iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-03-19--Scientists Struggling To Understand Germany’s Low Coronavirus Death Rate

Scientists are struggling to understand why the death rate from the coronavirus is so much lower in Germany than other countries .
Germany has seen just 27 deaths from the virus so far despite recording 10,082 infections — more than anywhere except China , Italy , Iran and Spain .
That represents a fatality rate of just 0.2 per cent , compared to 7.9 per cent in Italy — raising hopes Germany might be doing something right that other countries can follow .
The disparity has even led to allegations of a German cover-up by the Italian far-Right .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be at an earlier stage of the pandemic , and that death rates here may soon catch up .
But they also point to other factors that may be helping keep the German death rate down .
“ Germany has had a very aggressive testing process , ” Dr Mike Ryan , health emergencies director at the World Health Organisation ( WHO ) said .
“ So the number of tests maybe detecting more mild cases .
“ From the beginning , we have very systematically called upon our doctors to test people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s Robert Koch Institute said .
“ We can provide testing to a high degree so that we can easily look into the beginnings of the epidemic.
” “ Test , test , test ” has become the WHO ’ s mantra in fighting the coronavirus , and experts say Germany ’ s vigorous testing programme may be doing more than just keeping the death rate down by documenting more cases .
“ Italy has a much older population .
And in many ways Italy is the poster child for living longer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ having an older population means the fatality rate may appear higher , ” Dr Ryan said .
Official figures show that rates of infection among the most vulnerable age group , those aged 60 and above , are much lower in Germany than elsewhere .
That may just be a case of luck , but it may be that by identifying cases early , Germany has been able to track chains of infection and prevent the virus reaching the most vulnerable .
The post Scientists Struggling To Understand Germany ’ s Low Coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Warming Policy Forum ( GWPF ) .

Scientists are struggling to understand why the death rate from the coronavirus is so much lower in Germany than other countries. Germany has seen just 27 deaths from the virus so far despite recording 10,082 infections — more than anywhere except China, Italy, Iran and Spain.
That represents a fatality rate of just 0.2 per cent, compared to 7.9 per cent in Italy — raising hopes Germany might be doing something right that other countries can follow.
The disparity has even led to allegations of a German cover-up by the Italian far-Right. But experts have cautioned that Germany may simply be at an earlier stage of the pandemic, and that death rates here may soon catch up.
But they also point to other factors that may be helping keep the German death rate down.
“Germany has had a very aggressive testing process,” Dr Mike Ryan, health emergencies director at the World Health Organisation (WHO) said. “So the number of tests maybe detecting more mild cases.
“From the beginning, we have very systematically called upon our doctors to test people,” Prof Lothar Wieler of Germany’s Robert Koch Institute said.
“We can provide testing to a high degree so that we can easily look into the beginnings of the epidemic.”
“Test, test, test” has become the WHO’s mantra in fighting the coronavirus, and experts say Germany’s vigorous testing programme may be doing more than just keeping the death rate down by documenting more cases.
“Italy has a much older population. And in many ways Italy is the poster child for living longer lives, but unfortunately in this case having an older population means the fatality rate may appear higher,” Dr Ryan said.
Official figures show that rates of infection among the most vulnerable age group, those aged 60 and above, are much lower in Germany than elsewhere.
That may just be a case of luck, but it may be that by identifying cases early, Germany has been able to track chains of infection and prevent the virus reaching the most vulnerable.
The post Scientists Struggling To Understand Germany’s Low Coronavirus Death Rate appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF).
via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)
https://ift.tt/2vCMYT2
March 19, 2020 at 12:54PM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-03-19--Set AC to Higher Temperature and Humidity

To reduce transmission of COVID-19 indoors : increase air temperature and humidity .
This a well known folk remedy , @ @ @ @ @ .
Warmer and more humid air kills viruses in the air and on the surfaces @ @ @ @ @ confirmed that it works for the COVID-19 virus .
If you are in an affected @ @ @ @ @ temperature to 80°F and humidity to 80 % , for example .

To reduce transmission of COVID-19 indoors: increase air temperature and humidity. This a well known folk remedy, now confirmed by the science. Warmer and more humid air kills viruses in the air and on the surfaces faster. Now a study confirmed that it works for the COVID-19 virus.
If you are in an affected area, you might set temperature to 80°F and humidity to 80%, for example.
via Science Defies Politics
https://ift.tt/3bcIdyq
March 19, 2020 at 12:32PM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-03-19--How Exactly Do They Plan To Replace Fossil Fuels? – OpEd

That ’ s easy – there is no plan .
Plenty of bluster , arm-waving and rash promises though .
But the realities of engineering , economics , logistics and so on can ’ t be wished away .
Berkeley , CA , Takoma Park , MD and other cities ; California , Connecticut , New York , Virginia and other states ; Germany , England and other countries ; the European Union – all plan to all plan to banish oil , natural gas and coal within 10 , 20 or 30 years , writes Paul Driessen @ Eurasia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have joined Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiatives and proudly say We Are Still In … the Paris climate treaty , no matter what President Trump says or does .
Forget the headlines and models , and look at hurricane , tornado , sea level and other historic records .
There is no crisis , no unprecedented warming or weather events , certainly nothing that proves humans have replaced the powerful natural forces that have always driven climate changes and weather events .
But for now , let ’ s just examine their zero-carbon plans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ happen ?
Where do they plan to get the turbines , panels and batteries ?
the raw materials to manufacture them ?
How do they plan to function as modern societies with pricey , erratic energy and frequent power disruptions ?
How would they – or America , if the entire USA goes Green New Deal – handle a COVID-27 outbreak ?
How would they manufacture cars , airplanes , wind turbines , toilet paper , pharmaceuticals or much of anything else with intermittent energy ?
It hasn ’ t worked in Europe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ won ’ t work here .

