COP 26 Glasgow 2020-1

https://www.alternet.org/2021/11/wealthy-countries-cop26/

sonali

more FF lobbyist than 8 smallest 3rd w countries?!

pvt plane BS recycled

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10152027/Hypocrite-airways-Jeff-Bezoss-48m-gulf-stream-leads-parade-400-private-jets.html

https://theferret.scot/1000-fossil-fuel-big-business-cop26/

no lnx many

Revealed: 1,000 fossil fuel and big business reps at COP26

Rob Edwards

November 6, 2021

Nearly 1,000 representatives from the fossil fuel industry, big business and nuclear power companies have registered to attend the COP26 climate summit in Glasgow, according to an analysis by The Ferret.

They include executives from Shell, BP, Equinor, Chevron, Total, Gazprom and other major oil and gas companies, as well as multinational corporations such as McDonald’s, Bayer, Walmart, HSBC, PepsiCo, Nestlé and Microsoft.

There are also delegations from the coal industry, tobacco companies and pesticide manufacturers. Eleven people from two climate sceptic think-tanks have registered for the summit.

Subscribe to The Ferret

Campaigners are outraged that the oil and nuclear industries were being allowed to influence COP26, and called for polluters to be kept away from the summit. They warned of the “corporate capture of climate policies”.

But the industries argued that it was important to “hear first hand from decision-makers” what they needed to do to meet climate goals. Some companies were decarbonising faster than governments, they said.

On 1 November the United Nations (UN) published a 1,616-page list of more than 39,000 people who have registered to attend COP26, which is due to end on 12 November. The Ferret examined the 11,734 non-governmental organisations that registered to come to Glasgow as official observers to the climate negotiations.

We found 233 people linked to the fossil fuel industry internationally. The biggest delegation was from the International Emissions Trading Association (Ieta), which registered 103 people.

Ieta represents the carbon trading business, and its delegation included three executives from BP: Jeffrey Swartz, Ingrid Parramon and Nigel Dunn. There was also David Hone from Shell, two officials from the Norwegian oil company, Equinor, and people from six other oil firms.

Environmental groups argue that carbon trading is a “false solution” to the climate crisis because pollution cuts are not guaranteed. But Ieta says that “market-based approaches” could effectively deliver climate goals.

Other fossil fuel groups registered for COP26 were the International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association, the International Association of Oil and Gas Producers and the World Coal Association, with two officials. There were executives from the US oil giant, Chevron, and France’s TotalEnergies.

Over 50 representatives from the oil and gas industry were part of four government delegations, with Russia’s including 20 from the fossil fuel funder, Sberbank, and nine from the state gas company, Gazprom.

Kuwait’s delegation included 11 people from oil companies and Japan’s five from a think tank run by Mitsubishi, whose bank has been criticised for funding fossil fuels. Two representatives in Canada’s group were executives from tar sands developer, Suncor.

The presence and access of these big polluters is in stark contrast with the exclusion of civil society, which draws into disrepute the legitimacy of these talks.

Scott Tully, Glasgow Calls Out Polluters

The Ferret’s analysis identified 492 representatives from major business organisations. The largest was from the International Chamber of Commerce, with 91 people, including executives from BP, Shell, McDonald’s, Mitsubishi, PepsiCo, British American Tobacco, Nestlé, Bayer and Amazon.

Oil companies were also part of the 64-strong delegation from the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, as were the US tobacco company, Philip Morris, the US retailer, Walmart, and the German car manufacturer, BMW.

There were significant delegations registered from Japanese, German, Spanish, North American, Brazilian and Indian business federations. Others included those from steel companies, the chemical industry, mining firms, airlines and landowners.

As many as 141 people registered for COP26 from the nuclear power industry across the globe, including the UK’s Nuclear Industry Association and the World Nuclear Association. More than 20 were part of the Young Generation Network of nuclear professionals.

The nuclear industry promotes itself as a low-carbon solution to the climate crisis. But some environmentalists argue that it’s too expensive, unreliable and dangerous, compared to renewable energy.

Big business registered at COP26

Tied to fossil fuel industry 233

Big business 492

Nuclear industry 141

Agribusiness 87

Carbon capture and storage 26

Climate sceptics 11

TOTAL 990

Source: COP26 Provisional List of Participants

Some 87 of those who registered for COP26 were from the food and agriculture industry. They included Croplife International, which represents multinational pesticide manufacturers, the International Fertiliser Association, which brings together 430 companies involved in plant nutrition, and farmers.

There were also 26 representatives from the carbon capture and storage industry, a controversial method of reducing emissions favoured by oil and gas companies. Two climate sceptic think tanks from the US are on the registration list, the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow and the Competitive Enterprise Institute, led by Myron Ebell, who worked for former US president, Donald Trump.

According to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, a total of 1,823 non-governmental organisations have registered as observers at COP26. As well as businesses, there are campaign groups, community groups, religious organisations, professional associations and many others.

This list is described as “provisional”, with a final version due to be issued after COP26 has closed. It does not include so-called “overflow” delegates which under UN rules can been added by countries without their names appearing on the official list of participants.

Friends of the Earth Scotland called for polluters to be kept out of COP26. “Many different groups in society need to talk and work together to tackle the climate crisis,” said the environmental group’s director, Dr Richard Dixon.

