Greenhouse gas emissions

Subterms

    More stories

    • 100 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      A Dire Outlook as Climate Action Falls Short

      by

      More from our inbox:Pennsylvania Political Ads: ‘A Flood of Falsehoods’A Republican No MoreBig Lie LawyersProtests in Brazil: A Harbinger for the U.S.?Flooded farmland in Hadeja, Nigeria, in September.Associated PressTo the Editor:Re “Climate Pledges Fizzle as Havoc Looms for Globe” (front page, Oct. 26):Whatever happened to mutually assured destruction?During the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union never attacked each other directly for fear of a nuclear war that would destroy both nations. But today, world-threatening climate change is apparently not enough to bring the U.S. and China to the negotiating table.Without prompt and drastic action by both nations (and others) to cut greenhouse gas emissions, the planet is aimed at a global temperature rise of at least 2.1 degrees Celsius (3.8 degrees Fahrenheit). Tens of millions of people worldwide will be displaced from their homes. Hundreds of millions will suffer severe drought and food shortages due to crop loss. Billions will face dangerous, possibly deadly heat waves.Are the U.S. and China assuming that their populations will magically be spared? Or is an existential threat to both our nations no longer considered enough for our leaders to take seriously?Amy LivingstonHighland Park, N.J.To the Editor:There’s no doubt that our planet is fast approaching the point of no return for avoiding a future of unimaginable, ever-worsening climate chaos. As you report, the perilous position we find ourselves in is due largely to decades of gross inaction from the world’s biggest climate polluters. The only question now is what to do about it.Your article notes that some progress in the name of climate action has recently been made in the United States, with hundreds of billions of dollars in the Inflation Reduction Act allocated for encouraging “cleaner technologies.” But the fact is that incentivizing the development of cleaner energy sources will not by itself make a dent in carbon emissions.Our recent analysis showed that while use of renewable energy rose significantly in the previous decade, fossil fuel production increased even more. In truth, the only way to meaningfully reduce climate-killing carbon pollution is to halt it at its source, by stopping new oil and gas drilling and fracking, and preventing the buildout of new infrastructure like pipelines and export terminals that encourage the devastating extraction.Wenonah HauterWashingtonThe writer is the founder and executive director of Food & Water Watch.To the Editor:Carbon and methane emissions cause temperature to increase, and we are reading that methane emissions are rising faster than ever. At the same time, climate pledges around the globe to cut those emissions are falling short.Many people understand the potential negative effects of climate change, but don’t see the urgency to address it. We need to rectify all of these failings and create the will for faster action. Our citizens must understand and believe that the cost of inaction is too high and demand stronger action now.Perhaps some people are more worried about the immediate economic and inflation aspects. I want to remind them that every negative effect of climate change is bad for the economy and even more inflationary. Climate-related weather events (wildfires, floods, drought, hurricanes, etc.) drain production and supply and escalate demand and prices.If we don’t decrease the use of fossil fuels soon enough, climate migration will become a large issue. Such movements will harm local economies both to and from those migration areas. Climate inaction is too costly to ignore, and we need action now.Jonathan LightLaguna Niguel, Calif.Pennsylvania Political Ads: ‘A Flood of Falsehoods’Chester County elections workers scanning mail-in ballots in 2020. Unsigned letters circulated in the county this year warning residents that their votes might not have counted.Matt Slocum/Associated PressTo the Editor:Re “With Push of a Button, Lies Flood a Swing State” (front page, Nov. 1):As a Pennsylvania voter, I find that it has become increasingly difficult to cut through the deluge of disinformation that has flooded the airwaves, our mailboxes and social media channels in connection with the coming election.Regrettably, far too many people choose to peddle propaganda in a brazen attempt to mislead voters, and the relative ease with which deceptive and denigrating material is widely disseminated degrades an already tenuous political system.With an electorate that is already jaded and exceedingly cynical because of the rancor that has become so pervasive in American politics, we cannot afford to give voters yet another reason to stay home on Election Day. Pennsylvanians deserve better than a flood of falsehoods that threatens to wash away the decency and credibility that we desperately need in our electoral process.N. Aaron TroodlerBala Cynwyd, Pa.A Republican No More Brittany Greeson for The New York TimesTo the Editor:My grandfather was a conservative Pennsylvania Republican. My father was a conservative Pennsylvania Republican. And I naturally became a conservative Pennsylvania Republican, holding onto it as I moved over the years to Ohio, Connecticut and New York.Several months ago, I registered as a Democrat, pen twitching in my hand, yet knowing that it was time to speak up the only way politicians comprehend.Donald Trump brought me to this. He has yet to wear his proper label. He is, and should be publicly recognized as, a cult leader: unbelievably dangerous, persuasive and dense.Until Republican Party leaders recognize that they have been “drinking the Kool-Aid” because they are afraid of the cult leader, I have no use for them, nor should any clear-thinking Republican.J.H. QuestIthaca, N.Y.Big Lie Lawyers T.J. Kirkpatrick for The New York TimesTo the Editor:The continued attack on our free and democratic elections revealed in “Same Trump Lawyers Gear Up for Midterms” (news article, Nov. 3) is even more disturbing in light of the fact that almost all of the lawyers mentioned in the article face outstanding bar complaints from The 65 Project, the bipartisan accountability group I run.These complaints were filed months ago, and in the face of inaction by the various state bar associations, these Big Lie lawyers have continued their attacks on our democracy.Until the state bar associations take action by referring these attorneys to the relevant disciplinary committees and imposing sanctions — up to and including disbarment — their actions described in this article will just be another stop along the way to more attempts to overturn elections in 2022 and 2024.Michael TeterSalt Lake CityProtests in Brazil: A Harbinger for the U.S.?Supporters of President Jair Bolsonaro gathering outside the Brazilian Army’s national headquarters on Wednesday in Brasília, the capital. Dado Galdieri for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Denying Defeat, Bolsonaro’s Supporters Ask Army to Step In” (news article, Nov. 3):It used to be that we were afraid of a coup, of a strongman or the army taking over against the will of the people. Now it seems that the people themselves are the problem. In Brazil, tens of thousands are protesting the results of their recent election, demanding a new election or, most chillingly, a military government “permanently,” as one put it.This sounds disconcertingly familiar, as millions in this country are demanding similarly authoritarian forms of government. The focus here has been on disinformation and conspiracy theories circulating on social media, and on Donald Trump himself, America’s Bolsonaro. But the real problem, here as in Brazil, is the inexplicable desire of millions of ordinary citizens to live under an authoritarian regime.We should hope that Brazil’s reaction to Jair Bolsonaro’s loss is not a harbinger of our own experience two years hence.Tim ShawCambridge, Mass. More