That’s easy – there is no plan. Plenty of bluster, arm-waving and rash promises though. But the realities of engineering, economics, logistics and so on can’t be wished away.
Berkeley, CA, Takoma Park, MD and other cities; California, Connecticut, New York, Virginia and other states; Germany, England and other countries; the European Union – all plan to all plan to banish oil, natural gas and coal within 10, 20 or 30 years, writes Paul Driessen @ Eurasia Review.
A number of US states have joined Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiatives and proudly say We Are Still In … the Paris climate treaty, no matter what President Trump says or does.
Forget the headlines and models, and look at hurricane, tornado, sea level and other historic records. There is no crisis, no unprecedented warming or weather events, certainly nothing that proves humans have replaced the powerful natural forces that have always driven climate changes and weather events.
But for now, let’s just examine their zero-carbon plans. How exactly will they make this happen? Where do they plan to get the turbines, panels and batteries? the raw materials to manufacture them? How do they plan to function as modern societies with pricey, erratic energy and frequent power disruptions?
How would they – or America, if the entire USA goes Green New Deal – handle a COVID-27 outbreak? How would they manufacture cars, airplanes, wind turbines, toilet paper, pharmaceuticals or much of anything else with intermittent energy?
It hasn’t worked in Europe (see below), and it won’t work here.
Full article here.
via Tallbloke’s Talkshop
https://ift.tt/2U0Udxn
March 19, 2020 at 12:03PM


Coronavirus uncertainty

My thoughts on coronavirus and deep uncertainty .
I and my family are in isolation , in relatively comfortable , well-stocked and in safe circumstances ( solar power with Tesla power wall ) .
My community ( Reno NV ) has relatively few cases and no apparent transmission as of yet ; however Las Vegas NV is pretty hard hit as well as neighboring communities in California .
I am very fortunate not have to worry personally about jobs or $ $ through this ( apart from the financial well being of our extended family members and employees at CFAN @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quasi-isolated location near the edge of wilderness , with many walking trails .
I am working to continue supporting the service people that we rely on ( housekeeper , personal trainers , handyman etc ) .
My daughter is working to set up online music lessons , and our Tai Chi instructor is working on setting up online instruction .
Once the weather is nice , both music lessons and and Tai Chi sessions will be held outside in our very large driveway .
I have no idea where this is all headed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be surprised .
My ‘ prediction ’ ( well , hope ) is that effective treatments will be identified ( I have flagged dozens of such publications on twitter , lets discuss this on the technical thread ) , and that this will be brought under control within a few months .
Personally , my most immediate concern is that Netflix streaming doesn ’ t bring down the internet !
There is much discussion about parallels with decision making under corona virus and climate change .
The climate change alarmists say that CV @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to act urgently on climate change .
Au contraire .
The main similarity between CC and CV are that they are both situations of deep uncertainty .
For CV , we are working from data from countries having the early outbreaks , plus epidemiological models .
Extreme precaution is advised immediately to save lives .
Individual people feel the urgent , visceral need for extreme precaution ( well not all them , viz .
the riotous spring breakers in Florida ) .
The economic and social consequences of this extreme precaution is beginning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flexibility in our responses so we can shift course as needed .
I have written much on the topic of climate change and the precautionary principle .
Simply put , the precautionary principle is wrong trousers from the climate change problem .
Apart from the brainwashed Extinction Rebellion folk ( assuming that they are doing this not because they are being paid to do it ) , no one feels the urgent visceral need to drop everything and ‘ act ’ on climate change .
The reason for that is that the potential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ long time horizon ( decades to centuries ) , there is no simple ‘ action ’ that will reverse climate change , premature actions could lock us into infrastructure that is not in our best long term interests .
And finally , diversion of all our resources to the climate change problem could make us more vulnerable to more urgent problems such as CV .
This is not to say that we shouldn ’ t act on climate change ; I have long argued for no regrets actions such as energy technology R @ @ @ @ @ @ @ events , planning for 21st century infrastructures , and minimizing pollution of air , water and soils .
However , inferring that the coronavirus policies will lead to comparably urgent climate change action is misguided , IMO .
We will eventually get past this .
What are the long-term implications of our CV experiences ?
Some of them arguably have implications for climate change .
But there are much broader implications for how we live and work , and also the social safety net .
The rate of epidemiological and immunological research that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; after all this settles , the old publication model with peer review and paywall will arguably be dead .
The insanity of people travelling nonstop all over the world for conferences and meetings has been illuminated .
Apart from the CO2 emissions , this travelling is an insane loss of productivity and takes a toll on people ’ s health .
Even the IPCC is conducting its working group meetings via the internet .
With regards to scientific conferences , these are being posted on the internet .
These days on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I don ’ t attend any talks ( look at them later on the internet ) , but set up meetings with people ( collaborators , old friends , clients and potential clients ) .
That is the hard part , but everyone staying home has more of an opportunity to reach out to people over the internet .
Traveling and tourism will undoubtedly change .
While I have never been on a big cruise trip , I can ’ t imagine getting on such a ship after all this .
I suspect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to its previous level .
Restaurants will change dramatically , more a focus on pick up and delivery than on dining .
Apparently millennials are already in this mode , rarely going to restaurants but relying on food pick up or delivery .
How we value employees at the lower end of the economic ladder will change , e.g .
grocery store employees , truck drivers , health care workers , teachers , etc .
The CV experience has been a real eye-opener for the U.S. in terms of its fragile safety net @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one is vulnerable at one time or another ) .
Sick leave ( and pay ) , health care are being reconsidered .
Much flux for both political parties in the U.S. ; here ’ s to hoping that something sensible emerges .
The perception of expertise is in flux .
As a result of climate change alarmism ( both scientists and the media ) , scientific expertise took a hit in terms of political and public perceptions .
By contrast , the scientific experts on coronavirus are doing a superb job and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lessons the climate alarmed and dismissives will eventually learn from this remains to be seen .
CO2 emissions are down , which is likely only temporary , but some of these post CV changes could have longterm impacts .
Well , this should be enough to kick off the discussion .
Stay safe , everyone .