“But the last people you want at the COP are the big oil firms who continue to profit from fuelling climate change and the nuclear, carbon capture and carbon market enthusiasts who are peddling solutions that are no solution at all.”

The campaign group, Glasgow Calls Out Polluters, decried “political failure” at COP26. “These big polluters’ climate plans are a death sentence for many, but they are nevertheless appeased by the authorities at the COP,” said the group’s Scott Tully from Glasgow.

“The presence and access of these big polluters is in stark contrast with the exclusion of civil society, which draws into disrepute the legitimacy of these talks.”

The anti-poverty charity, Oxfam Scotland, said it was “worrying” that those who have fuelled the climate crisis were given so much access. “Civil society groups, in particular from poorer countries in the south, have found it so hard to attend or even to observe the talks,” said the group’s head, Jamie Livingstone.

“Unless COP26 prioritises the voices of those facing the consequences of climate inaction, it will be impossible for the talks to deliver climate justice.”

Dr Will Dinan, an expert on lobbying from the University of Stirling, accused fossil fuel companies of lobbying to delay action to cut climate pollution. “Climate campaigners have long been concerned about corporate influence on UN environmental decision-making in general, and the corporate capture of climate policies in particular,” he said.

Delivering the energy transition demands the active participation of all businesses, governments, and citizens. We are fully committed to playing our part.

Spokesperson, International Association of Oil and Gas Producers

The International Association of Oil and Gas Producers stressed that it supported the 2015 Paris Agreement to tackle climate change. “It’s important for energy industry actors to attend COPs as observers in order to hear first hand from decision-makers who set the ambition that they expect us to deliver,” said a spokesperson.

“Delivering the energy transition is a huge challenge, and demands the active participation of all businesses, governments, and citizens. We are fully committed to playing our part.”

BP said it supported the UK’s efforts to achieve COP26 goals. “We have had a very small number of people at the meeting to observe progress and take part in events on the sidelines of the conference,” a company spokesperson told The Ferret.

According to the International Chamber of Commerce, the “core negotiations” at COP26 were a matter for governments alone. “It’s plain wrong to suggest that business is directly involved in the critical path decision making that needs to happen at the conference to keep the world on track to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050,” said a spokesperson.

“Having business at COP26 is, however, a powerful way to keep the pressure on governments to commit to credible policies to limit global temperature increases to 1.5 degrees Celsius. Many companies are already going further and faster than governments.”

Jonathan Cobb, the spokesperson for the World Nuclear Association, said: “There are business representatives for fossil fuels, and there are business representatives for nuclear, wind, solar, hydro and other low carbon generation. The second group will all need to be building new capacity on a much larger scale if we are to reach net-zero.”

This story was published in tandem with the Sunday Mirror.

Additional research by Rachel Tansey. Photo thanks to iStock/Urbanbuzz.

Big business registered at COP26

Tied to fossil fuel industry	233
Big business	492
Nuclear industry	141
Agribusiness	87
Carbon capture and storage	26
Climate sceptics	11
TOTAL	990

Source: COP26 Provisional List of Participants

shillenberger?

Chair

Saralyn Thomas

chair.ygn@nuclearinst.com

https://www.nuclearinst.com/YGN/Committee

no lnx

Oil industry bigwigs given platform at COP26 despite organisers’ claims

Exclusive: UK government hosts said Big Oil companies wouldn’t be welcome, but BP’s CEO is among fossil fuel lobbyists at the heart of the conference

Adam Ramsay

2 November 2021,

The CEO of BP is among those from Big Oil speaking at COP26 | SOPA Images Limited/Alamy Stock Photo]

Representatives of major oil companies including BP will be speaking at COP26, despite reassurances from organisers that they wouldn’t be welcome, a programme from inside the venue reveals.

Last month, it was revealed that oil companies including BP were being excluded from official roles at COP26, with organisers casting doubt on the firms’ claimed ambitions to eliminate carbon emissions.

At the time, the exclusion was seen as a victory for environmental campaigners, who have long called for major polluters to be excluded from UN climate conferences.

However, a programme of events obtained by openDemocracy reveals that representatives of Big Oil have been allowed into the conference under the umbrella of a trade association that has a stall at the heart of COP26.

“These companies are the greatest perpetrators of the climate crisis, and none of them have committed to rapidly phase out their oil, gas and coal extraction in line with the 1.5°C target.But BP and Chevron still get a platform and the industry still gets access to influential decision-makers behind the scenes,” Jess Worth, a Culture Unstained co-director, told openDemocracy.

“While so many vital voices from frontline and Indigenous communities around the world have been excluded from the summit, this clearly demonstrates the injustice baked into the heart of the process,” she added.

BP and Chevron get a platform and the industry gets access to influential decision-makers

The events are organised by the International Emissions Trading Association (IETA), which lists oil company Chevron and mining firm Rio Tinto among its partners.

Speakers hosted by the IETA include Bernard Looney, the chief executive of oil firm BP,who will take part in a ‘high level dialogue on business, human rights and the just transition’ along with Mary Robinson, the former president of Ireland and former UN commissioner for human rights.

