You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Watched this last night. Incredibly compelling.
Reinforces Attenborough point about biodiversity lossWatched this last night. Incredibly compelling.
Don't understand can you please better explain this?I've watched Fallout. I believe we will have a much worse demise than what climate change could ever do to the planet.
To this concern I wish to remind this:
Former Vice President Al Gore is complaining that a new gas plant will be built in Tennessee
US's largest public utility ignores warnings in moving forward with new natural gas plant
The nation’s largest public utility is moving ahead with a plan for a new natural gas plant in Tennessee despite warnings that its environmental review of the project doesn’t comply with federal law.apnews.com
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — The nation’s largest public utility is moving ahead with a plan for a new natural gas plant in Tennessee despite warnings that its environmental review of the project doesn’t comply with federal law. The Tennessee Valley Authority announced in April that it would replace the aging coal-burning Kingston Fossil Plant with gas amid growing calls for the agency’s new board of directors to invest in renewables.
The board, with six of nine members appointed by President Biden, is expected to meet on Thursday in Nashville, a day after a planned protest by a coalition of environmental groups demanding the utility stop investing in fossil fuels.
Decommissioning the Kingston plant, the site of a massive 2008 coal ash spill, is part of TVA’s overall plan to reduce its reliance on coal. In analyzing alternatives to replace the plant, the utility considered either a new 1,500-megawatt gas plant or 1,500 megawatts of solar combined with 2,200 megawatts of battery storage. TVA concluded that a 2027 deadline for retiring the current plant does not give it enough time to develop the renewables alternative.
The Environmental Protection Agency asked the utility in a March 25 letter to redo several aspects of its analysis, citing “numerous” concerns with the plan to install new gas turbines. Among other things, the EPA accused the utility of defining the Kingston project so narrowly that only its predetermined choice of a new gas plant would meet the parameters, making the evaluation process a “foreordained formality.” EPA said the utility did not adequately explain the need for the 2027 closure or look at possible alternatives.
Bottom line: luckily we have such a good person as Al Gore fighting close to us.
Sorry but I have to report this comment by Prof. Bill McGuir about the fact that we had a whole year of record breaking Ocean Temperatures.
TRULY TERRIFYNG
This post is WORRISOME. PLEASE don't look it up.
Very interesting to read, thank you‘I am starting to panic about my child’s future’: climate scientists wary of starting families
A fifth of female climate scientists who responded to Guardian survey said they had opted to have no or fewer childrenwww.theguardian.com
"I had the hormonal urges" said Prof Camille Parmesan, a leading climate scientist based in France. “Oh my gosh, it was very strong. But it was: ‘Do I really want to bring a child into this world that we’re creating?’ Even 30 years ago, it was very clear the world was going to hell in a handbasket. I’m 62 now and I’m actually really glad I did not have children.”
Parmesan is not alone. An exclusive Guardian survey has found that almost a fifth of the female climate experts who responded have chosen to have no children, or fewer children, due to the environmental crises afflicting the world.
Such decisions were extremely difficult, they said. Dr Shobha Maharaj, an expert on the effects of the climate crisis from Trinidad and Tobago, has chosen to have only one child, a son who is now six years old. “Choosing to have a child was and continues to be a struggle,” she said.
Maharaj said fear of what her child’s future would hold, as well as adding another human to the planet, were part of the struggle: “When you grow up on a small island, it becomes part of you. Small islands are already being very adversely impacted, so there is this constant sense of impending loss and I just didn’t want to have to transfer that to my child.”
“However, my husband is the most family-oriented person I know,” Maharaj said. “So this was a compromise: one child, no more. Who knows, maybe my son will grow up to be someone who can help find a solution?”
The Guardian approached every contactable lead author or review editor of all reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change since 2018. The IPCC’s reports are the gold standard of climate knowledge. Of the 843 contacted, 360 replied to the question on life decisions, a high response rate.
Ninety-seven female scientists responded, with 17, including women from Brazil, Chile, Germany, India and Kenya, saying they had chosen to have fewer children. All but 1% of the scientists surveyed were over 40 years old and two-thirds were over 50, reflecting the senior positions they had reached in their professions. A quarter of the respondents were women, the same proportion as the overall authorship of the IPCC reports.
The findings were in response to a question about major personal decisions taken in response to the climate crisis by scientists who know the most about it, and who expect global temperatures to soar past international targets in coming years. 7% of the male scientists who responded said they had had either no children or fewer than they would otherwise have had.
Most of the female scientists interviewed had made their decisions about children in past decades, when they were younger and the grave danger of global heating was less apparent. They said they had not wanted to add to the global human population that is exacting a heavy environmental toll on the planet, and some also expressed fears about the climate chaos through which a child might now have to live.
Found this interesting article about the consequences of a whole year of record breaking Ocean Temperatures.
A whole year of record breaking Ocean Temperatures.
As you can see in the reported graph the Ocean Temperatures have been at record levels each day since 4 May 2023.
This warmth has significant effects on ocean ecosystems. A large fraction of the world’s human population rely on protein from the ocean to live. Disruption to life in the ocean does affect us all.
Climate change: World's oceans suffer from record-breaking year of heat
Every single day of the past 12 months has seen a new global sea temperature high for the time of year.www.bbc.com
In Canada in May we have a vast early heat wave in Northern Canada with fires already and Temperatures rising at record levels.
Expect that this rising trend of Temperatures will be confirmed also at Global Level and that May 2024 will be twelveth month in a row record warmest month with a 365-day Global Temperature Deviation >1.61°C well above the threshold of 1.5°C set by the Agreement of Paris.
This post is WORRISOME. PLEASE don't look it up.
In Canada in May we have a vast early heat wave in Northern Canada with fires already and Temperatures rising at record levels.
Expect that this rising trend of Temperatures will be confirmed also at Global Level and that May 2024 will be twelveth month in a row record warmest month with a 365-day Global Temperature Deviation >1.61°C well above the threshold of 1.5°C set by the Agreement of Paris.
This post is WORRISOME. PLEASE don't look it up.