03/12/2019

UN Chief: Climate Change Near 'Point Of No Return'

Deutsche Welle - AP | AFP | Reuters

 Antonio Guterres has taken the world's major economies to task for not "pulling their weight" to reduce emissions. Ahead of the COP25 climate summit, the UN head said we were rapidly approaching the "point of no return."
Guterres sounds stark climate warning

"We are confronted with a global climate crisis and the point of no return is no longer over the horizon, it is in sight and hurtling towards us," said United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres on the eve of the two-week COP25 global climate summit in Madrid.
"Our war against nature must stop, and we know that it is possible," he said Sunday. "We simply have to stop digging and drilling and take advantage of the vast possibilities offered by renewable energy and nature-based solutions."
Across the globe, catastrophic weather patterns — from floods to fire to extreme droughts and heavy snowstorms — are wreaking havoc on both human and animal life. Scientists are warning that the world is running out of time to reverse the worst possible effects of man-made climate breakdown.
Guterres took member nations to task for not sticking to the 2015 Paris climate agreement, which calls on a limit to fossil fuel use in an attempt to curb global temperatures increases.


Protesters around the world demand action

World's largest emitters are not pulling their weight'
"We also see clearly that the world's largest emitters are not pulling their weight," he said, "and without them, our goal is unreachable."
The world's largest carbon emitter is China and the second-largest, the United States.
At last year's UN climate summit in Katowice, Poland, member states drew up a framework for monitoring emission reductions and made plans for further cuts in the future. However, there has still been no agreement on key elements like putting a price on CO2 emissions that could allow carbon taxes to be traded between countries.
On Friday, mass rallies were held around the world as people called on their governments to address climate change before it's too late.

How is climate change affecting Europe?
Record-setting heat waves
The summer of 2019 saw heat records in Europe broken across the continent. In July, Germany recorded its highest temperature ever at 42.6 C (108 F). France broke its heat record twice in 2019, the highest temperature measuring 46.C (114.8 F) in July. Climate change increases the frequency of heat waves. 

Venice under water
In November 2019, the Italian archipelago city of Venice experienced multiple flooding events and the high water mark of 1.5 meters was reached three times in one week for the first time in recorded history. Projected sea level rise due to climate change could make these events more likely in the future.

Wildfires burning Spain
The same heat wave that brought record temperatures to France sparked the worst wildfires to hit Spain in 20 years. On the Spanish island of Gran Canaria, wildfires in August decimated a national park on the popular tourist island. Hotter temperatures and drier air due to climate change increase the risk of fires. 

German forests dying
A combination of drought, storms and extreme heat is depleting Germany's forests. According to BDF, a forest advocacy group, in Germany, more than 1 million established trees have died since 2018. "These are no longer single unusual weather events. That is climate change," said a BDF representative. 

Disappearing glaciers in the Alps
A glacier on the Italian side of Mont Blanc experienced accelerated melting in 2019. And enthusiasts held a "funeral" for the Pizol glacier in the Swiss Alps, which has almost completely disappeared. Scientists say climate change accelerates glacial melting in the Alps. 

Drought affecting food production
Two consecutive years of drought in Germany have hit farmers hard. In 2018, record drought caused major crop failures, and heat waves in 2019 also damaged crops. "Climate change means more frequent droughts and extreme weather events in Germany,"said German Weather Service Vice President Paul Becker.


New EU Commission plans 'Green Deal'
The newly minted leadership of the European Commission, under former German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen, has set lofty climate goals for itself under a policy initiative called the "European Green Deal." Among the goals set out by the campaign is the plan to make Europe the "first carbon-neutral continent."
As von der Leyen and her cabinet took office on Sunday, she hailed the COP25 summit as the perfect "starting point" for her climate policy plans.
"Europe is leading in this topic and we know that we have to be ambitious for our planet,'' von der Leyen told reporters.


Seychelles: An ecosystem under threat

On Thursday, European lawmakers voted to declare an EU-wide climate emergency in a symbolic move aimed at increasing pressure on the incoming European Commission to take a stronger stance on climate change.
On Sunday, European Parliament President David Sassoli also spoke of the need "to turn the promises of the past few months into results that improve people's lives. From the fight against climate change to tackling the rise in the cost of living, Europeans want to see real action.''