Last month, MPs criticised BP after openDemocracy revealed the oil company had paid a firm founded by an ex-MI6 officer to snoop on climate activists.

Norwegian oil company Equinor is also listed as a partner, while speakers include those from Malaysian oil company Petronas and Delta Air Lines, another major polluter.

Another member of IETA, the Edison Electric Institute (EEI), is an umbrella body for energy companies in the US. Over the past decade, the EEI has been accused of holding back climate legislation in the US, including campaigning against distributed solar power, according to research by the investigative outlet Desmog.

Although the EEI officially acknowledges climate change as “one of the biggest energy and environmental policy challenges this country has ever faced”, in 2017, its then chair Tom Fanning denied the science of climate change in an interview with CNBC.

[COP26: How the UK started the climate crisis

8 October 2021 | Adam Ramsay]

Boris Johnson will soon take on the role of the bombastic host at the UN s climate conference in Glasgow. Don t let him pretend we’re the good guys

“The so-called business hub, the route by which BP, Chevron, Equinor, Rio Tinto and many other mega polluters have snuck into COP26, is really just a front for dodgy emission trading and offsetting schemes,” Mary Church, head of campaigns at Friends of the Earth Scotland, said.

“Market-based mechanisms like those promoted under the IETA's COP26 programme are a dangerous distraction from the real solutions to the climate crisis.”

A BP spokesperson told openDemocracy that “We’re not official participants, but there are a number of side events,” which it confirmed senior figures from the company would be speaking at.

Responding to criticism of the company’s approach to climate change, he said: “We’re very clear about what our net zero targets are.” He added that these include “targets we have set for 2025 and 2030: we’ve set out a very clear set of ambitions, aims and targets, and that’s what we’re focussed on delivering”.

The Edison Electric Institute, ITEA and Chevron did not respond to openDemocracy’s request for comment.

tag TAG https://www.dailykos.com/tags/Shellenberger

With COP Closing, Deniers Beclown Themselves, Then Cry ‘I’ve Been Cancelled!’ When People Laugh

The disinformation around this year’s climate negotiations got off to a stupid start, got slightly funny and gross there for a minute, and then just gross as a TERF called climate reporters biased. But not to worry, it’s still getting stupider, and...

ClimateDenierRoundup

Nov 12, 2021

disinformation around this year’s climate negotiations got off to a _{stupid start}_, got_{ slightly funny and gross there for a minute}_, and then just gross as a _{TERF called climate reporters biased}_. But not to worry, it’s still getting stupider, and more offensive!

On the stupid front, a member of the new _{denial PR pop-up CAR26}_ that _{we warned about}_ last week _{tweeted}_ on Monday that she was “chased” out of COP26, and had to do an interview while “hiding in the disabled loos.” _{But it turns out no one chased her out of COP26}_, she was just asked to leave a private meeting room at a side event, presumably because it was about to be used for, you know, a meeting.

“Anti-climate actors rely on a reactionary dynamic with ‘mainstream’ institutions, media, or experts,” Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD) disinformation expert _{Jennie King told DeSmog}_, “and cultivate their brand, especially on social media, around being ‘cancelled’ or outcast by perceived elites.”

This dynamic is absolutely unmistakable across the deniersphere, to the extent that it even entices people who try to distance themselves from it, like “_{honest broker}_” author _{Roger Pielke Jr.}_ While he’s long attempted to portray himself as sitting squarely within the consensus, and expresses support for a carbon tax, he’s also _{done plenty of work}_ that’s _{immediately used}_ by the _{sorts of people}_ who cry persecution when they lock themselves in a bathroom, like alleging that _{Democrats have corrupted climate science}_.

And deniers return the favor by supporting him, _{for example with a new 20-page report published by GWPF detailing}_ how, due to persecution, _{his university office is tiny}_ and filled with boxes from his shuttered projects. Based on an interview with Donna LaFramboise, who’s past works have _{centered on smearing the IPCC}_, it’s built on the idea that the tenured professor who once complained about being silenced_{ in the Wall Street Journal}_ has been, as King described of the bathroom-dweller, “‘cancelled’ or outcast by perceived elites.”

:{(On Tuesday, } $_{a COP26 event}_$ :{ honored the lives of the 1,000+ }:_{environmental activists murdered}_:{ since the }:_{Paris Agreement in 2015}_:{, a third of whom were from indigenous communities. But everyone should really feel very sorry for Pielke, because his office is very small and doesn’t even have any windows!)}:

While most may not be moved by such a harrowing tale of being told you’re wrong, refusing to admit it, and facing _{consequences for your toxic actions}_, one person who did praise Pielke yesterday _{:{was :(style="background-color:#ffff66;"):}:**:{Michael:(style="background-color:#ffff66;"):}::{ Shellenberger:(style="background-color:#ff9900;"):}:**}_. Also on the anti-elitist kick, Shellenberger tweeted a link to his new substack post a couple dozen times as well, so we took the bait and gave “_{Why Wokeism Is A Religion}_” a read. And surprisingly, we were glad we did!

Because for years now, Shellenberger has slowly been evolving beyond his brand as the liberal presenting hard truths in the name of a stronger and more successful progressive movement, and despite naming his post-_{Breakthrough}_ spin-off “_{Environmental Progress}_,” he is moving fully into the reactionary, alt-right space. This undoubtedly confirms it.