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Qué significa la victoria de Lula en Brasil para el clima

      by

      Durante sus mandatos anteriores, el presidente electo ayudó a reducir las tasas de deforestación en la selva amazónica. Ahora dice que quiere volver a hacerlo.RÍO DE JANEIRO — En las elecciones más reñidas desde que el país regresó a la democracia en 1985, los electores decidieron traer de regreso al expresidente Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, quien hizo del medioambiente una piedra angular de su campaña, y rechazaron al mandatario en funciones, Jair Bolsonaro, cuya presidencia vio un fuerte aumento de la deforestación.“Brasil está listo para reanudar su liderazgo en la lucha contra la crisis climática”, dijo el domingo Da Silva en su discurso a sus seguidores tras la victoria. “Probaremos una vez más que es posible generar riqueza sin destruir el medioambiente”.El compromiso es importante porque Brasil contiene gran parte de la selva del Amazonas. En este momento, el bosque absorbe el dióxido de carbono de la atmósfera que calienta el planeta y lo almacena en las raíces de los árboles, las ramas y el suelo. Según un cálculo, hay de 150.000 a 200.000 millones de toneladas métricas de carbono encerradas en el bosque. Pero eso podría cambiar. Si la deforestación continúa, la selva pronto puede convertirse en un emisor neto de gases de efecto invernadero.La región es también uno de los lugares con mayor biodiversidad en la Tierra, y protegerla es clave para defendernos de una crisis mundial de biodiversidad.De vuelta a una lucha conocida: contra la deforestaciónCuando Lula da Silva asumió el cargo por primera vez en 2003, las tasas de deforestación eran más del doble de lo que son hoy. Él promulgó políticas que las redujeron un 80 por ciento. El ritmo más bajo de deforestación se registró dos años después de su renuncia en 2010.p y alentó a sus partidarios a continuar con la minería ilegal. Las tasas de deforestación comenzaron a dispararse nuevamente. Brasil perdió más de 3 millones de hectáreas de la selva amazónica entre 2019 y 2021.Quemando para limpiar la tierra en el estado de Amazonas en septiembre.Michael Dantas/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesAhora, Da Silva dice que planea reanudar las políticas que redujeron la pérdida de bosques.“Ahora lucharemos por el fin de la deforestación en el Amazonas”, dijo. “Brasil y el planeta necesitan una Amazonía viva”.Pero la resistencia a las políticas para proteger el bosque probablemente será fuerte entre los partidarios de Bolsonaro, tanto en el Congreso como en la Amazonía. Bolsonaro ganó en más de la mitad de los estados que componen la selva.El presidente ha defendido durante mucho tiempo las industrias maderera, minera y ganadera. Si bien son destructivas para el bosque, estas industrias, que a menudo operan de manera ilegal, también brindan algunas de las pocas oportunidades económicas en la región.Fuera de Brasil: el centro de atención está en el sur globalLos dos mandatos de Da Silva como presidente, de 2003 a 2010, estuvieron marcados por iniciativas para reformar los órganos de gobierno mundial, como el Consejo de Seguridad de las Naciones Unidas, y para elevar el perfil de los países en desarrollo en los asuntos mundiales.Hay señales de que podría volver a hacer de esos esfuerzos una prioridad, esta vez con un énfasis especial en los problemas climáticos.Él puede “movilizar a otros países en el sur global para insistir que cualquier reforma que se haga a la gobernanza global asuma el tema del clima con seriedad, pero que esto también tiene aportes de los países en desarrollo”, dijo Adriana Abdenur, quien dirige Plataforma Cipó, una organización de investigación en Brasil que se enfoca en la política climática.Meses antes de las elecciones, los asesores de Da Silva se estaban coordinando con Indonesia y la República Democrática del Congo a fin de presionar a las naciones ricas para que amplíen su financiamiento para proteger a los bosques. Marina Silva, su exministra de Medioambiente, dijo a Reuters el lunes que Da Silva enviaría a un representante a la COP27, la cumbre climática mundial que comienza el domingo en Egipto. Un portavoz de Da Silva dijo que el asunto aún se estaba decidiendo.El principal asesor de asuntos exteriores de Da Silva, Celso Amorim, dijo que el presidente electo también planeaba invitar a los líderes regionales a una cumbre sobre la selva amazónica en 2023. Es una señal de que planea fortalecer la Organización del Tratado de Cooperación Amazónica, lo cual podría facilitar a los países de la región unirse para diseñar estrategias que protejan el bosque y atraigan inversión extranjera para proyectos de desarrollo sostenible.Cuando Da Silva era presidente, Brasil creó uno de los mecanismos más importantes para la cooperación climática en la gestión forestal, el Fondo Amazonía. De 2009 a 2019, Noruega y Alemania donaron más de 1200 millones de dólares al fondo, que se convirtió en uno de los mecanismos de financiación más importantes para las agencias de protección ambiental en Brasil.Bolsonaro disolvió el órgano rector del fondo, que congeló todas sus operaciones, pese a que su gobierno luchaba por combatir los delitos ambientales. El domingo, el ministro de Clima y Medioambiente de Noruega dijo a los periodistas que se pondría en contacto con Da Silva para reanudar la cooperación entre los dos países.Está previsto que Da Silva asuma la presidencia el 1 de enero.Manuela Andreoni, actualmente radicada en Brasil, escribe en el boletín Climate Forward. Anteriormente fue becaria en Rainforest Investigations Network, donde examinó las fuerzas que impulsan la deforestación en la Amazonía. @manuelaandreoni More