Will a 'climate emergency' make a difference?

Links
Posted by at No comments :
Labels: , , ,

Scientist's Theory Of Climate's Titanic Moment The 'Tip Of A Mathematical Iceberg'

The Guardian - 

Formula for climate emergency shows if ‘reaction time is longer than intervention time left’ then ‘we have lost control’
‘Knowing how long societies have to react to pull the brake on the Earth’s climate and then how long it will take for the ship to slow down is the difference between a climate emergency and a manageable problem.’ Photograph: Topical Press Agency/Getty Images
When is an emergency really an emergency?
If you’re the captain of the Titanic, approaching a giant iceberg with the potential to sink your ship becomes an emergency only when you realise you might not have enough time to steer a safe course.
And so it is, says Prof Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, when it comes to the climate emergency.
Knowing how long societies have to react to pull the brake on the Earth’s climate and then how long it will take for the ship to slow down is the difference between a climate emergency and a manageable problem.
Rather than being something abstract and open to interpretation, Schellnhuber says the climate emergency is something with clear and calculable risks that you could put into a formula. And so he wrote one.
Emergency = R × U = p × D × τ / T
In a comment article in the journal Nature, Schellnhuber and colleagues explained that to understand the climate emergency we needed to quantify the relationship between risk (R) and urgency (U).
Borrowing from the insurance industry, the scientists define risk (R) as the probability of something happening (p) multiplied by damage (D).
For example, how likely is it that sea levels will rise by a metre and how much damage will that cause.
Urgency (U) is the time it takes you to react to an issue (τ) “divided by the intervention time left to avoid a bad outcome (T)”, they wrote.
Schellnhuber, of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, tells Guardian Australia the work on the formula was just the “tip of a mathematical iceberg” in defining the climate emergency.
“It can be illustrated by the Titanic disaster, but it applies to many severe risks where you can calculate the do-nothing/business-as-usual probability of a highly damaging event,” he says. “Yet there are options to avoid the disaster.
“In other words, this a control problem.”
There is a time lag between the rapid cuts to greenhouse gases and the climate system reacting. Knowing if you have enough time tells you if you’re in an emergency or not.
Schellnhuber used “standard risk analysis and control theory” to come up with the formula, and he was already putting numbers to it.
“As a matter of fact, the intervention time left for limiting global warming to less than 2C is about 30 [years] at best. The reaction time – time needed for full global decarbonisation - is at least 20 [years].”
As the scientists write in Nature, if the “reaction time is longer than the intervention time left” then “we have lost control”.
Schellnhuber says: “Beyond that critical point, only some sort of adaptation option is left, such as moving the Titanic passengers into rescue boats (if available).”
Earlier this month, Oxford Dictionaries announced “climate emergency” as the word of the year, defining it as “a situation in which urgent action is required to reduce or halt climate change and avoid potentially irreversible environmental damage resulting from it”.
One website tracking climate emergency declarations says 1,195 jurisdictions in 25 countries, representing 454 million people, have already voted on the emergency.
This week the European parliament joined them, as did Ballina shire council in northern New South Wales, the 76th local government authority in Australia to make the declaration.
Prof Will Steffen, of the Australian National University and the Stockholm Resilience Centre, and a co-author of the article, says: “Emergency can mean many things to many people. But there are some hard numbers behind why so many people are saying we are in a climate emergency.
“This formula sharpens our thinking. So we have 30 years to decarbonise and to stabilise our pressure on the climate system.”
In the Nature article, the scientists highlight nine “tipping points” that, if crossed, become almost impossible to stop. At least five are already “active”.
Some of them, like melting permafrost or forest degradation, can start to add more greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, making the job of keeping global temperatures down even harder.
“There are a range of these intervention times left,” Steffen says. “How long do we have before [the Greenland ice sheet] goes? Maybe we have 20 to 25 years and then we might be committed to losing Greenland.
“But the time we have left to intervene to stabilise coral reefs, for example, is a lot less than 30 years.
“Our reaction time has to be fast and to decarbonise by 2050 we have to really move now. That’s the point of [Schellnhuber’s] maths.
“To err on the side of danger is a stupid thing to do.”