Shellenberger’s new “taxonomy” of the “woke religion” is a project with fellow anti-woke-ist Peter Boghossian, who recently quit Portland State University _{after getting blowback for writing fake academic papers}_ and in an apparent preemptive self-cancellation, as _{announced}_ on the substack of fellow _{preemptive self-canceller}_ _{Bari Weiss}_.

Similar to the _{TERFs and trans disinfo}_ we talked about last Thursday, _{this “woke religion taxonomy”}_ links racism, climate change, trans people, crime, mental illness, and drug and homelessness issues by suggesting each has an “original sin” (history) committed by “guilty devils,” (white capitalists, mostly) perpetuated by “myths” (sociology) and impacting “sacred victims” (actual victims of racism) who “the elect” _{(((}_elite_{)))}_ protect with “supernatural beliefs” (facts) and by outlawing “taboo facts” (alternative facts) and “taboo speech” (hate speech), and can only be improved through “purifying rituals” (reducing emissions, being respectful of people's identities by using their pronouns) and by embracing “purifying speech” of words and phrases as outlandish as “Black,” “Renewables,” and “Trans women are women.”

Seriously, those are the actual examples!

Somehow, though, that’s not even the most disgusting content coming from a supposed ally of climate action yesterday. While the Republican plan to export natural gas as a climate cure _{would lead to a catastrophic 3.1°C of warming}_, apparently even that is too much climate action for so-called skeptical environmentalist Bjorn Lomborg.

In _{this week's Wall Street Journal column, Lomborg argues}_ that a "reasonable alternative" to the COP26 talks is to allow for 3.5°C (6.3°F) of warming. But just the difference_{ between 1.5°C and 2·°C of warming is significant}_, with:{ :(style="box-sizing:border-box"):}:_{upward of 1 billion additional people who would be at risk of dying from extreme heat if they spend a summer day outside}_ at 2°C (and half the world population is at risk at 4°C). Allowing fossil fuels to pollute us to_{ to 3.5°C would put at }__{least}__{ 275 million people’s homes under water}_, including:{ :(style="box-sizing:border-box"):}:_{entire island nations}_ (and _{Louisiana}_ communities) that will be submerged by:{ :(style="box-sizing:border-box"):}:_{sea level rise after just 2°C of warming}_, literally _{committing cultural genocide}_.

Experts were quick to debunk Lomborg's claims, _{for example pointing out}_ that if you look at the updated version of the study he cites to justify that genocide, it now matches the Paris goals.

While the antics of obvious anti-climate activists hiding in bathrooms may be an entertaining distraction, it seems these days the real danger is coming from those “honest brokers” pretending to offer “reasonable” advice.

https://www.desmog.com/2021/10/28/new-climate-denial-group-run-by-celebrity-pr-exec-behind-net-zero-referendum-poll/

A poll showing public support for a referendum on the UK’s net zero goal covered on the front page of yesterday’s Telegraph was paid for by a newly-launched climate science denial group run by a leading figure in actor Laurence Fox’s political party.

The survey, conducted by YouGov, was commissioned by “CAR26”, a campaign group that questions whether carbon dioxide is a “significant factor in global warming” and suggests teaching children about the dangers of climate change is “borderline child abuse”.

The revelation prompted two past clients of the PR executive’s company to distance themselves from her firm, which has worked with environmentalist fashion designer Vivienne Westwood and Dragons’ Den entrepreneur James Caan.

CAR26, a nod to the UN climate summit set to begin next week, was registered as a company last month and boasts a talking sunflower called Ambassador Seeotu (CO2) as its “loveable mascot”.

The group’s director Lois Perry is an associate at 6 Hillgrove, a PR firm whose clients have included the National Lottery, Aldi, Little Chef and the Big Issue.

The company, headed by Richard Hillgrove, has worked with environmentally-friendly companies, such as SaveMoneyCutCarbon and Naked Energy, as well as high-carbon clients like Indago Petroleum and Air Berlin.

Perry has been a regular on Jeremy Vine’s chat show and is the South East Representative of Laurence Fox’s Covid-sceptic Reclaim Party, which opposes lockdowns and masks, and casts doubt on the effectiveness of vaccines.

DeSmog recently reported on how Fox had made campaigning against low-traffic neighbourhoods a key plank of his political activities.

Anti-Net Zero Campaign

The poll comes as opponents of climate action have been calling for a referendum on the government’s net zero policy ahead of the UN COP26 climate summit the UK is hosting in Glasgow.

Sunday Telegraph editor Allister Heath called for a referendum in his column last week, followed by former Tory leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith, who wrote in the paper on Monday that “there is a case to be made that if the political elite refuse to engage, a referendum on net zero might be necessary”.

The Telegraph has a long history of casting doubt on climate science and opposing action to cut emissions, with a study published in August finding that the paper’s coverage of climate change between 2005 and 2019 was “well behind the curve” in terms of scientific accuracy.

Former Brexit Minister Steve Baker appeared to back the idea of a net zero referendum in a BBC interview yesterday ahead of the government’s spending review.