by Judith Curry
My thoughts on coronavirus and deep uncertainty.
I and my family are in isolation, in relatively comfortable, well-stocked and in safe circumstances (solar power with Tesla power wall). My community (Reno NV) has relatively few cases and no apparent transmission as of yet; however Las Vegas NV is pretty hard hit as well as neighboring communities in California.
I am very fortunate not have to worry personally about jobs or $$ through this (apart from the financial well being of our extended family members and employees at CFAN). We also live in a quasi-isolated location near the edge of wilderness, with many walking trails.
I am working to continue supporting the service people that we rely on (housekeeper, personal trainers, handyman etc). My daughter is working to set up online music lessons, and our Tai Chi instructor is working on setting up online instruction. Once the weather is nice, both music lessons and and Tai Chi sessions will be held outside in our very large driveway.
I have no idea where this is all headed, only that I expect us to be surprised.
My ‘prediction’ (well, hope) is that effective treatments will be identified (I have flagged dozens of such publications on twitter, lets discuss this on the technical thread), and that this will be brought under control within a few months.
Personally, my most immediate concern is that Netflix streaming doesn’t bring down the internet!
CV vs CC
There is much discussion about parallels with decision making under corona virus and climate change. The climate change alarmists say that CV shows us how and why we need to act urgently on climate change.
Au contraire. The main similarity between CC and CV are that they are both situations of deep uncertainty.
For CV, we are working from data from countries having the early outbreaks, plus epidemiological models.
Extreme precaution is advised immediately to save lives. Individual people feel the urgent, visceral need for extreme precaution (well not all them, viz. the riotous spring breakers in Florida). The economic and social consequences of this extreme precaution is beginning to be realized; the key is flexibility in our responses so we can shift course as needed.
I have written much on the topic of climate change and the precautionary principle. Simply put, the precautionary principle is wrong trousers from the climate change problem. Apart from the brainwashed Extinction Rebellion folk (assuming that they are doing this not because they are being paid to do it), no one feels the urgent visceral need to drop everything and ‘act’ on climate change. The reason for that is that the potential adverse impacts of climate change have a long time horizon (decades to centuries), there is no simple ‘action’ that will reverse climate change, premature actions could lock us into infrastructure that is not in our best long term interests. And finally, diversion of all our resources to the climate change problem could make us more vulnerable to more urgent problems such as CV.
This is not to say that we shouldn’t act on climate change; I have long argued for no regrets actions such as energy technology R&D, adaptation to extreme weather events, planning for 21st century infrastructures, and minimizing pollution of air, water and soils.
However, inferring that the coronavirus policies will lead to comparably urgent climate change action is misguided, IMO.
Post CV
We will eventually get past this. What are the long-term implications of our CV experiences? Some of them arguably have implications for climate change. But there are much broader implications for how we live and work, and also the social safety net.
The rate of epidemiological and immunological research that is getting conducted and published is breathtaking; after all this settles, the old publication model with peer review and paywall will arguably be dead.
The insanity of people travelling nonstop all over the world for conferences and meetings has been illuminated. Apart from the CO2 emissions, this travelling is an insane loss of productivity and takes a toll on people’s health. Even the IPCC is conducting its working group meetings via the internet.
With regards to scientific conferences, these are being posted on the internet. These days on the rare occasions i go to conferences, I don’t attend any talks (look at them later on the internet), but set up meetings with people (collaborators, old friends, clients and potential clients). That is the hard part, but everyone staying home has more of an opportunity to reach out to people over the internet.
Traveling and tourism will undoubtedly change. While I have never been on a big cruise trip, I can’t imagine getting on such a ship after all this. I suspect that air travel won’t recover to its previous level.
Restaurants will change dramatically, more a focus on pick up and delivery than on dining. Apparently millennials are already in this mode, rarely going to restaurants but relying on food pick up or delivery.
How we value employees at the lower end of the economic ladder will change, e.g. grocery store employees, truck drivers, health care workers, teachers, etc.
The CV experience has been a real eye-opener for the U.S. in terms of its fragile safety net for vulnerable people (pretty much every one is vulnerable at one time or another). Sick leave (and pay), health care are being reconsidered. Much flux for both political parties in the U.S.; here’s to hoping that something sensible emerges.
The perception of expertise is in flux. As a result of climate change alarmism (both scientists and the media), scientific expertise took a hit in terms of political and public perceptions. By contrast, the scientific experts on coronavirus are doing a superb job and politicians are taking them seriously. What lessons the climate alarmed and dismissives will eventually learn from this remains to be seen.
CO2 emissions are down, which is likely only temporary, but some of these post CV changes could have longterm impacts.
Well, this should be enough to kick off the discussion. Stay safe, everyone.
via Climate Etc.
https://ift.tt/2Uy9TYf
March 19, 2020 at 11:09AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-03-19--Polar bears prowling Newfoundland come on top of coronavirus fears

On Tuesday 17 March 2020 , several polar bears were reported in and around the community of St. Anthony on the Northern Peninsula of Newfoundland , adding another threat on top of coronavirus concerns in the province .
The photo below is from a 2018 Newfoundland sighting from the same region : none are available for the current report .
There have been no reports of trouble but locals will have to stay vigilant to remain safe , which since 2008 has been a common concern from late winter to early spring .
In 2012 in this area , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and attacked livestock ; another bear was shot the next week in the same area .
And in 2016 and 2017 , a bear had to be shot to protect residents .
Bears at this time of year are in hunting mode , which is why my polar bear attack thriller novel , EATEN , is set in March .
There is a bit less ice than average off Newfoundland at the moment but plenty of ice thick enough to support polar bears ( see chart below ) .
The bears are in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ population of harp seals that are currently giving birth in the area .
Young seals will be available prey for polar bears for the next 8 weeks or so .
St. Anthony on the northern peninsula is marked on the map : See ice in Canada and the world at this date below .

On Tuesday 17 March 2020, several polar bears were reported in and around the community of St. Anthony on the Northern Peninsula of Newfoundland, adding another threat on top of coronavirus concerns in the province. The photo below is from a 2018 Newfoundland sighting from the same region: none are available for the current report.
There have been no reports of trouble but locals will have to stay vigilant to remain safe, which since 2008 has been a common concern from late winter to early spring. In 2012 in this area, a bear was shot after it destroyed homes and attacked livestock; another bear was shot the next week in the same area. And in 2016 and 2017, a bear had to be shot to protect residents. Bears at this time of year are in hunting mode, which is why my polar bear attack thriller novel, EATEN, is set in March.
Current sea ice conditions below.
There is a bit less ice than average off Newfoundland at the moment but plenty of ice thick enough to support polar bears (see chart below). The bears are in the area to feed off the abundant population of harp seals that are currently giving birth in the area. Young seals will be available prey for polar bears for the next 8 weeks or so. St. Anthony on the northern peninsula is marked on the map:
See ice in Canada and the world at this date below.
NSIDC Masie chart:
NSIDC chart:
via polarbearscience
https://ift.tt/2UkFE6P
March 19, 2020 at 11:01AM


Coronavirus technical thread

Click to email this to a friend ( Opens in new window )

by Judith Curry
A thread devoted to technical topics, e.g. epidemiology, immunology, treatments. A more general thread will be coming shortly.
via Climate Etc.
https://ift.tt/2IWZvUb
March 19, 2020 at 10:55AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-03-20--Italy Averages 23,000 Flu Deaths Per Year

Italy has had 3,400 COVID-19 deaths .
They average nearly 23,000 flu deaths per year .
Investigating the impact of @ @ @ @ @ all ages in Italy during recent seasons ( 2013/14–2016/17 seasons ) – ScienceDirect Flu typically @ @ @ @ @ drops off nearly as fast once everyone is exposed , or the behavior of the @ @ @ @ @ , etc .
This time , government will claim it was their draconian actions which @ @ @ @ @