    • 163 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      The Guardian view on climate diplomacy: it’s crunch time – again | Editorial

      by

      The Guardian view on climate diplomacy: it’s crunch time – againEditorialFreezing relations between the US and China threaten this year’s crucial Cop27 summit Less than two weeks before Cop27 opens in the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh, an outline of what to expect from the negotiations is becoming more distinct. The issue of loss and damage is expected to dominate – as it should. Wealthy countries have broken the promise made in 2009 at Cop15 in Copenhagen. An annual climate finance budget of $100bn was agreed then to help the countries most dangerously exposed to global heating to adapt. But contributions have fallen short. The group of countries known as the V20, which includes the Philippines and several small island states, are justifiably angry and determined to ensure that past failures are confronted.So is Pakistan, which is not part of V20 but suffered catastrophic losses during recent floods. With one-third of its landmass under water and valuable crops destroyed by what one senator, writing in the Guardian, called a “monster monsoon”, the country now faces an immediate crisis as well as a longer-term, existential threat from melting glaciers. Pakistan, with its population of around 220 million people, is responsible for just 1% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Meanwhile, G20 countries between them produce 80%.“People are enjoying their lives in the west, but someone here is paying the price,” said one government minister, Ahsan Iqbal. Such views have been echoed by other leaders. At Cop26, Madagascar’s environment minister, Baomiavotse Vahinala Raharinirina, told the Guardian she believed that some short-haul flights should be banned. “You have to make a choice or have to make a sacrifice,” she said, pointing to the climate-induced famine in her country as the price being paid for western consumption habits.But while lifestyle changes such as reducing meat-eating and car use are increasingly recognised as an important element of emissions-cutting plans, it is governments that must step up in Egypt. A bilateral agreement between the US and China was among the most encouraging developments at Cop26. Then, the US’s climate envoy, John Kerry, spoke of global heating as an issue of “math and physics” rather than politics. His Chinese counterpart, Xie Zhenhua, said “there is more agreement between China and the United States than divergence”.Eleven months on, relations between the two superpowers have chilled. Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan in the summer angered Chinese leaders. A recently unveiled US national security strategy described China as “America’s most consequential geopolitical challenge”. It was swiftly followed by new export controls on microchips, intended to hamper Chinese ambitions. The question is whether climate negotiations can be forced back on track despite this. While Mr Kerry used an interview in the Guardian on Tuesday to appeal for renewed cooperation, the war in Ukraine, combined with the China-US standoff, have significantly raised tensions and lowered expectations.The hope is that once leaders gather in Egypt, the scale of the threat from rising temperatures will focus minds. In asking for international support with loss and damage, the global south countries have right on their side – as rich countries knew when they agreed to the original climate finance package. Governments left Glasgow last year knowing that they had fallen short of what is required if humanitarian disasters of unimaginable severity are to be prevented. The window of opportunity for policies that will deliver on the headline commitment to keep global temperature rises below 1.5C gets smaller every year.Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.TopicsCop27OpinionClimate crisisJohn KerryChinaUS politicsExtreme weatherGreenhouse gas emissionseditorialsReuse this content More

    • 100 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Your Friday Briefing: U.S. to Unseal Trump Warrant