Sean Buchan, researcher and partnerships manager at Stop Funding Heat, said: “The timing of this new campaign is not a coincidence. As the world’s leaders enter the most important climate talks in five years – perhaps ever – fringe groups will inevitably try to derail the proceedings.

“That The Telegraph has platformed this campaign’s toxic narrative is no surprise. The Telegraph already has a lamentable track record on climate science, but this will continue to put their advertisers in an awkward position. For example, Sainsburys, who are funding the Telegraph while promoting themselves as a ‘Principal Partner’ of COP26.”

‘Climate Analysis Reason’

He added: “Questioning the cost of climate policy while ignoring the human and economic cost of the alternative is highly misleading. It is a subtle form of misinformation, and the potential damage of such narratives – and giving them an oversized microphone – should not be understated.”

CAR26 was registered on the Companies House website last month, with its business activities described as “market research and public opinion polling”. Perry is the only person listed as being involved in the company.

The campaign’s website says its name stands for “climate analysis reason” and seeks to “offer balance to COP26”.

It claims to oppose the “plentiful absurdity in the ‘climate emergency’” and lists key questions it wants to see answered as: “Is CO2 a significant factor in global warming?” and “What are the good and bad impacts of any global warming?”.

CAR26 also says it “denounces conscription of our impressionable passionate youth to a false ‘war on CO2’ by green millionaires, educators and politicians – brainwashing and distracting from deserving real conservation and humanitarian issues like pollution, disease, clean water and sanitation. Borderline child abuse?”

‘We Don’t Share Their Values’

The CEOs of both Naked Energy and SaveMoneyCutCarbon criticised the campaign after being contacted for comment.

Naked Energy CEO Christophe Williams said his solar power company worked with Richard Hillgrove in 2011, but added: “We don’t work with them and we don’t share their values.” He said if the pair were involved in climate science denial, this would be “completely at odds with what we’re trying to do”.

He said the company had briefly used 6 Hillgrove’s services in 2011 and that they would be requesting its logo be removed from the PR firm’s website.

“I can confirm that we do not share the views you have highlighted by CAR26 and if this is being driven by Lois Perry, we categorically disagree.”

“Naked Energy is a British design and engineering firm with the sole purpose of helping reduce man-made climate emissions through the deployment of our unique solar collectors. We are in fact exhibiting our technology at the COP26 next week for the duration of the event, as we were selected by the Cabinet Office and the [Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy,” he added.

Mark Sait said his consultancy SaveMoneyCutCarbon (SMCC) had been a client of 6 Hillgrove but had never worked with Perry: “We are not aware of or have ever dealt with Lois Perry and therefore would not be aware of her or her views on this subject matter.”

He said SMCC had helped homes and businesses save significant amounts of energy and water, which he said was its “primary focus rather than the opinion of any individuals.”

“There will always be resistance and sceptics to any major cause, like global warming”, he added.

“We continue to review the best ‘fit’ of all our suppliers on a regular basis and will consider your allegations in our next review,” he said.

A spokesperson for Vivienne Westwood said: “Vivienne worked with Richard Hillgrove on a freelance basis in the past for an environmental campaign against fracking in the UK, and a human rights campaign in support of the release of Julian Assange.

“She has not worked with 6 Hillgrove since 2020 and has no intention of working again with him in the future. Vivienne Westwood is not one of Hillgrove’s clients.”

They added: “Vivienne Westwood has no connection to or acknowledgment of Lois Perry and has never worked with her.”

CAR26, 6 Hillgrove, the Telegraph, and YouGov have been contacted for comment.

loki crit an 11 21

The impact of agriculture on climate change is significant. According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the agriculture sector is responsible for 10 percent of the total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, after transportation (29 percent), electricity production (25 percent), industry (23 percent), and commercial and residential usage (13 percent). However, according to Peter Lehner, managing attorney for EarthJustice, a nonprofit environmental law firm, the EPA estimate is "almost certainly significantly quite low."

Lehner argues that most analyses exclude five unique sources of emissions from the farming sector: soil carbon (carbon released during the disturbance of soil), lost sequestration (carbon that would still be sequestered in the ground had that land not been converted into farmland), input footprints (carbon footprint for products used in agriculture, like the manufacturing of fertilizer), difficult measurements (it is harder to measure the carbon emissions of biological systems like agriculture than it is to measure the emissions of other industries that are not biological, like transportation), and potent gases (like methane and nitrous oxide).

Regarding that last source: Focusing on carbon dioxide as the main greenhouse gas often ignores powerful planet-warming gases that are emitted by agriculture and that are even more potent than carbon dioxide. Methane, which is emitted by the burps and farts of ruminants like cows and sheep, has up to 86 times more global warming potential over a 20-year period than carbon dioxide (and also impacts public health, particularly in frontline communities). Nitrous oxide, a byproduct of fertilizer runoff, has 300 times more warming potential than carbon dioxide (and also harms plants and animals).

"Most other studies, including by the [United Nations (UN)] and others, say that agriculture contributes much closer to 15 or 20 percent or more of world greenhouse gas emissions," Lehner points out.

