the rule. Taxpayers could ultimately foot the bill in the form of increased water rates, they said.PFAS, a vast class of chemicals also called per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are widespread in the environment. They are commonly found in people’s blood, and a 2023 government study of private wells and public water systems detected PFAS chemicals in nearly half the tap water in the country.Exposure to PFAS has been associated with developmental delays in children, decreased fertility in women and increased risk of some cancers, according to the E.P.A.At a public address ahead of the filing on Monday, Brenda Mallory, chair of the White House’s Council on Environmental Quality, defended the Biden administration’s stringent standards. “Everyone should be able to turn on the tap and know that the glass of water they fill is safe to drink,” she said.At the same event, E.P.A. officials said the new standard was based on the best available science and was designed so that it “would be robust enough to withstand litigation.”The E.P.A. estimates that it would cost water utilities about $1.5 billion annually to comply with the rule, though utilities have said the costs could be twice that amount. States and local governments have successfully sued some manufacturers of PFAS for contaminating drinking water supplies,President Biden’s bipartisan infrastructure law, passed in 2021, sets aside $9 billion to help communities address PFAS contamination. The E.P.A. said $1 billion of that money would be set aside to help states with initial testing and treatment. More

    • 150 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      EMTs Get a New Way to Treat Heat Victims: Body-Sized Ice Cocoons

      by

      In overheated Phoenix, firefighters are carrying giant plastic, ice-filled bags to quickly cool people, a technique pioneered in the military and at sporting events.As America comes to grips with hotter summer temperatures that already are seizing the nation’s Southwest, emergency medical responders in some areas are carrying new gear to treat heat victims: giant plastic bags to immerse people in ice water.The tactic involves placing patients suffering from heat-related illnesses in zippered bags that engulf the body, then packing them with ice cubes and water, until they cool to safe levels.It’s a technique that has been used for years to cool overheated soldiers or athletes facing heat stroke. Now the bags are being routinely deployed in some emergency rooms and on ambulance calls.In Phoenix, where record-breaking temperatures last year killed 645 people, fire trucks and ambulances have been equipped with specially designed “immersion bags,” said Phoenix Fire Captain Todd Keller. Emergency responders fill the bags with water and ice at fire stations before heading out on heat-related calls, he said.“Sometimes, when they get to the hospital, the ice is completely melted, the patient is so hot,” Mr. Keller said.Patients typically stay inside 15 to 20 minutes or so, until their body temperature is reduced to about 101 degrees Fahrenheit. A pilot program using the therapy in Phoenix last summer proved successful enough that fire officials decided to deploy it across the entire department.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      ‘Hanging by a Thread’: U.N. Chief Warns of Missing a Key Climate Target

      by

      His comments came as the world body’s weather agency said it expected Earth to soon surpass the record high temperatures experienced in 2023.With the planet in the grips of its highest temperatures in more than 100,000 years, scientists with the United Nations weather agency have crunched the numbers and come to a stark conclusion: More record-hot years are all but inevitable.In the next five years, there’s a nearly 90 percent chance Earth will set yet another record for its warmest year, surpassing the scorching highs experienced in 2023, the World Meteorological Organization said in a report Wednesday.The chances are almost as great that, in at least one of these five calendar years, the average global temperature will be 1.5 degrees Celsius, or 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit, higher than it was at the dawn of the industrial age. That’s the level of warming that countries set out to avoid under the 2015 Paris Agreement.“The target of limiting long-term global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius is hanging by a thread,” the United Nations secretary general, António Guterres, said in a speech in New York City on Wednesday. He called for urgent action in a number of areas, including slashing carbon dioxide emissions and adopting renewable energy, helping poor countries finance their climate plans, and clamping down on the fossil fuel industry.On the last subject, Mr. Guterres reiterated past exhortations to end taxpayer subsidies for oil and gas. But he also turned his attention to a new target: He urged governments to ban advertising by fossil-fuel companies, comparing oil and coal producers to the tobacco industry, which faces advertising restrictions worldwide. And he urged the news media and tech companies to stop displaying their ads.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      How Electric Car Batteries Might Aid the Grid (and Win Over Drivers)

      by

      Automakers are exploring energy storage as a way to help utilities and save customers money, turning an expensive component into an industry asset.Electric cars are more expensive than gasoline models largely because batteries cost so much. But new technology could turn those pricey devices into an asset, giving owners benefits like reduced utility bills, lower lease payments or free parking.Ford Motor, General Motors, BMW and other automakers are exploring how electric-car batteries could be used to store excess renewable energy to help utilities deal with fluctuations in supply and demand for power. Automakers would make money by serving as intermediaries between car owners and power suppliers.Millions of cars could be thought of as a huge energy system that, for the first time, will be connected to another enormous energy system, the electrical grid, said Matthias Preindl, an associate professor of power electronic systems at Columbia University.“We’re just at the starting point,” Dr. Preindl said. “They will interact more in the future, and they can potentially support one another — or stress one another.”A large flat screen on the wall of the Munich offices of the Mobility House, a firm whose investors include Mercedes-Benz and Renault, illustrates one way that carmakers could profit while helping to stabilize the grid.The graphs and numbers on the screen provide a real-time picture of a European energy market where investors and utilities buy and sell electricity. The price changes from minute to minute as supply and demand surge or ebb.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More