      by

      Plus Russia prepares for show trials and Taiwan does not rise to China’s provocations.Good morning. We’re covering moves by the U.S. to unseal the Mar-a-Lago search warrant, Russia’s preparation for possible show trials and Taiwan’s undeterred diplomacy.Attorney General Merrick Garland had come under pressure to provide more information about the search at former President Donald Trump’s Florida residence.Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesU.S. to unseal the Trump warrantMerrick Garland, the U.S. attorney general, moved to unseal the warrant authorizing the F.B.I. search for classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump’s residence in Florida. Garland said he personally approved the decision to seek the warrant.Garland’s statement followed revelations that Trump received a subpoena for documents this spring, months before the F.B.I. search on Monday. It also came a day after Trump asserted his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination when he was questioned by New York’s attorney general in a civil case about his business practices.The subpoena suggests the Justice Department tried methods short of a search warrant to account for the material before taking the politically explosive step of sending F.B.I. agents, unannounced, to the former president’s doorstep. Here are live updates.Details: Officials think the former president improperly took documents with him after leaving office. The Justice Department has provided no information about the precise nature of the material it has been seeking to recover, but it has signaled that the material involved classified information of a sensitive nature.Analysis: Garland’s decision to make a public appearance came at an extraordinary moment in the department’s 152-year history, as the sprawling investigation of a former president who remains a powerful political force gains momentum. After coming under pressure, Garland said he decided to go public to serve the “public interest.”The Mariupol Chamber Philharmonic will be used for upcoming show trials of Ukrainian soldiers. Associated PressRussia readies for likely show trialsRussia has installed cages in a large Mariupol theater, an apparent preparation for show trials of captured Ukrainian soldiers on newly occupied soil. The trials could begin on Aug. 24, Ukrainian Independence Day.Some fear that the Kremlin plans to use the trappings of legal proceedings to reinforce its narrative about fighters who defended the southern Ukrainian city and spent weeks underneath a steel plant. Ukrainian officials have called for international intervention.Moscow may also use the trials to deflect responsibility for atrocities Russia committed as its forces laid siege to Mariupol. The Kremlin has a long and brutal history of using such trials to give a veneer of credibility to efforts to silence critics. Here are live updates.Our Coverage of the Russia-Ukraine WarOn the Ground: A series of explosions that Ukraine took credit for rocked a key Russian air base in Kremlin-occupied Crimea. Russia played down the extent of the damage, but the evidence available told a different story.Drones: To counter Russia’s advantage in artillery and tanks, Ukraine has seized on drone warfare and produced an array of inexpensive, plastic aircraft rigged to drop grenades or other munitions.Nuclear Shelter: The Russian military is using а nuclear power station in southern Ukraine as a fortress, stymying Ukrainian forces and unnerving locals, faced with intensifying fighting and the threat of a radiation leak.Starting Over: Ukrainians forced from their hometowns by Russia’s invasion find some solace, and success setting up businesses in new cities.Context: Concerns for prisoners’ safety have only grown since last month, when the Ukrainian authorities accused Moscow of orchestrating an explosion at a Russian prison camp that killed at least 50 Ukrainian prisoners of war.Other updates:Satellite images show that Russia lost at least eight warplanes in a Tuesday explosion at a Crimean air base.New shelling at a Russian-occupied nuclear plant in southern Ukraine added to concerns of possible disaster.Turkey needs Russian cash and gas ahead of an election. Russia needs friends to evade sanctions. The country’s leaders have a wary, mutually beneficial rapport.Taiwanese soldiers conducted a live-fire drill earlier this week. Lam Yik Fei for The New York TimesChina’s drills did not deter TaiwanChina’s continuing military drills have not deterred Taiwan, my colleagues write in an analysis.In fact, the drills have hardened the self-ruled island’s belief in the value of its diplomatic, economic and military maneuverings to stake out a middle ground in the big-power standoff between Beijing and Washington.Under Tsai Ing-wen, the current president, Taiwanese officials have quietly courted the U.S., making gains with weapon sales and vows of support. They have also turned China’s bluster into a growing international awareness about the island’s plight.But Taiwan has held back from flaunting that success in an effort to avoid outbursts from China. When Beijing recently sent dozens of fighters across the water that separates China and Taiwan, the Taiwanese military said it would not escalate and took relatively soft countermeasures. Officials offered sober statements and welcomed support from the Group of 7 nations.What’s next: American officials have considered stockpiling arms in Taiwan out of concern that it might be tough to supply the island in the event of a Chinese military blockade.THE LATEST NEWSAsiaAn undated North Korean state media photograph showed Kim Jong-un attending a meeting about Covid-19.Korean Central News Agency, via ReutersKim Jong-un declared “victory” over North Korea’s coronavirus outbreak, despite a lack of vaccines, state news reported.Hong Kong suffered a record 1.6 percent population decline over the past 12 months, the South China Morning Post reports.A new animal-derived virus, Langya henipavirus, has infected at least 35 people in China’s eastern Shandong and Henan provinces, the BBC reports.Seoul announced a ban on underground homes after people drowned during recent flooding, The Korea Herald reports.The PacificOlivia Newton-John will receive a state memorial service in Australia, CNN reports.New Zealand’s tourism minister dismissed budget travelers and said the country planned to focus on attracting “high quality,” “big spender” visitors, The Guardian reports.World NewsAfter peaking in June, the lower price of gas is a welcome change for drivers.Gabby Jones for The New York TimesU.S. gas prices fell below $4 a gallon yesterday, back to where they were in March.The Arctic is warming four times faster than the global average, not the commonly reported two to three times, researchers said.The W.H.O. warned people to not blame monkeys for monkeypox after a report that animals were harmed in Brazil amid fear of transmission.Wildfires are again ripping through France, weeks after the last heat wave.A Morning ReadSo-called carbon farming has become a key element of New Zealand’s drive to be carbon neutral by 2050.Fiona Goodall/Getty ImagesNew Zealand put a growing price on greenhouse emissions. But the plan may be threatening its iconic farmland: Forestry investors are rushing to buy up pastures to plant carbon-sucking trees.ARTS AND IDEASSelling democracy to AfricaThe U.S. unveiled a new Africa policy this week that leaned on a familiar strategy, promoting democracy. The challenge will come in selling it to a changing continent.“Too often, African nations have been treated as instruments of other nations’ progress rather than the authors of their own,” Secretary of State Antony Blinken said as he presented the new U.S. approach during a tour that included South Africa, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda.The U.S. “will not dictate Africa’s choices,” he added, in an apparent response to criticism that America’s stance toward Africa can be patronizing, if not insulting. “I think, given history, the approach has to be somewhat different, and I would recommend a greater attention to tools that Africans have developed,” said Naledi Pandor, South Africa’s foreign minister.Along with their own tools and institutions, like the African Union, more African states are wealthier than they were a generation ago, Bob Wekesa, the deputy director of the African Center for the Study of the United States in Johannesburg, said.“They can afford to say, ‘We can choose who to deal with on certain issues,’” Wekesa said. Those new partnerships include not only U.S. rivals Russia and China, but also emerging powers like Turkey and India. Traditional U.S. allies like Botswana and Zambia are likely to embrace the American strategy, but strongman leaders in Uganda and even Rwanda are likely to be more resistant, he added.In Kigali yesterday, Blinken said that he had urged the leaders of Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo to end their support for militias in eastern Congo. He also raised concerns about the detention of the U.S. resident who inspired the film “Hotel Rwanda,” Paul Rusesabagina.But just hours before his meeting with Blinken, President Paul Kagame poured cold water over suggestions that he would be swayed on the Rusesabagina case. “No worries … there are things that just don’t work like that here!!” he said on Twitter. — Lynsey Chutel, Briefings writer based in Johannesburg.PLAY, WATCH, EATWhat to CookChristopher Testani for The New York TimesCaramelized brown sugar adds complexity to this berry upside-down cake.What to Watch“Inu-oh” is a visually sumptuous anime film about a 14th-century Japanese performer.TravelRetirees are taking on part-time work loading baggage at airports or passing out towels to make their way through Europe on the cheap.Now Time to PlayPlay today’s Mini Crossword, and a clue: “Crucial” (three letters).Here are today’s Wordle and Spelling Bee.You can find all our puzzles here.That’s it for today’s briefing. See you next time. — AmeliaP.S. The Times will bring back its Food Festival for the first time since 2019. Mark your calendars: Oct. 8, in New York City.The latest episode of “The Daily” is on abortion in the U.S.You can reach Amelia and the team at briefing@nytimes.com. More