READ: Pastor tells congregation 'the best person to rape is your wife']

Disappointingly, agriculture was not a central topic of discussion at COP26, the international climate summit that recently concluded in Glasgow, Scotland. "Despite [the] huge impact to ecological systems and climate," writes Suzannah Gerber, a nutrition scientist and fellow of the National Institute of Food and Agriculture—a research agency within the U.S. Department of Agriculture—"specific high-level talks about agriculture comprised less than 5 percent of all official negotiations and less than 10 percent of side events, favoring the less controversial topic of renewable energy."

And while renewable energy supporters cheered the fact that the Glasgow Climate Pact is the first UN climate agreement to explicitly mention "coal" and "fossil fuels"—something that the fossil fuel industry fought hard against in previous summits, and that China and India managed to water down in the current agreement—the pact makes no mention of the words "agriculture" or "food."

Meat Is Murder—for Animals and the Environment

Forests continue to be clear-cut to make room for farms, such as factory farms—which supply humans' appetite for meat—and plantations that produce the world's most used vegetable oil: palm oil. And while deforestation and methane emissions were main topics at COP26 (resulting in pledges to reduce both), agriculture—which is intimately linked to deforestation and land-use change—was relegated to a sideline topic. "Unlike forest, finance and transport—that got the feted 'title of a day' at … [COP26]—agriculture was taken up as part of 'Nature Day' on a Saturday," reported Richard Mahapatra for Down to Earth. "Outside the venue, thousands protested against a gamut of things, including step-motherly treatment to food systems that have been a major source of greenhouse gas… emissions."

Within agriculture, producing meat is the main climate problem: Plant-based foods account for 29 percent of the global food production greenhouse gas emissions, while animal-based food accounts for almost twice as much—57 percent—with beef being the main contributor. "Every bite of burger boosts harmful greenhouse gases," said the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). "Research shows that if cows were a nation, they would be the world's third-largest greenhouse gas emitter," according to UNEP. "As humans, meat production is one of the most destructive ways in which we leave our footprint on the planet."

READ:***Charlottesville defendants found liable for civil conspiracy and ordered to pay millions in damages***

And many, many more human footprints are on the way. By 2050, the human population is expected to reach a staggering 9.9 billion people. (Today, there are 7.7 billion people on the planet; just 50 years ago, the global population was less than half that number.) To ensure global food security in 2050, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) said that food production must increase by 60 percent.

A More Sustainable Future Is Plant-Powered

Animal-based agriculture is ultimately a poor way to feed a skyrocketing human population. "Farming animals is notoriously inefficient and wasteful when compared to growing plants to feed humans directly, with the end result that 'livestock' animals take drastically more food from the global food supply than they provide," writes Ashley Capps, a researcher specializing in farmed animal welfare for A Well-Fed World, an international food security organization advocating for the transition to plant-based agriculture.

"This is because in order to eat farmed animals, we have to grow the crops necessary to feed them, which amounts to vastly more crops than it would take to feed humans directly," writes Capps. "To give one example, it takes 25 pounds of grain to yield just one pound of beef—while crops such as soy and lentils produce, pound for pound, as much protein as beef, and sometimes more."

Switching to plant-based agriculture would help prevent food shortages, hunger and even famine at a time when climate change is creating food insecurity across the globe. Patricia Espinosa, executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, had warned during the Saudi Green Initiative Forum on October 24 that failure to stem the climate crisis "would mean less food, so probably a crisis in food security."

A Well-Fed World points out that "[c]limate change is a hunger risk multiplier, with 20 percent more people projected to be at risk of hunger by 2050 due to extreme weather events. Unfortunately, the world's most food insecure populations are also those disproportionately harmed by climate-related events, including increased heat waves, droughts, hurricanes, tsunamis and flooding."

Climate, Conflict and COVID-19: A Perfect Storm

"A perfect storm of conflict, climate crises, the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and rising costs for reaching people in need is causing a seismic hunger crisis," warns the World Food Program, the food assistance branch of the UN. The agency has recently launched a public appeal to the world's billionaires to donate $6.6 billion to save 42 million people across 43 countries from famine.

"Concurrently replacing all animal-based items in the U.S. diet with plant-based alternatives will add enough food to feed, in full, 350 million additional people, well above the expected benefits of eliminating all supply chain food waste," according to a 2018 study by an international team of researchers published in the journal Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. The authors note that the results of their study "highlight the importance of dietary shifts to improving food availability and security."

The dietary shift from meat to plants is something that UNEP has underscored as a way to combat climate change and increase the efficiency of our food system. In their Emissions Gap Report 2021, the agency noted that—in addition to switching from the combustion of natural gas to renewables—"behavioral changes such as reduced consumption of cattle-based foods and reduced food waste and loss" present a significant opportunity to reduce methane emissions. "[F]ast methane action, as opposed to slower or delayed action, can contribute greatly to reducing midterm (2050) temperatures," the report states.

COP26's Missed Opportunity

In many ways, this behavioral change is already underway, as veganism is on the rise. "It can be difficult to get an accurate picture of how many vegans there are in the U.S., but one survey found a 300 percent increase in vegans between 2004 and 2019, amounting to about 3 percent of the total population or nearly 10 million people," notes Sentient Media, a nonprofit animal rights journalism organization. Still, even though there has been a steady increase in plant-based diets, meat consumption is hitting record levels, aided by carnivores in low- and middle-income countries where incomes are on the rise, like India and China.