Italy has had 3,400 COVID-19 deaths. They average nearly 23,000 flu deaths per year.
Investigating the impact of influenza on excess mortality in all ages in Italy during recent seasons (2013/14–2016/17 seasons) – ScienceDirect
Flu typically rises exponentially, and then drops off nearly as fast once everyone is exposed, or the behavior of the virus changes due to weather, etc. This time, government will claim it was their draconian actions which caused it to fall.
Spanish flu – Wikipedia


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-03-20--Matt Ridley: We Must Not Despair, Despite The Hardships Ahead

There are no good outcomes from here .
The hardships ahead are like nothing we ’ ve known .
But in the long run , we will get through this .
On Sunday , lonely as a cloud , I wandered across a windswept moor in County Durham and passed a solitary sandstone rock with a small , round hollow in the top , an old penny glued to the base of the hollow .
It is called the Butter Stone and it ’ s where , during the plague in 1665 , coins were left in a pool of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and villages , to be exchanged with farmers for food .
The idea was that the farmer or his customer approached the rock only when the other was at a safe distance .
Four modern coins were on the rock , anonymous offerings to the spirits of the moor .
Never once in my six decades did I expect to be back in a 17th-century world of social and physical distancing as a matter of life and death .
There are no good outcomes from here .
Many people will die prematurely .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ businesses will go under .
Many people will suffer bereavement , loneliness and despair , even if they dodge the virus .
The only question is how many in each case .
We are about to find out how robust civilisation is .
The hardships ahead are like nothing we ’ ve known .
The British government has been unusual in ramping up its social distancing measures , rather than rushing them all at once .
This resulted in a good deal of bafflement and criticism , some of it justified .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the virus after its initial suppression would be a disastrous outcome , because people would not allow themselves to be curfewed twice , so the timing had to be right .
But the vicious experience of Italy has changed everything .
So when the darned models revealed that a single ‘ managed ’ peak here leading to eventual herd immunity might kill 260,000 people and overwhelm the National Health Service , the strategy shifted from ‘ delay ’ to ‘ suppress ’ .Successive waves of the disease mean successive curfews and successive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is now effectively admitting that even if drastic curfews lead to successive waves of the disease , that may be the least worst outcome .
It is still a daunting prospect .
Successive waves mean successive curfews and successive body blows to the economy .
If we clamp down hard now and the infection rate drops , then we might be able slowly and cautiously to restart the economy in the summer but have to clamp down again when the virus resurges .
Each time we do this , it will be more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ service will be that much better prepared , with more intensive-care beds , more isolation facilities , more ventilators , more and newer testing kits , more data on the efficacy of repurposed drugs .
Moreover , each time the virus re-emerges , there will be more immune people to help look after the sick .
Once you ’ ve had the disease , and assuming the immunity you acquire is long-lasting ( not yet certain ) , then you are in a special category of person who can be employed — or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ risky work , and for looking after older people .
Each wave of the disease can then be less awful .
One side-effect of the government ’ s step-by-step approach is that the people have got ahead of the authorities .
Lots of people have been volunteering to give up gatherings , work from home if they can or travel less before being asked to .
The chorus of complaint last week on social media that the government was not doing enough is a sign that people are now telling the government what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should be in a democracy .
A prime minister is being criticised for not ordering us to do things , but ‘ advising ’ us .
Better than the other way round .
As the libertarian thinker Douglas Carswell put it on Monday : ‘ Treat people as responsible adults and they will behave more responsibly.
’ Until this year I thought this kind of infectious pandemic could not happen today .
The defeat of infectious diseases as a cause of death has been so complete as to seem invincible : plague , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , polio , whooping cough and many more eradicated or nearly so .
The failure of terrifying new animal-derived viruses like Hanta , Marburg , Sars , Mers , ebola , swine flu , bird flu and zika to cause more than a local or temporary interruption of the march of progress left us complacent .
( Only HIV went global . )
The advance of science allowing the rapid reading of the genome of the new coronavirus gave us false confidence : we would know how to beat it by the time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seemed that only the most innocuous of common colds , and milder forms of flu , seemed capable of remaining ubiquitous .
And coronaviruses are a common cause of the common cold , so ( despite Sars ) they seemed like pussy cats , not tigers .
It turns out that I and many others were badly wrong .
The human race has been playing epidemiological Russian roulette all along .
It has taken Mother Nature a long time to put a bullet in the right chamber , combining high contagion with asymptomatic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but she has done it .
We now know that we should have been building far more preparedness for such an event .
The World Health Organization has been asleep at the switch .
The Wellcome Trust did well to establish a Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovation in 2017 in partnership with the Gates Foundation along with the Indian and Norwegian governments , but it should have been started much earlier .
Against many risks , excess precaution is a mistake , doing more harm than good by preventing innovation — but not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ explode exponentially from small beginnings .
Apart from Singapore , which built a special hospital after Sars , and South Korea , which geared up to test people and gather data on a huge scale , the world had done far too little to get ready for this possibility .
Everything now is catch-up .
And we are trying to catch the fastest runner of them all : an exponential curve .
The post Matt Ridley : We Must Not Despair , Despite The Hardships Ahead appeared first on The Global Warming Policy @ @ @ @ @