Links
Posted by at No comments :
Labels: ,

(AU) Woman Brings Remains Of Home Lost In NSW Bushfires To Parliament In Climate Protest

The Guardian - Australian Associated Press

‘We’ve got no leadership ... we’ve got nothing,’ says Melinda Plesman, who lost her house in Nymboida, near Grafton
Melinda Plesman stands with the remains of her burnt-out house, destroyed in the NSW bushfires, outside Parliament House in Canberra. Photograph: Mick Tsikas/AAP
A woman who lost her home in the New South Wales bushfires has brought the charred remains to Parliament House to send a message to both major parties on climate change.
Melinda Plesman and her partner, Dean Kennedy, lost their family home of 35 years after bushfires tore through Nymboida, south of Grafton in NSW, last month.
Plesman said she wanted to show Scott Morrison the direct result of climate change.
“It’s happening now and this is what climate change looks like,” Plesman said.
“I’m losing my home, whole communities are losing their homes ... and the prime minister said we’re not allowed to talk about it.
“He said he was going to pray for us. And that was the last straw.”
But she also criticised Labor for not wanting to discuss the link between climate change and bushfires.
“That is what is absolutely terrible. We’ve got no leadership, we’ve got no discussion, we’ve got no debate, we’ve got nothing,” she said.
“We need a bipartisan approach. I completely understand that the Labor party are absent in this as well.”
Plesman, who is now living in a motel room, said she didn’t know what the future held for her.
She said she wanted the government to set a price on carbon, phase out native forest logging, immediately shift Australia towards renewables and stop mining coal.
“I think it’s the job of the prime minister to bring us together and lead us forward. That’s his job,” she said.
On a sheet of corrugated iron rescued from the scorched remains her beloved home she had written: “Morrison, your climate crisis destroyed my home.”
“He’s not acting,” Plesman said.

Links
Posted by at No comments :
Labels: , , , ,

02/12/2019

Students Stage Global Strikes To Pressure UN Climate Summit

The Age - Colin Packham, Reuters

Lisbon: Thousands of people in Asia and Europe joined rallies demanding more action on climate change on Friday, aiming to force political leaders to come up with urgent solutions at a United Nations conference next week.
Student activists from School Strike for Climate Australia (SS4C) hold a 'Solidarity Sit-down' outside the Victorian Parliament in Melbourne, Friday. Credit: AAP
Swedish activist Greta Thunberg had been due to join a student strike in Lisbon, but her environmentally friendly voyage across the Atlantic from New York by yacht was hit by high winds, delaying her by a few days, she told social media followers.
Portugal's student movement still expected thousands to join marches on Friday, building on the famous campaigner's imminent arrival to mobilise ahead of the United Nations climate summit in Madrid from December 2 to 13.
"We wish she'd been here, but the movement has to carry on without her. We've got to send our message and pressure politicians ahead of the climate summit," Marianna Louca, 14, said in Lisbon.
Friday's climate strikes were expected to take place in 2300 cities in 153 countries around the world, according to the climate campaign group Friday For Future.
Thousands of demonstrators attend a protest climate strike ralley of the 'Friday For Future Movement' in front of the Federal Administrative Court building in Leipzig, Germany, on Friday. Credit: AP
The protests come as experts warn that global temperatures could rise sharply over this century with destructive consequences after greenhouse gas emissions hit record levels.
Outside Parliament in London, protesters flew a giant blimp in the shape of a baby with "Guess my weight in CO2" written on its vest.
Students take part in a "Fridays for Future" climate change rally in London. The UK goes to the polls on December 12. The youth climate strike movement started in August 2018, led by the Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg. Credit: Getty Images
Other protests took place in Mumbai, Tel Aviv, Vienna and Frankfurt. In Bangkok, young people chanted: "No more coal, no more oil, keep the carbon in the soil", and staged a "drop dead" flash mob.
In Warsaw, activists, some in gas masks, waved banners saying: "Save our planet" and "Poland without coal 2030".
A protester holds a placard as he takes part in a Global Climate Strike protest in Tokyo on Friday. Credit: Getty Images
In Berlin, protesters in swimming costumes dived into the chilly river Spree, holding up a white box in a symbolic attempt to rescue the government's climate change package.
Activists protested at Amazon sites around France in a backlash against the annual Black Friday shopping event driven in part by environmental concerns.
Several dozen protesters staged a dawn sit-in outside an Amazon building in the Clichy district of Paris, holding a sign saying: "No to Amazon and its world."
In Australia, students in Sydney and other cities walked out of class, saying more should be done to combat the country's devastating bushfire crisis, which many see as a result of climate change.
Holding home-made signs, including "The climate is changing, why aren't we?", demonstrators in Sydney accused the government of inadequate action in addressing the bushfire crisis. Smoke from bushfires in New South Wales state formed a haze overhead.
Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison denies his government is not doing enough on climate change.
Student activists from School Strike for Climate Australia (SS4C) hold a 'Solidarity Sit-down' outside the office of the Liberal Party in Sydney, on Friday. Credit: AAP