Considering the growing interest in plant-based eating, the COP26 negotiators missed an opportunity to make dietary and agricultural changes a main thrust of the global climate solution. "Without positions and main messages from COP26 leadership, the need to address the climate change contributions from diet will not be able to gain ground," writes Gerber. In the UN-managed "Blue Zone" at the Glasgow Science Center, for example, while COP26 attendees were presented with mainly animal-based food choices, only 38 percent of the menu was plant-based, as opposed to the earlier promise of ensuring "50 percent plant-based offerings within the Blue Zone."

In order to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels (which will help avoid the worst impacts of climate change), the world must achieve net zero emissions by 2050. To meet this goal, the COP26 organizers listed four distinct strategies: accelerate the phase-out of coal; curtail deforestation; speed up the switch to electric vehicles, and encourage investment in renewables.

They would have done well to add a fifth: transition the world to a plant-based diet.

joe bringing big tea,/guns incl BO but....kneecapped?

1021 kos an

blades

Sen. Joe Manchin has made clear that there is no way will he cast his crucial votefor the Democrats' reconciliation bill if it includes the Clean Electricity Performance Program (CEPP), the most powerful part of President Joe Biden's climate agenda. Thus does the senior senator from West Virginia display his true colors to anyone who was still confused about them.

CEPP would provide $150 billion to reward utilities that accelerate the replacement of the nation's coal- and gas-fired power plants with wind, solar, and nuclear energy in order to reach the goal of zero carbon emissions in the power sector by 2035. Without Manchin on board, White House staff and senior Democrats seem to have surrendered in the matter and are searching for ways to put together other programs to cut emissions. Without passage of a bill containing aggressive programs, Biden's team is going to have a devil of a time in Glasgow at the climate summit persuading China, India, and Brazil that he can even deliver the U.S. pledges on emissions cuts, much less that their nations should do better than they are.

Here's Coral Davenport at The New York Times:

A spokeswoman for Mr. Manchin, Sam Runyon, wrote in an email, "Senator Manchin has clearly expressed his concerns about using taxpayer dollars to pay private companies to do things they're already doing. He continues to support efforts to combat climate change while protecting American energy independence and ensuring our energy reliability."

I can't read minds, so I won't claim to know what is truly in Manchin's heart in this matter. What I do know is that anyone who truly accepts what scientists are saying about the climate crisis—anyone who actually backs "efforts to combat climate change"—would not use the political clout of his high office to cripple policies to prevent, mitigate, and adapt to the dire impacts of changes being projected for our future.

It's actually easier to respect a numbskull like Sen. James "Snowball" Inhofe, who wrote an entire book calling climate change a hoax and seems to truly believe it, than Manchin, who pretends he's down with the science even as his bank account gets ever fatter feeding off the teat of the fossil fuel industry. An industry that, in case anyone has forgotten, spent hundreds of millions of dollars promoting climate denial disinformation. Manchin and his family have thrived thanks to profiteers who created climate change doubt by gaslighting the populace, smearing scientists, attacking activists, and, of course, pouring gobs of campaign money into the pockets of compliant politicians in both parties.

There's a chance we'll still see passage of a reconciliation bill with a few crumbs on climate. But quite possibly not. As Democratic Sen. Tina Smith of Minnesota told The Times, "We must have strong climate action in the Build Back Better budget. I'm open to all approaches, but as I've said, I will not support a budget deal that does not get us where we need to go on climate action. There are 50 Democratic senators and it's going to take every one of our votes to get this budget passed."

Even if a bill with some climate elements in it does pass, without the CEPP, that cut will have far-reaching consequences beyond the power sector. While it contributes 25% of total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, the transportation sector contributes 29%. Cutting that to zero requires a switchover from internal combustion vehicles to green-sourced electric power. Otherwise, much of the reduced carbon pollution from the operation of EVs will be undermined by the continuing operation of power plants burning fossil fuels to charge up those vehicles.

Then there's the humiliation of showing up in Glasgow with a lot more words than actions. Not the strongest negotiating posture.

If Joe Manchin really were serious about combatting the climate crisis, he would say okay to the CEPP, but only on the condition that the reconciliation bill's already hefty investment in coal communities be doubled. But no.

This week more than650 protesters,many of them Indigenous, were arrested in Washington for civil disobedience in protest of foot-dragging in Congress on climate change. In the words of a 90-year-old song written by Florence Reece in support of coal strikers in Harlan County, Kentucky, the protesters asked a question for those within earshot: "Which side are you on?"

Joe Manchin has shown us which side he is on. And that puts us, and generations to come, in peril.

didn't i have RW students trying to peddle this myth?

Climate deniers are going all in with disinfo for COP26 (Sorry, Teslas really do produce fewer emissions)

TAGGED:COP26, DENIAL, TESLA October 27th, 2021

As the world gears up for the COP26 climate negotiations in Glasgow next week, deniers are already laying the groundwork for the disinformation they’ll peddle in a hopefully-vain attempt to recreate their success in using Climategate disinformation to disrupt the Copenhagen COP.