There are no good outcomes from here. The hardships ahead are like nothing we’ve known. But in the long run, we will get through this.
On Sunday, lonely as a cloud, I wandered across a windswept moor in County Durham and passed a solitary sandstone rock with a small, round hollow in the top, an old penny glued to the base of the hollow. It is called the Butter Stone and it’s where, during the plague in 1665, coins were left in a pool of vinegar by the inhabitants of nearby towns and villages, to be exchanged with farmers for food. The idea was that the farmer or his customer approached the rock only when the other was at a safe distance.
Four modern coins were on the rock, anonymous offerings to the spirits of the moor. Never once in my six decades did I expect to be back in a 17th-century world of social and physical distancing as a matter of life and death.
There are no good outcomes from here. Many people will die prematurely. Many will lose their jobs. Many businesses will go under. Many people will suffer bereavement, loneliness and despair, even if they dodge the virus. The only question is how many in each case. We are about to find out how robust civilisation is. The hardships ahead are like nothing we’ve known.
The British government has been unusual in ramping up its social distancing measures, rather than rushing them all at once. This resulted in a good deal of bafflement and criticism, some of it justified. The driving motive was concern that a resurgence of the virus after its initial suppression would be a disastrous outcome, because people would not allow themselves to be curfewed twice, so the timing had to be right. But the vicious experience of Italy has changed everything. So when the darned models revealed that a single ‘managed’ peak here leading to eventual herd immunity might kill 260,000 people and overwhelm the National Health Service, the strategy shifted from ‘delay’ to ‘suppress’.Successive waves of the disease mean successive curfews and successive body blows to the economy
The government is now effectively admitting that even if drastic curfews lead to successive waves of the disease, that may be the least worst outcome. It is still a daunting prospect. Successive waves mean successive curfews and successive body blows to the economy. If we clamp down hard now and the infection rate drops, then we might be able slowly and cautiously to restart the economy in the summer but have to clamp down again when the virus resurges. Each time we do this, it will be more painful, but at least the health service will be that much better prepared, with more intensive-care beds, more isolation facilities, more ventilators, more and newer testing kits, more data on the efficacy of repurposed drugs.
Moreover, each time the virus re-emerges, there will be more immune people to help look after the sick. Once you’ve had the disease, and assuming the immunity you acquire is long-lasting (not yet certain), then you are in a special category of person who can be employed — or volunteer — for what would otherwise be risky work, and for looking after older people. Each wave of the disease can then be less awful.
One side-effect of the government’s step-by-step approach is that the people have got ahead of the authorities. Lots of people have been volunteering to give up gatherings, work from home if they can or travel less before being asked to. The chorus of complaint last week on social media that the government was not doing enough is a sign that people are now telling the government what to do — which is how it should be in a democracy. A prime minister is being criticised for not ordering us to do things, but ‘advising’ us. Better than the other way round. As the libertarian thinker Douglas Carswell put it on Monday: ‘Treat people as responsible adults and they will behave more responsibly.’
Until this year I thought this kind of infectious pandemic could not happen today. The defeat of infectious diseases as a cause of death has been so complete as to seem invincible: plague, smallpox, cholera, typhoid, measles, polio, whooping cough and many more eradicated or nearly so. The failure of terrifying new animal-derived viruses like Hanta, Marburg, Sars, Mers, ebola, swine flu, bird flu and zika to cause more than a local or temporary interruption of the march of progress left us complacent. (Only HIV went global.) The advance of science allowing the rapid reading of the genome of the new coronavirus gave us false confidence: we would know how to beat it by the time it got out of China. It seemed that only the most innocuous of common colds, and milder forms of flu, seemed capable of remaining ubiquitous. And coronaviruses are a common cause of the common cold, so (despite Sars) they seemed like pussy cats, not tigers.
It turns out that I and many others were badly wrong. The human race has been playing epidemiological Russian roulette all along. It has taken Mother Nature a long time to put a bullet in the right chamber, combining high contagion with asymptomatic carriers and a significant death rate, but she has done it.
We now know that we should have been building far more preparedness for such an event. The World Health Organization has been asleep at the switch. The Wellcome Trust did well to establish a Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovation in 2017 in partnership with the Gates Foundation along with the Indian and Norwegian governments, but it should have been started much earlier.
Against many risks, excess precaution is a mistake, doing more harm than good by preventing innovation — but not in the case of threats that can explode exponentially from small beginnings. Apart from Singapore, which built a special hospital after Sars, and South Korea, which geared up to test people and gather data on a huge scale, the world had done far too little to get ready for this possibility. Everything now is catch-up. And we are trying to catch the fastest runner of them all: an exponential curve.
The post Matt Ridley: We Must Not Despair, Despite The Hardships Ahead appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF).
via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)
https://ift.tt/39c9CiZ
March 20, 2020 at 04:15AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-03-20--Impact of a second Dust Bowl would be felt worldwide

Catastrophic shock to US agriculture would deplete reserves , including those of other countries The American Dust Bowl of the 1930s – captured by the novels of John Steinbeck – was an environmental and socio-economic disaster that worsened the Great Depression .
The Dust Bowl was an extreme event .
But due to climate change , massive crop failures are more likely to happen again in the future .
New research in Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems aimed to answer what these impacts may look like .
The Dust Bowl was centered on the Great Plains of the USA , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ displaced native , moisture-retaining grasses .
An atypical La Niña then brought intense droughts , high temperatures , and strong winds which blew away the topsoil in the form of large-scale dust storms .
Apart from its direct impact on people ( around 7,000 deaths and two million homeless ) , the Dust Bowl had a catastrophic effect on crops where wheat and maize production in the USA plummeted by 36 % and 48 % during the 1930s .
Currently , the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts that in another three to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will have further warmed by 1.5-2 °C .
This compounds issues that already exist today , where global food security is under pressure from the increased frequency of extreme weather events .
“ We wanted to forecast how a multi-year production decline in a major exporting country , similar to that which occurred during the Dust Bowl , would affect modern food supplies globally via international trade , ” says first author Dr Alison Heslin , a postdoctoral researcher at the Center for Climate Systems Research of Columbia University and NASA ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In today ’ s system of global food trade , disruptions are not bound by borders .
Shocks to production are expected to affect trade partners who depend on imports for their domestic food supply.
” To assess the possible impacts of a second dust bowl , the authors first developed two alternative computer simulations of the worldwide trade in wheat .
They then delivered a shock to these model systems in the form of a four-year-long Dust Bowl-like anomaly , restricted to the USA .
Under one simulation , countries first use @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shock between imports and exports , propagating it in one direction by increasing imports and in another by decreasing exports .
Under the more complicated second model , the USA first reduces only its exports , propagating the shock to all receiving trade partners , after which all countries with a shortage respond by increasing their imports .
Their results predict a severity similar to that of the original event , estimated from historical data .
The results show that the USA would fully exhaust 94 % of its reserves over the first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shock .
They also show that without exception , all countries to which the USA exports wheat would decrease their reserves , even though they didn ’ t themselves suffer crop failure .
“ We focused on a subset of the possible impacts , specifically changes in trade , drawing down strategic reserves and decreases in consumption , ” says co-author Dr Jessica Gephart , Assistant Professor at the Department of Environmental Science of the American University in Washington DC .
“ We found that global wheat trade contracts and shifts toward other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around the world decline , in many cases to zero .
This suggests that the impacts would not only raise prices for US consumers but would also raise prices far beyond the US borders , ” says Gephart .
Key impacts of another four-year dust bowl could include an initial 31 % loss of global wheat stocks , and by the end of the four years , between 36-52 countries could have used up over 75 % of their starting reserves .
The 10 countries with the highest initial reserves ( China , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Russia , Morocco , Australia , Egypt , Algeria ) would see their reserves decline by 15-22 % relative to the starting points .
However , a silver lining is that due to the high initial starting point of global reserves , most supply shocks , even in countries without reserves , could be addressed through trade flow adjustments without reducing consumption .
“ Our results remind us that mitigating climate risks requires accounting for not only the direct effects of climate change , like local extreme weather events , but also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interconnected system of global trade.
” “ In the context of food security , we show that accessing food reserves can , for a time , buffer populations from trade-induced supply shortages but as reserves deplete , people are at risk of food shortages , ” says Heslin .
Please link to the original research article in your reporting : https : //www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2020.00026/full