 Links
Posted by at No comments :
Labels: , , ,

Countries From Siberia To Australia Are Burning: The Age Of Fire Is The Bleakest Warning Yet

The Guardian - Julian Cribb

It is time not only to think the unthinkable, but to speak it: the world economy, civilisation, and maybe our survival as a species are on the line
Realms as diverse and distant as Siberia, Amazonia, Indonesia, Australia and California are aflame. Photograph: Andrew Merry/Getty Images
Julian Cribb
Julian Cribb is an author, journalist, editor and science communicator.
His career includes newspaper editor, science editor, director of national awareness at the CSIRO, membership of numerous scientific boards and advisory panels, and president of national professional bodies for agricultural journalism and science communication.
His published work includes 12 books. Food or War is the latest.
Julian has received 32 awards for journalism.
On any day, between 10,000 and 30,000 bushfires burn around the planet.
Realms as diverse and distant as Siberia, Amazonia, Indonesia, Australia and California are aflame. The advent of “the age of fire” is the bleakest warning yet that humans have breached boundaries we were never meant to cross.
It is time not only to think the unthinkable, but to speak it: that the world economy, civilisation, and maybe our very survival as a species are on the line. And it is past time to act.
It isn’t just fires. It’s the incessant knell of unnatural (human-fed) disasters: droughts, floods, vanishing rivers, lakes and glaciers and the rise in billion-dollar weather impacts.
It is the spate of extinctions, the precipitous loss of sea fish, birds and corals, of forests, mammals, frogs, bees and other insects. It is the march of deserts and the waxing of dead zones in the oceans.
It is an avalanche of human chemical emissions poisoning our air, water, food, homes, cities, farms and unborn babies, slaying nine million a year.
It is the probability there will be no Arctic before the end of this century and rising seas expelling 300 million from their homes.
It is the ominous seepage of methane from the world’s oceans, tundra, swamps and fossil fuels, threatening runaway heating of 7 to 10 degrees or more.
It is the drift of billions of tonnes of soil from lands that feed us into the blind depths of the ocean, placing food security on a knife-edge as farming systems fail amid a turbulent climate and degraded landscapes.
It is the rising toll of noncommunicable disease killing three people in every four.
It is the $1.8tn spent weaponising nations for the true “war to end all wars”. Unchained by political malice or blunder, robot weapons of mass destruction commanded by artificial intelligence will choose who lives and who dies.
Yet a global citizen movement of scientists, youth, elders and women is demanding urgent action in the face of a growing risk of collapse. Its scientific warnings, Extinction Rebellion and the school strike for climate are flooding the streets of the world’s cities.
Pope Francis plans to add “ecological sin against the common home” to the Catholic catechism. The Bank of England’s governor, Mark Carney, warns of “abrupt financial collapse” due to climate change. In its annual assessment of catastrophic risks the Global Economic Forum sees mounting danger.
Prof Jem Bendell, of the University of Cumbria, UK, is among voices warning that the collapse of civilisation may have begun. Because we cannot easily predict its pace, trajectory or magnitude is no reason for inaction, he says. His paper, Deep Adaptation: a Map for Navigating our Climate Tragedy, predicts: “There will be a near-term collapse in society with serious ramifications for the lives of [citizens].” Catastrophe is “probable”, it added, and extinction “is possible”.
Yet so far only a handful of countries – France, Canada, Britain, Ireland and Argentina – have declared even a climate emergency. Most governments continue to move at glacial pace and turn a blind eye to the nine other mega-threats threats menacing humanity. Why?
Because a worldwide counter-revolution is under way, intended to paralyse action on climate, environmental loss, extinction, toxic air water and food. It is financed by “dark money” from a terrified fossil fuels sector through shady institutions. It pours hundreds of millions of dollars into global propaganda to discredit climate and environmental science, seduce government and deceive the public.
More sinister still is the growing control of the fossil fuels lobby over governments and the world media – not only in floundering western democracies, but also Russia, China, Brazil, India and Saudi Arabia.
Now a new UN report says fossil corporates plan to ramp up carbon emissions 50% to 120% by 2030 beyond the limit for a safe human future (1.5C degrees). Despite the renewables boom, fossil infrastructure investment has rebounded in 2019 after three years of decline, the International Energy Agency says. On the face of it, the fossil lobby has turned the tide.
There are only three motives to so hazard civilization: greed, malice and ignorance. Either the returns are so great that fossil executives are willing to cook their own grandchildren, or they are blind to the risks. Since these are technical people, the latter does not ring true: oil majors like Shell and ExxonMobil have revealed in court they understood exactly what they were doing to the planet for nearly 50 years. Ignoring it, they then sought to deceive humanity while ramping up carbon output.
The world is dividing into two opposing movements: the concerned “survivors” – the young, the old, the wise, the educated, the informed and the pragmatic – and the cynics backing the very global system that will precipitate collapse.
Some scientists’ estimates for how many lives collapse will cost range from 50%-90% of the human population. The number is not knowable because human behaviour, as war, cannot be foretold. The process starts with famines and water crises, both already in evidence, leading to refugee tsunamis and multiplying conflicts.
As this truth sinks in, the part of humanity committed to survival is seeking legal redress. Columbia Law School documents more than 1,640 ongoing lawsuits against fossil fuel companies and/or governments. But the law is slow, and justice can be bought.
It is time to speak the unspeakable.
Without urgent action to terminate fossil fuel use, return the planet to a state of ecological health and address all 10 mega-threats in an integrated way, our worst fears will become our fate. Collapse becomes inexorable.
Doing nothing or too little sentences humanity to collapse – economic, societal, even existential. It is time to discuss this, openly, honestly, truthfully.
We have only one rational choice: to choose to survive.
This demands all necessary actions – although they spell the end of existing systems of energy, food, water, money, defence, transport and politics – and their replacement with new ones, universally dedicated to a viable, just and sustainable human and planetary future.