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      I Feel Utterly Hopeless About American Climate Policy

      by

      In a column published in June 2021, I declared the coming year would be a “hinge in history” for American participation in the global effort to address the climate crisis. Having won the White House and control of the House and the Senate, Democrats had cracked open a rare window of political opportunity — their first chance since 2010 to pass major federal legislation to reduce our carbon emissions.But the window wasn’t very big, and it wouldn’t stay open long. President Biden had proposed setting a target of 2030 for the United States to cut carbon emissions to half of 2005 levels. He’d outlined hundreds of billions of dollars of investments in clean energy, public transit, electric vehicle infrastructure, severe weather preparedness and climate-related research and development. Now, in the face of united Republican opposition, and with midterm politicking rapidly approaching, could Democrats seize what I called “the country’s last best political opportunity” to address climate change and pass Biden’s plan?Well, a year has passed, and the answer is in: Nope.When Senator Joe Manchin pulled his support last week for even a significantly scaled-down version of Biden’s climate plan, America’s great window of opportunity all but slammed shut. Manchin’s decision was no surprise — he has been stringing his party along for more than a year — but for me it still packed a wallop.Was I thrown into a spiral of despair about the incapacity of our political system to take on urgent issues? Was I left feeling hopeless about the world’s efforts to avoid climate scientists’ worst-case scenarios? Did I wonder more than once what even was the point of Democrats running the show if they could not secure this plan? Yeah, maybe just a little.It is difficult to overstate the case for a huge federal effort on climate change. It’s popular — most Americans think Congress should address the causes and effects of climate change. And because there are new disasters brought about by a warming planet seemingly every week now, the issue will only grow more urgent. (About 100 million Americans are sweating through severe heat this week.)Biden’s plan also made economic sense: Regardless of whether America participates, a global transition to renewable fuels is already underway. China leads the United States (and the rest of the world) in growth in renewable power generation capacity and in solar panel manufacturing; because the Chinese government is investing heavily in renewables while we are not, we risk falling further behind in industries that will dominate the future.It has also rarely been clearer that our dependence on fossil fuels is doing us no national security favors. Biden was in Saudi Arabia last week when he conceded defeat on the climate bill. He was there to ask one brutal petromonarch for more oil because another brutal petromonarch is using his fossil fuel profits to finance an invasion of a sovereign neighbor. But despite an embarrassing fist bump with the Saudi crown prince, whose country Biden once aimed to sideline as a global “pariah,” the president hasn’t yet secured any guarantees for more oil. That may change at an upcoming meeting of the OPEC+ oil cartel — but shouldn’t we be striving for a future in which we wouldn’t have to bend to such characters because they happen to sit on a lot of dead plants and animals?It’s precisely the strength of the case for federal climate action that has left me feeling so down. Democrats seem headed toward losing their congressional majorities in the midterms, and Biden’s approval ratings are abysmal. It is difficult to imagine the party will get another shot at taking major climate action anytime soon. What will become of climate change as a political issue if Democrats are out in the political wilderness? Are we doomed to another decade of inaction?Climate experts told me not to abandon all hope. Alex Trembath, the deputy director of the Breakthrough Institute, an environmental research group, took issue last year with my characterization of Biden’s plan as a do-or-die moment for the American climate movement.“There isn’t a 12-year deadline or a one-year deadline,” Trembath told me this week. He argued that advocacy that leans on such deadlines is bound to provoke nihilism, and that a better way to talk about climate change is as a long-term issue that we will have to keep dealing with for as long as we live. More

    • 100 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      How Can We Still Be Talking About Trump?