Catastrophic shock to US agriculture would deplete reserves, including those of other countries
Frontiers
The American Dust Bowl of the 1930s – captured by the novels of John Steinbeck – was an environmental and socio-economic disaster that worsened the Great Depression.
The Dust Bowl was an extreme event. But due to climate change, massive crop failures are more likely to happen again in the future. New research in Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems aimed to answer what these impacts may look like.
The Dust Bowl was centered on the Great Plains of the USA, where decades of unsustainable deep plowing had displaced native, moisture-retaining grasses. An atypical La Niña then brought intense droughts, high temperatures, and strong winds which blew away the topsoil in the form of large-scale dust storms.
Apart from its direct impact on people (around 7,000 deaths and two million homeless), the Dust Bowl had a catastrophic effect on crops where wheat and maize production in the USA plummeted by 36% and 48% during the 1930s.
Currently, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts that in another three to four decades that most of the USA will have further warmed by 1.5-2 °C. This compounds issues that already exist today, where global food security is under pressure from the increased frequency of extreme weather events.
“We wanted to forecast how a multi-year production decline in a major exporting country, similar to that which occurred during the Dust Bowl, would affect modern food supplies globally via international trade,” says first author Dr Alison Heslin, a postdoctoral researcher at the Center for Climate Systems Research of Columbia University and NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies.
“In today’s system of global food trade, disruptions are not bound by borders. Shocks to production are expected to affect trade partners who depend on imports for their domestic food supply.”
To assess the possible impacts of a second dust bowl, the authors first developed two alternative computer simulations of the worldwide trade in wheat. They then delivered a shock to these model systems in the form of a four-year-long Dust Bowl-like anomaly, restricted to the USA.
Under one simulation, countries first use their reserves and then divide the absorbed shock between imports and exports, propagating it in one direction by increasing imports and in another by decreasing exports.
Under the more complicated second model, the USA first reduces only its exports, propagating the shock to all receiving trade partners, after which all countries with a shortage respond by increasing their imports.
Their results predict a severity similar to that of the original event, estimated from historical data. The results show that the USA would fully exhaust 94% of its reserves over the first four years of a Dust Bowl-liked agricultural shock.
They also show that without exception, all countries to which the USA exports wheat would decrease their reserves, even though they didn’t themselves suffer crop failure.
“We focused on a subset of the possible impacts, specifically changes in trade, drawing down strategic reserves and decreases in consumption,” says co-author Dr Jessica Gephart, Assistant Professor at the Department of Environmental Science of the American University in Washington DC.
“We found that global wheat trade contracts and shifts toward other wheat exporters, and that wheat reserves around the world decline, in many cases to zero. This suggests that the impacts would not only raise prices for US consumers but would also raise prices far beyond the US borders,” says Gephart.
Key impacts of another four-year dust bowl could include an initial 31% loss of global wheat stocks, and by the end of the four years, between 36-52 countries could have used up over 75% of their starting reserves. The 10 countries with the highest initial reserves (China, USA, India, Iran, Canada, Russia, Morocco, Australia, Egypt, Algeria) would see their reserves decline by 15-22 % relative to the starting points.
However, a silver lining is that due to the high initial starting point of global reserves, most supply shocks, even in countries without reserves, could be addressed through trade flow adjustments without reducing consumption.
“Our results remind us that mitigating climate risks requires accounting for not only the direct effects of climate change, like local extreme weather events, but also the climate impacts which travel through our interconnected system of global trade.”
“In the context of food security, we show that accessing food reserves can, for a time, buffer populations from trade-induced supply shortages but as reserves deplete, people are at risk of food shortages,” says Heslin.
###
Notes to Editors
Please link to the original research article in your reporting: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2020.00026/full
From EurekAlert!


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-03-20--Green Deal Facing Delays Due To Coronavirus, EU Admits

The European Commission is having to re-order its priorities in the face of the coronavirus crisis , with “ non-essential ” initiatives like the biodiversity strategy and the farm-to-fork strategy likely to be delayed by several weeks , EURACTIV understands .
Officially , the show must go on .
But in private , officials admit that Brussels is having to review its priorities in order to throw all its weight behind the ongoing fight against the coronavirus crisis .
“ At this point in time , we do not have any comment to make on any knock-on effect that this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” said Eric Mamer , chief spokesperson of the European Commission , during a regular press briefing on Tuesday ( 17 March ) .
However , he also suggested that a reshuffling of priorities was underway at the EU executive , also because of constraints posed by teleworking .
“ For legislative activity to work , we need to have the institutions able to operate , ” Mamer admitted , saying Commission services and other EU institutions “ will definitely have to prioritise their work in order to cater for the current @ @ @ @ @ @ @ non-essential ” initiatives like the biodiversity strategy and the farm-to-fork strategy are likely to be delayed by a few weeks , EURACTIV understands .
According to the Commission ’ s work programme , those were supposed to be adopted before the end of March .
Other Green Deal-related initiatives likely to be delayed include the raw materials strategy .
“ If we adopt those strategies in two or three weeks , that won ’ t make such a big difference , ” one official told EURACTIV on condition of anonymity .
“ We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” the official explained .
But that doesn ’ t mean Europe should “ forget about the Green Deal ” to focus on the coronavirus , as suggested by Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babiš on Monday .
Nor will the Commission put its carbon trading scheme on hold , like Poland requested through the voice of its Deputy Minister for State Assets , Janusz Kowalski , officials said .
“ The long-term work on the Green Deal continues in parallel ” to the coronavirus firefighting “ and continues to be one of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Vivian Loonela , EU Commission spokesperson for the European Green Deal .
“ We have preparations ongoing for the next initiatives and this work is continuing , ” Loonela said .
That work is “ underway through our colleagues who are in teleworking , ” she said in response to press questions on Tuesday ( 17 March ) .
The post Green Deal Facing Delays Due To Coronavirus , EU Admits appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum ( GWPF ) .