Links
Posted by at No comments :
Labels: , , , , ,

Trade Deals May Be An Effective Method Of Enforcing Climate Action

Sydney Morning Herald - Editorial

As world leaders gather this week in Madrid to try to breath some life into the Paris Agreement climate accord, it has its work cut out. With US President Donald Trump triggering the one-year get-out clause and the latest United Nations Emissions Gap Report starkly revealing a world further off course than ever from meeting its emission goals, it's increasingly looking like an agreement in name only. It may explain why some countries are looking elsewhere to enforce change.
Australia's Trade Minister Simon Birmingham recently got a taste of this. During negotiations with the European Union, France proposed tying a free trade deal to Australia adopting climate change targets enforceable by sanctions. As part of a government that has repeatedly defied pressure on it to set more ambitious targets, Senator Birmingham was always going to baulk, stating: "I think it would be unprecedented to see those type of provisions proposed in an agreement."
Global trade deals increasingly take account of nation's climate policy. Credit: Jessica Shapiro


Not quite. Only last week, in the midst of the British election, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn revealed leaked government documents detailing the United Kingdom's attempts to include reference to climate change in a future trade agreement with America. As expected, while Mr Trump remains  president, the request was rebuffed.
And this year the president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, promised in a speech to the European Parliament a carbon border tax, which is meant to protect local companies from "unfair" competition by raising the cost of products from countries that fail to take adequate action against climate change. As long as it does not turn into protectionism under another guise, it's an idea with some merit.
Big business has become much more vocal about the need to do more on climate change.
Even the World Trade Organisation is starting to discuss ways in which climate change could become part of future negotiations. As global trade has greatly expanded, there is a growing awareness of the detrimental impact more economic activity will have on greenhouse gas emissions. Extreme weather will also play havoc with the roughly 50,000 cargo ships at sea at any one time and coastal infrastructure, especially ports, will become highly vulnerable.
So when Senator Birmingham says he believes trade agreements were "overwhelmingly commercial undertakings between countries" and should "focus on commercial realities", he is most likely in the land of wishful thinking. And it's not like those most affected by these changes to trade negotiations are going to be too surprised or possibly put out.
Much to the annoyance of the Coalition, big business has become much more vocal about the need to do more on climate change. It should also be remembered that trade negotiations are increasingly about non-trade matters. The recent free trade agreement with Indonesia included a deal over the number of work visas for young Indonesians coming to Australia.
While the Herald is hopeful the climate talks in Madrid this week prove surprisingly successful, what seems more likely is that many countries will continue to put national interest in front of the need for collective global action. As climate warnings become more dire, the heavy lifting on getting countries to move quicker may end up in unlikely forums. Trade deals may be just the forum that turns action on climate change into an enforceable reality.