      by

      Gail Collins: Happy Independence Day, Bret! Want to celebrate by talking about the Supreme Court?Bret Stephens: I was sorta thinking of a cookout on the patio with a nice bottle of rosé, but fire away.Gail: We were in such accord, gnashing our teeth over the decisions on abortion and guns. How about their deep-sixing environmental regulation? You still gnashing with me?Bret: You are referring to the ruling that says the Environmental Protection Agency can’t unilaterally reinvent the entire energy economy with an expansive interpretation of the Clean Air Act that Congress did not intend when it wrote the bill? I’d say the decision was the best thing the court did this term.Guessing you … don’t see it quite the same way.Gail: Well, um … no.Congress gave the E.P.A. extensive power when it comes to regulating carbon emissions. That’s because carbon emissions are a threat to the environment and a trigger for global warming.If Congress feels the E.P.A. is going too far, it has the power to override said regulations at any time. That hasn’t happened because — gee, I guess the Congressional majority feels global warming is a big deal.Bret: The case hinges on an interpretation of the word “system.” The Clean Air Act requires power plants to adopt “the best system of emission reductions.” The court’s conservatives took “system” to mean emission-controlling technologies at the plants themselves, not a vast regulatory mechanism that puts the entire American coal industry on a swift path to extinction.Gail: I think I told you that my father worked for a utility company, and I remember the agony he went through trying to deal with both the government regulators and the folks we called “the coal barons” in West Virginia. I have sympathy for the folks in the middle here, but not so much for the barons.Bret: I grew up listening to my father’s complaints about the way the Mexican government did business with the private sector. In case you ever wonder about my worship of the works of Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman, Gary Becker and Ronald Coase.Gail: We obviously need to keep directing help to the working people in the mining industry, but the government’s top job is to protect the nation and future generations from global warming.Bret: If Congressional Democrats — whose majority happens to hinge on a certain senator from West Virginia — want to make a case that global warming is the country’s No. 1 priority, they should do so openly rather than sneak regulatory actions that they can’t get through Congress through the E.P.A. bureaucracy. I hold no particular brief for the coal industry per se. But Democrats need to figure out a set of climate-change policies that don’t threaten people’s wallets, jobs or businesses. Trying to put coal out of business is just a big fat political gift to Mitch McConnell and Kevin McCarthy.Aside from the court, Gail, last week’s big news enchilada was Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony before the House committee investigating Jan. 6. Did we just have a “this changes everything” moment?Gail: Well, we certainly had some “Holy cow — did you hear what Donald Trump did?” moments. But I’ve sadly gotten used to the idea that he can do almost anything and still keep his very, very large fan club of voters.Bret: Truest words ever spoken by Trump: “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose any voters.”Gail: Yeah, sigh. And I just don’t think there’s an appetite for trying to prosecute a former president for stuff he did while he was still in office. Am I being too cynical?Bret: Until last week, no. But, to quote from “Only Murders in the Building,” Hutchinson’s testimony “sends the investigation in a whole new direction.”I don’t mean the stuff about Trump trying to grab the steering wheel of his limo, which Hutchinson acknowledges she heard secondhand. I mean her overhearing Trump at the Jan. 6 rally yelling that he didn’t care if people were armed because they weren’t there to hurt him. And also her report that Trump instructed Mark Meadows to get in touch with Roger Stone and Mike Flynn, who in turn were apparently in touch with some of the most violent protesters on Jan. 5. If it’s true, that just seems like a textbook case of seditious conspiracy.There’s still a big question of the overall wisdom of a prosecution, however well-justified. If, God forbid, Trump runs and wins in 2024, the first thing he’ll do is find any pretext to prosecute Joe Biden, and then it’s off to the races. If you were in Merrick Garland’s shoes, what would you do? More

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      How Climate Change Fits in the Australian Elections