The European Commission is having to re-order its priorities in the face of the coronavirus crisis, with “non-essential” initiatives like the biodiversity strategy and the farm-to-fork strategy likely to be delayed by several weeks, EURACTIV understands.
Officially, the show must go on. But in private, officials admit that Brussels is having to review its priorities in order to throw all its weight behind the ongoing fight against the coronavirus crisis.
“At this point in time, we do not have any comment to make on any knock-on effect that this could have on legislative work in general,” said Eric Mamer, chief spokesperson of the European Commission, during a regular press briefing on Tuesday (17 March).
However, he also suggested that a reshuffling of priorities was underway at the EU executive, also because of constraints posed by teleworking.
“For legislative activity to work, we need to have the institutions able to operate,” Mamer admitted, saying Commission services and other EU institutions “will definitely have to prioritise their work in order to cater for the current needs.”
“Non-essential” initiatives delayed
As a result, “non-essential” initiatives like the biodiversity strategy and the farm-to-fork strategy are likely to be delayed by a few weeks, EURACTIV understands. According to the Commission’s work programme, those were supposed to be adopted before the end of March. Other Green Deal-related initiatives likely to be delayed include the raw materials strategy.
“If we adopt those strategies in two or three weeks, that won’t make such a big difference,” one official told EURACTIV on condition of anonymity. “We have to concentrate on the corona crisis,” the official explained.
But that doesn’t mean Europe should “forget about the Green Deal” to focus on the coronavirus, as suggested by Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babiš on Monday. Nor will the Commission put its carbon trading scheme on hold, like Poland requested through the voice of its Deputy Minister for State Assets, Janusz Kowalski, officials said.
“The long-term work on the Green Deal continues in parallel” to the coronavirus firefighting “and continues to be one of the priorities as well,” said Vivian Loonela, EU Commission spokesperson for the European Green Deal.
“We have preparations ongoing for the next initiatives and this work is continuing,” Loonela said. That work is “underway through our colleagues who are in teleworking,” she said in response to press questions on Tuesday (17 March).
The post Green Deal Facing Delays Due To Coronavirus, EU Admits appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF).
via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)
https://ift.tt/2wnGbwR
March 20, 2020 at 03:53AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-03-20--Doctors on front line see disaster coming and feel abandoned

Australian Medical Association WA President Andrew Miller said Western Australia was headed for a situation like Italy .
“ And we ’ re not doing any of the things that the countries that are being successful are doing like Hong Kong .
“ They are using fever monitoring in public , they lock people down away from their families if they ’ re positive , whereas here we send them home.
” Dr Miller said the WA Government knew before today ’ s announcement that community spread was happening .
“ They ’ re in a state of disbelief , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The AMA has called for the State ’ s borders to be closed .
Dr Miller said : “ They said , ‘ that ’ s ridiculous , we ’ re not closing them .
And it ’ s impossible and unnecessary because no one gets infected on a plane ’ .
“ And the next day , the Premier comes out and says , “ it should be non-essential travel only , interstate ( but ) we can ’ t close the borders , that would require a national agreement that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ day Tasmania closes its borders .
They ’ re full of [ … ]

Coronavirus crisis: Australian Medical Association WA President Andrew Miller slams WA Government response to COVID-19 pandemic
John Flint The West Australian
Australian Medical Association WA President Andrew Miller said Western Australia was headed for a situation like Italy.
“And we’re not doing any of the things that the countries that are being successful are doing like Hong Kong.
“They are using fever monitoring in public, they lock people down away from their families if they’re positive, whereas here we send them home.”Dr Miller said the WA Government knew before today’s announcement that community spread was happening.
“They’re in a state of disbelief, confusion and chaos,” he said.
The AMA has called for the State’s borders to be closed.
Dr Miller said: “They said, ‘that’s ridiculous, we’re not closing them. And it’s impossible and unnecessary because no one gets infected on a plane’.
“And the next day, the Premier comes out and says, “it should be non-essential travel only, interstate (but) we can’t close the borders, that would require a national agreement that contravenes the constitution.’
“The next day Tasmania closes its borders. They’re full of […]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
via JoNova
https://ift.tt/396p4x1
March 20, 2020 at 03:12AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-03-20--COP26 Climate Summit May Have To Be Delayed, UK Warns

International climate change talks scheduled to take place later this year in Glasgow may have to be postponed due to the coronavirus outbreak , Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab has warned .
Mr Raab said the Government had not given up hope that it could still host the COP26 summit in November as planned , but warned that it would be a “ challenge ” given the disruption caused by the ongoing pandemic .
Coronavirus has prompted many countries around the world to impose travel bans and domestic lockdowns in a bid to slow the spread of the outbreak .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cast-iron guarantee , things are moving so quickly , ” he told the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee .
“ Obviously it is not until November .
We will keep it under close review .
We would of course want it to go ahead but I can ’ t give you any guarantee on that.
” The United Nations-led talks – expected to attract 30,000 people to Glasgow ’ s Scottish Events Campus ( SEC ) – are aimed at producing an international response to the climate emergency .
Mr Raab said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would depend on the “ trajectory ” of the Covid-19 outbreak over the coming weeks. “ I think we are all waiting to see right now quite what the timing is going to be on the coronavirus , ” he added .
“ It is still possible of today that it might be doable .
As long as that is the case I think we would want to try to give it a go.
” Mr Raab ’ s comments came after noted global climate crisis expert Lord Nicholas Stern earlier this week @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Government to resist calls to postpone the COP26 talks .
The post COP26 Climate Summit May Have To Be Delayed , UK Warns appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum ( GWPF ) .

International climate change talks scheduled to take place later this year in Glasgow may have to be postponed due to the coronavirus outbreak, Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab has warned.
Mr Raab said the Government had not given up hope that it could still host the COP26 summit in November as planned, but warned that it would be a “challenge” given the disruption caused by the ongoing pandemic.
Coronavirus has prompted many countries around the world to impose travel bans and domestic lockdowns in a bid to slow the spread of the outbreak.
“I can’t give you a cast-iron guarantee, things are moving so quickly,” he told the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee.
“Obviously it is not until November. We will keep it under close review. We would of course want it to go ahead but I can’t give you any guarantee on that.”
The United Nations-led talks – expected to attract 30,000 people to Glasgow’s Scottish Events Campus (SEC) – are aimed at producing an international response to the climate emergency.
Mr Raab said whether they could be held this autumn would depend on the “trajectory” of the Covid-19 outbreak over the coming weeks.
“I think we are all waiting to see right now quite what the timing is going to be on the coronavirus,” he added.
“It is still possible of today that it might be doable. As long as that is the case I think we would want to try to give it a go.”
Mr Raab’s comments came after noted global climate crisis expert Lord Nicholas Stern earlier this week urged Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s Government to resist calls to postpone the COP26 talks.
The post COP26 Climate Summit May Have To Be Delayed, UK Warns appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF).
via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)
https://ift.tt/2WtMXf6
March 20, 2020 at 02:57AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-03-20--THE MERCHANTS OF DOOM HAVE THEIR SAY ON BBC

There is nothing new about people predicting the end of the world and I hope that the majority of people @ @ @ @ @ doom .
For the BBC to give this article an airing to a wider audience @ @ @ @ @ .
Although I don ’ t believe in censorship we don ’ t need to @ @ @ @ @ of scare story .
The BBC are quick enough to sensor climate sceptics , even @ @ @ @ @ and logical arguments .