Links
Posted by at No comments :
Labels: , , ,

01/12/2019

Paris Agreement Targets Need To Be 5 Times Stronger To Actually Work

Grist - 

AP Photo / Michel Euler
In almost exactly a year’s time, nearly 200 countries will have the chance to go back to the drawing board and make revisions to their Paris Agreement commitments. It sounds boring, but those voluntary commitments are pretty much the only global tool humanity currently has at its disposal to fight the looming climate crisis. What these countries decide to do when they get together in Glasgow next November to update their commitments will quite literally determine whether the planet devolves into a climate-wrecked hellscape or starts tracking a far more livable course.
A new U.N. report published on Tuesday, a week before many of those nations gather in Madrid for an annual climate change conference, shows exactly what the world needs to do to avoid catastrophic warming. Spoiler alert: it will not be easy.
The report says that nations need to make their emissions-reductions goals five times more ambitious in order to limit warming to 1.5 degrees C — the threshold scientists say is the danger line for global warming. Even if all of the countries involved in the Paris Agreement bring emissions down to the levels they initially pledged to meet, the world would still be on track for 3.2 degrees C of warming. That’s 5.76 degrees F, a scenario that would make the wildfires, hurricanes, heat waves, and droughts of 2019 look like child’s play.
The worse news is that many of the world’s biggest emitters aren’t even on track to meet their Paris accord pledges. Members of the G20, which includes 19 countries and the EU, produce 78 percent of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions. Of those countries, only China, the EU, India, Mexico, Russia, and Turkey are on track to meet their nationally determined contributions to the Paris Agreement. Meanwhile, Australia, Brazil, Japan, Canada, the Republic of Korea, South Africa, and the United States of America — which is in the process of pulling out of the agreement — need to take stronger action to achieve the targets that they voluntarily set in 2016. (There’s conflicting data on whether the remaining G20 members are on or off track.)
All these countries need to revise their targets significantly in 2020 and then start actually meeting their targets to “close the emissions gap” and avoid a terrible warming scenario. Inger Andersen, the executive editor of the U.N. Environment Programme and the lead author of the report, gives humanity two options: “set in motion the radical transformations we need now, or face the consequences of a planet radically altered by climate change.” Those radical transformations she’s talking about involve cutting emissions 7.6 percent every year between 2020 and 2030 if we want to limit warming to 1.5 degrees, or 2.7 percent per year if we’re willing to resign ourselves to 2 degrees of warming.
It would be the understatement of the century to call these objectives daunting. Luckily, the report lays out exactly what each country in the G7 can do to help achieve those cuts. The United States, for one, can put a price on carbon, shore up fuel efficiency standards for new cars, and implement clean building standards so developers build more efficient buildings. It can also regulate its power plants better and work toward a carbon-free electricity sector. China and India can ban coal-fired power plants, invest in public transit, and work toward zero-emissions cars and buildings. The E.U. can stop investing in fossil fuel-powered infrastructure, cut the natural gas cord, phase out its coal-powered plants, ban combustion-engine vehicles, and retrofit existing buildings to make them cleaner.
Here’s the good news: several G20 members have said they aim to achieve net-zero emissions by mid-century. In the U.S., many presidential candidates are running on platforms that include that ambitious goal. Furthermore, the technology to accomplish the recommendations laid out in the report already exists. What nations need now is the political willpower to make it happen. “We have to learn from our procrastination,” Andersen writes. “We cannot afford to fail.”

Links
Posted by at No comments :
Labels: , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts ( Atom )

Lethal Heating is a citizens' initiative