      by

      The country has been hit hard by wildfires and other climate disasters, but it’s also making tons of money from fossil fuels.What do you do when your country feels some of the worst calamities of climate change but also enriches itself from the very fossil fuels that are responsible for climate change?Few face that question more acutely than Australians.They faced it when they went to the polls three years ago. They’re facing it again now. National elections are scheduled a week from Saturday, on May 21.What’s changed? I asked my colleague, The Times Sydney bureau chief, Damien Cave. Here’s an edited version of our conversation.Hi Damien. I hear Australians are looking for answers on climate change on Google in the run-up to these elections. What do you make of that?Well, it’s been a tough three years. The intense, overwhelming bush fires of 2020. Two years of La Niña rains. Another round of bleaching for the Great Barrier Reef.Australians are probably Googling for solutions because they’re seeing more examples of climate change in their lives and wondering: When and how are we supposed to deal with this? They’re Googling inflation more often, though.Compared to other issues, how much does climate matter to voters? Polls show that climate is not necessarily the top issue for most voters. But it does seem like a low-level and constant source of anxiety, not just because of all the extreme weather we’ve been having, but also because Australians fear that they are losing out on an economic opportunity.Last year, for example, I did a big article on Australia’s richest man, a mining baron named Andrew Forrest, making a big push into hydrogen. I spent a lot of time talking to iron ore miners for that article and what I heard again and again was: “Australia needs to change fast, or else we’re going to lose out.”Many Australians can see that — in a country full of minerals, with some of the best solar and wind potential in the world — not making climate change a priority means risking the loss of good paying jobs to other countries with a clearer plan for the future. Australia is currently the third-largest exporter of fossil fuels in the world, but it can be a renewable energy superpower if it decides to be, and a growing number of Australians seem to recognize that.What’s the current government’s stance on climate?It has done very little to suggest that it recognizes climate change as a clear and immediate danger in need of a major shift in policy. Last year, just before the international climate talks in Glasgow, it reluctantly agreed to a net-zero-by-2050 target, meaning that it would reduce its greenhouse gas emissions and make up for what it couldn’t remove with things like tree planting projects. It’s little more than a pledge. There’s not really a plan on how to get there.That’s out of touch with most Australians. Polls show a majority would like to see their government tackle climate change more aggressively.Is the governing conservative coalition still banking on coal?Yes, and the opposition isn’t far behind. Anthony Albanese, the Labor leader fighting to become prime minister, said last month that a Labor government would support new coal mines, matching the pro-mining stance of the conservative Liberal-National coalition that’s now in power. It’s partly an effort to keep the support of blue-collar workers, but it’s also an attempt to avoid a repeat of what happened in the 2019 election when Labor lost over its apparent opposition to a big new coal mine in the state of Queensland. You wrote about that. It’s owned by the Indian conglomerate Adani, and that mine has since started exporting coal.Coal is still king in many of the districts needed to win Australia’s election.A handful of independents ran on climate issues in 2019. I met some of them when I went to Australia in the run-up to the last elections. What’s different now?Well, there are more independents running. Around 25 of them. Most are professional women — lawyers, doctors, entrepreneurs — who have been recruited by community groups eager to break the two-party gridlock on climate change.They’re a loosely affiliated group, though they’re getting more coordinated. There’s more money coming their way from groups like Climate 200, which is essentially an Australian version of a political action committee. And there’s more energy. Some of their campaigns have thousands of volunteers, far more than the major party incumbents.The question, of course, is still whether they have enough support to win more than a seat or two.If the election is close, as is expected, the independents may be kingmakers. They may be the ones who decide whether to form a government with Labor or the Liberal-National coalition.That could change Australian climate policy very quickly.I’m puzzled by one thing: If climate risk isn’t a top election issue in a country as vulnerable as Australia, can it be a top election issue anywhere?One of the lessons from Australia, I think, is that climate change can be a very important political issue even if it doesn’t end up at the top of voters’ most urgent concerns. Here, it’s a constant, a low-level hum just below the political shouting.What we’ve seen over the past few years is that if the major parties don’t tackle climate change, there’s going to be a backlash that could threaten their own hold on power. The independents are the big story of this year’s campaign. I have an article coming soon about their efforts, but whether they win or lose, they’ve put both parties on edge. They’ve changed the conversation because they are the public face of a grass-roots movement that is trying to pull the country back to the political center and focus on pragmatic solutions to big problems. Chief among them is the problem of climate change.Damien and the rest of our team in Australia will be following the final days of the campaign and next week’s vote result. You can get news and analysis here.Flares burning in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria in 2021.Sunday Alamba/Associated PressEssential news from The TimesMessy business: Some oil giants, in an effort to meet climate pledges, are transferring their dirtiest wells to smaller operations with even fewer climate safeguards.Hurricane facts: A new study explains how air pollution has led to more hurricanes in the Atlantic Ocean, but fewer in the Pacific.Rapid research: Scientists say global warming played a role in the deadly floods that hit South Africa last month.Offshore drilling: The Biden administration has canceled oil drilling lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska.Righting wrongs: U.S. officials have announced a series of policies intended to elevate environmental justice efforts.Book review: Stacy McAnulty’s “Save the People!” uses humor to call middle grade readers to action.From outside The TimesMillions in California depend on a key delta for water, but they can’t agree on managing it. That could become one of America’s biggest water disasters, The New Yorker writes.Oregon has adopted a new law to protect farm workers from extreme heat and wildfire smoke, according to Civil Eats.From National Geographic: The Democratic Republic of Congo is awash in plastic waste. Artists are transforming it into sculptures with a dystopian twist.Japan and South Korea are increasingly burning wood pellets to make energy, Mongabay reports. Because of a loophole, that could lead to an undercounting of their emissions.Wild plants have always been an important source of food in rural India. Now, Whetstone Magazine writes, foraging is becoming more common in the country’s cities.Pinterest said it will would take down any content posted on its platform that denies climate change and its impacts, MSN.com reported.Before you go: Calculate your personal inflation ratePrices are rising at the highest pace in four decades, but not everyone experiences the effects of inflation in the same way. It depends on a range of individual circumstances. So, our colleagues on the Times business desk created an interactive calculator to estimate your personal inflation rate. You just need to answer seven easy questions. It turns out, a lot of the things that are bad for the climate — like driving, heating your home with oil and eating a lot of meat — also have an outsize effect on inflation. You can try the calculator here.Thanks for reading. We’ll be back on Tuesday.Manuela Andreoni, Claire O’Neill and Douglas Alteen contributed to Climate Forward. Reach us at climateforward@nytimes.com. We read every message, and reply to many! More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Brazil’s climate politics are shifting. That matters for the whole planet.