While every year brings a new and exciting display of denial, a few recent stories stand out as top candidates for the fossil fueled opposition to latch onto when confronted with the possibility that letting polluters profit our planet to death is a bad idea.By Climate Denier Roundup

Though we can expect some totally-unhinged and _{unsubstantiated claims about banning beef,}_ one of the biggest recurring arguments is also one of the most misleading, that the Texas blackouts offer a warning of what climate policies will make common.

For example, Sean Spicer, who hasn’t quite danced his Trump-stained reputation clean yet, has a new book out, and the Koch-funded RealClear _{ran an excerpt}_. It opens with a heart-tugging story about a 12 year old who died of hypothermia, and then quickly exploits the child’s death to score cheap, and completely false, political points. The 80+ deaths “were caused by political decisions,” Spicer writes, and “the tragedy of the Texas blackout was partially the result of the growth of the green energy industry.”

But the majority of the _{responsibility for the blackouts}_ can be laid at the fossil fuel industry’s failure to do the one thing it claims it does best: Be reliable.

That reliability claim is also at the core of another strain of disinformation we’re seeing around COP26, which is the suggestion that the Teslas parked at the Gleneagles Hotel that the VIPs will use in Glasgow are going to be charged by diesel generators. “Couldn’t make it up,” _{one viral tweet claimed}_.

It was used as _{the basis for a ZeroHedge story}_, and the same narrative has been picked up by _{the UK’s Spectator}_ magazine, and the climate _{denial blog Watts Up With That}_.

The problem? Well, it turns out you could make it up, and they did, as it turns out it’s Jaguar-brand electric vehicles they’re using, not Teslas, and while the COP26 crew may use supplemental generators to charge the vehicles somewhere, Gleneagles Hotel has denied setting up any chargers, while conference organizers _{told Alastair Dalton for the Scotsman}_ that any spare generators are going to be filled with cooking waste oil, AKA biodiesel, not petroleum-based diesel.

Although unreasonable for faux-populist conservatives to attack the rich elite pushing for climate action, it does seem odd that they’re apparently incapable of doing so in an honest way, despite that being so very, very easy to do.

For example, _{**a recent New York Post op-ed**}_ does a fine job of criticizing the billionaire boy’s club of Bezos, Musk, Gates, and Jobs(‘s widow), but also throws in some fakery for good measure.

While Paula Froelich is correct that “the electric cars made by Musk’s Tesla are not emissions free,”she then goes on to claim that the Wall Street Journal showed that “building one of his cars actually generates more emissions because of the metals needed for its lithium-ion batteries.”

But when _{you click through to the WSJ story}_, the subheadline notes that while “there are caveats”, “EVs produce fewer emissions overall than their gas-powered counterparts.” That’s because while the manufacturing of an electric vehicle requires more materials than a gas-powered car, the pollution from refueling far outweighs that initial difference.

Drive a Tesla for more than (at most) 20,000 miles, and you’ve broken even on emissions.

Drive it for a car’s average lifespan of 150,000 miles, and not only has the EV cost you less in ownership (because electricity is cheaper than gas) but you’ve also generated less than half as much pollution.

So if they had ordered and produced new electric cars for the COP26, and then immediately scrapped them afterwards, then yes, that would be hypocritical and wasteful. But the UK government has already said that the cars “have all been sourced from existing fleets in the UK,” so there’s not even that initial manufacturing pollution to count, dramatically improving the emissions footprint.

But, as one local environmental campaigner, Colin Howden, told the Scotsman, what they could’ve done to reduce emissions even further (and avoid this issue all together) is have the dignitaries take advantage of the “fleet of new electric buses” in Glasgow.

(Originally appeared at DailyKos.)

Bonn, 1 April 2020 - The COP26 UN climate change conference set to take place in Glasgow in November has been postponed due to COVID-19.

This decision has been taken by the COP Bureau of the UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change), with the UK and its Italian partners.

Dates for a rescheduled conference in 2021, hosted in Glasgow by the UK in partnership with Italy, will be set out in due course following further discussion with parties.

In light of the ongoing, worldwide effects of COVID-19, holding an ambitious, inclusive COP26 in November 2020 is no longer possible.

Rescheduling will ensure all parties can focus on the issues to be discussed at this vital conference and allow more time for the necessary preparations to take place. We will continue to work with all involved to increase climate ambition, build resilience and lower emissions.

COP26 President-Designate and Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Alok Sharma said:

“The world is currently facing an unprecedented global challenge and countries are rightly focusing their efforts on saving lives and fighting COVID-19. That is why we have decided to reschedule COP26.

“We will continue working tirelessly with our partners to deliver the ambition needed to tackle the climate crisis and I look forward to agreeing a new date for the conference.”

UN Climate Change Executive Secretary Patricia Espinosa said:

“COVID-19 is the most urgent threat facing humanity today, but we cannot forget that climate change is the biggest threat facing humanity over the long term.

“Soon, economies will restart. This is a chance for nations to recover better, to include the most vulnerable in those plans, and a chance to shape the 21st century economy in ways that are clean, green, healthy, just, safe and more resilient.

“In the meantime, we continue to support and to urge nations to significantly boost climate ambition in line with the Paris Agreement.”

Italian Minister for the Environment, Land and Sea Protection, Sergio Costa, said:...