      by

      The Amazon is emerging as a central issue in this year’s presidential campaign. Leaders have taken note.A message from your Climate Forward host: I’d like you to meet Manuela. She’s my partner on Climate Forward, and you’ll hear from her regularly when I’m out on reporting trips and unavailable to write the newsletter. Today, she takes you inside the climate politics of her home country, Brazil. — Somini SenguptaIn Brazil, beef isn’t just food. It’s political. It’s a symbol of dignity and equality, and the price of beef is a kind of barometer of well-being in the country.“Beef is not a privilege for people with money,” former President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva said in an interview last year.But now, with elections just months away, da Silva, who is better known as Lula, seems to be taking a more environmentally conscious position. He’s suddenly talking about vegetable barbecues and organic salads.“I broadened my perspective,” he said on Twitter in February. He was not just concerned about whether the average Brazilian could afford a barbecue, Lula said, “but also vegetarian people, who don’t eat meat, being able to eat a good organic salad, us encouraging healthier agriculture in our country.”At 76, and with more than five decades of politics under his belt, Lula is adapting. And his willingness to do so makes it clear that, for the first time, climate and the environment will be at the center of the debates before Brazilians vote for president and the national legislature on Oct. 2.Lula, who led Brazil from 2003 to 2010, is one of the best-known politicians in the developing world. Under his administration, millions rose out of poverty, helped by China’s growing hunger for Brazilian commodities like soybeans and steel.Beef was, in some ways, a thread that ran though his presidency. It became a more frequent part of daily meals and one of the country’s major exports. Lula’s administration poured millions from Brazil’s development bank into meatpacking companies, and those operations, in turn, eventually grew to become major drivers of deforestation in the Amazon.This time around, though, Lula is talking about supporting that “healthier agriculture” he mentioned on Twitter.Izabella Teixeira, who served as one of Lula’s environment ministers, told me the former president always treated climate issues seriously. But she said she saw something new in the way climate and environment issues seem to be gaining prominence in his speeches and debates.“He is looking at it with a modern mind set,” she said. “It is one thing to correct the past, to undo mistakes. It is another thing to affirm new paths.”President Biden similarly made climate a pillar of his campaign, as did Gabriel Boric, who became president of Chile in March. Just a few weeks ago, Colombia’s leftist presidential candidate Gustavo Petro chose an environmental activist as his running mate. The first round of that election is May 29.The choice Brazilians make matters for global climate targets. Brazil is, by some measures, the world’s sixth-biggest emitter of greenhouse gases. More important, though, is why: It is currently slashing its part of the Amazon, the world’s largest rainforest, at a pace not seen in over a decade.Lula’s environmental record is mixed. Back in the day, his administration pushed for new policies that sharply curbed Amazon deforestation, even as agribusiness, including beef, grew. But he seemed to disregard the need for an energy transition, instead refusing to support legislation that would have required Brazil to phase out fossil fuels.Under the current president, Jair Bolsonaro, climate action has been all but abandoned. The recent explosion in deforestation rates, which have angered the world, will unquestionably be one of the main legacies of his presidency.Brazil’s current policies have intensified its climate challenge. And it’s not just because of beef. Soy, the country’s top commodity, is increasing pressure on the Cerrado, the country’s vast tropical savanna. There’s also Brazil’s heavy dependence on oil and steel exports.Bolsonaro’s rise to power is widely seen as a response to a multibillion dollar corruption scandal that upended Brazilian politics years ago. Prosecutors said Lula was implicated at the top of the scandal. He spent 580 days in prison in connection with a conviction that was ultimately overturned.As Lula has clawed his way back into public life, he has refused to acknowledge mistakes in the corruption scandal. When it comes to climate policy, though, he has signaled a willingness to reform his legacy.Earlier this week, speaking to thousands of Indigenous people gathered in a demonstration in Brasília, the capital, he promised to appoint an Indigenous cabinet minister. It would be a first for Brazil, a country where Indigenous people are at the forefront of the environmental movement.Past governments of his Workers’ Party, Lula said, “didn’t do all they should have done” for Indigenous people.So far, Lula has the lead over Bolsonaro, who is seeking re-election, in all the main opinion polls, though the race has been tightening. Hunger, unemployment, inflation and the Covid pandemic will also be major issues during the campaign.But the two candidates’ radically different views on the environment could be crucial. According to a poll in September, 80 percent of voters believe protecting the Amazon rainforest should be a priority for presidential candidates.A majority also said a specific plan to defend the Amazon would increase their willingness to vote for a candidate.California’s plan to eliminate gas cars, if adopted, would very likely set the bar for the broader auto industry.Justin Sullivan/Getty ImagesEssential news from The TimesPhasing out gas cars: Officials in California made public plans to prohibit the sale of new gasoline-powered cars by 2035.White House departure: People close to Gina McCarthy, President Biden’s top climate adviser, say she plans to quit because she is unhappy with the slow pace of progress.Even cactuses aren’t safe: More than half of species could face greater extinction risk by midcentury, a new study found, as rising heat and dryness test the plants’ limits.Antarctic puzzle solved: Researchers say the collapse of the two ice shelves was most likely triggered by vast plumes of warm air from the Pacific.‘Silent victim’ of war: Research on past conflicts suggests that, in addition to the human toll, the Russian invasion of Ukraine could have a profound environmental impact.From the Opinion sectionDitch the gas-powered leaf blower: Get an electric one or just use a rake, Jessica Stolzberg writes.Other stuff we’re followingThe latest issue of National Geographic is all about saving forests.A new analysis showed that many big utilities in America are actively pushing back against climate policies, according to The Washington Post.Banks around the world are abandoning coal projects, except in China, according to Bloomberg.A new podcast from the Food & Environment Reporting Network talks to farmers about what they are doing to adapt to climate change.Parts of the Sacramento Valley in California have received their earliest-ever “red flag” warning for fire danger, Capital Public Radio reported.One TikToker found the transportation of the future.Adélie penguins on an iceberg near Paulet Island at the tip of the Antarctic Peninsula. Tomás MunitaBefore you go: For these birds, location mattersAdélie penguins are having a rough time on the western side of the Antarctic Peninsula, where warming linked to climate change has occurred faster than almost anywhere else on the planet. One researcher called the situation a “train wreck” for the birds. On the eastern side of the peninsula, however, it’s a very different story. Adélie populations there seem to be doing just fine. You can find out why, and see some impressive photos from a recent survey expedition in our article.Thanks for reading. We’ll be back on Tuesday.Claire O’Neill and Douglas Alteen contributed to Climate Forward. Reach us at climateforward@nytimes.com. We read every message, and reply to many! More