This article looks at the doom cults springing up based on an apocalypse due to climate change. you can understand why some very impressionable people might be upset by reading this, particularly now with the coronavirus epidemic gripping the world.
There is nothing new about people predicting the end of the world and I hope that the majority of people will reject the message of doom. For the BBC to give this article an airing to a wider audience is wrong in my view.


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-03-20--Overhyped: Europe’s Largest RE Battery Can Power Britain For 60 Seconds When Wind Power Fails

The hyperbole that greets the announcement of another giant battery is like the toxic plume they give off when they @ @ @ @ @ , as we recently reported , that ’ s an increasingly likely occurrence : Giant @ @ @ @ @ Storage Systems Literally Setting The World On Fire At a loss to deal with the @ @ @ @ @ ]

The hyperbole that greets the announcement of another giant battery is like the toxic plume they give off when they explode in flames. And, as we recently reported, that’s an increasingly likely occurrence: Giant Batteries Bomb: Renewable Energy Storage Systems Literally Setting The World On Fire At a loss to deal with the hopeless and chaotic […]
via STOP THESE THINGS
https://ift.tt/2Ug70e8
March 20, 2020 at 01:30AM


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-03-20--Obama’s Trumpian Oil Moment Eight Years Ago

Eight years ago , with oil prices high and the body politic restless , President Obama gave a speech in the oil boondocks , specifically in Cushing , Oklahoma .
At the central hub for American crude oil pipelines , he pitched his Administration ’ s record on oil and gas as if he was a friend , not a conniving foe .
Joe Romm at the now-defunct Climate Progress called it Obama ’ s Worst Speech Ever : “ We ’ ve Added Enough New Oil And Gas Pipeline To Encircle The Earth ” , ( oops : removed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will … be remembered for a ‘ failed presidency ’ simply for failing to seriously fight for a climate bill , ” Romm fussed .
“ And this [ Cushing ] speech certainly guts any possible claim for a climate legacy.
” What exactly did President Obama say ?
And how does this compare to the energy message of Presidential candidate Joe Biden today ?
It is good to be back in Oklahoma .
I haven ’ t been back here since the campaign , and everybody looks like they ’ re doing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Thank you so much for your hospitality .
It is wonderful to be here .
Yesterday , I visited Nevada and New Mexico to talk about what we ’ re calling an all-of-the-above energy strategy .
It ’ s a strategy that will keep us on track to further reduce our dependence on foreign oil , put more people back to work , and ultimately help to curb the spike in gas prices that we ’ re seeing year after year after year .
So today , I ’ ve come to Cushing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) — because producing more oil and gas here at home has been , and will continue to be , a critical part of an all-of-the-above energy strategy .
( Applause . )
Now , under my administration , America is producing more oil today than at any time in the last eight years .
( Applause . )
That ’ s important to know .
Over the last three years , I ’ ve directed my administration to open up millions of acres for gas and oil exploration across 23 different states @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than 75 percent of our potential oil resources offshore .
We ’ ve quadrupled the number of operating rigs to a record high .
We ’ ve added enough new oil and gas pipeline to encircle the Earth and then some .
So we are drilling all over the place — right now .
That ’ s not the challenge .
That ’ s not the problem .
In fact , the problem in a place like Cushing is that we ’ re actually producing so much oil and gas in places like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t have enough pipeline capacity to transport all of it to where it needs to go — both to refineries , and then , eventually , all across the country and around the world .
There ’ s a bottleneck right here because we can ’ t get enough of the oil to our refineries fast enough .
And if we could , then we would be able to increase our oil supplies at a time when they ’ re needed as much as possible .
Now , right now , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a new pipeline to speed more oil from Cushing to state-of-the-art refineries down on the Gulf Coast .
And today , I ’ m directing my administration to cut through the red tape , break through the bureaucratic hurdles , and make this project a priority , to go ahead and get it done .
( Applause . )
Now , you wouldn ’ t know all this from listening to the television set .
( Laughter . )
This whole issue of the Keystone pipeline had generated , obviously , a lot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And that ’ s because the original route from Canada into the United States was planned through an area in Nebraska that supplies some drinking water for nearly 2 million Americans , and irrigation for a good portion of America ’ s croplands .
And Nebraskans of all political stripes — including the Republican governor there — raised some concerns about the safety and wisdom of that route .
So to be extra careful that the construction of the pipeline in an area like that wouldn ’ t put the health and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ risk , our experts said that we needed a certain amount of time to review the project .
Unfortunately , Congress decided they wanted their own timeline — not the company , not the experts , but members of Congress who decided this might be a fun political issue , decided to try to intervene and make it impossible for us to make an informed decision .
So what we ’ ve said to the company is , we ’ re happy to review future permits .
And today , we ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Gulf a priority .
So the southern leg of it we ’ re making a priority , and we ’ re going to go ahead and get that done .
The northern portion of it we ’ re going to have to review properly to make sure that the health and safety of the American people are protected .
That ’ s common sense .
But the fact is that my administration has approved dozens of new oil and gas pipelines over the last three years -– including one from Canada .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ President , we ’ re going to keep on encouraging oil development and infrastructure and we ’ re going to do it in a way that protects the health and safety of the American people .
We don ’ t have to choose between one or the other , we can do both .
( Applause . )
So if you guys are talking to your friends , your neighbors , your coworkers , your aunts or uncles and they ’ re wondering what ’ s going on in terms of oil production @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suggests that somehow we ’ re suppressing domestic oil production isn ’ t paying attention .
They are not paying attention .
( Applause . )
What you also need to tell them is anybody who says that just drilling more gas and more oil by itself will bring down gas prices tomorrow or the next day or even next year , they ’ re also not paying attention .
They ’ re not playing it straight .
Because we are drilling more , we are producing more .
But the fact is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t enough by itself to bring gas prices down .
And the reason is we ’ ve got an oil market that is global , that is worldwide .
And I ’ ve been saying for the last few weeks , and I want everybody to understand this , we use 20 percent of the world ’ s oil ; we only produce 2 percent of the world ’ s oil .
Even if we opened every inch of the country — if I put a oil rig on the South Lawn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had one right next to the Washington Monument , even if we drilled every little bit of this great country of ours , we ’ d still have to buy the rest of our needs from someplace else if we keep on using the same amount of energy , the same amount of oil .
The price of oil will still be set by the global market .
And that means every time there ’ s tensions that rise in the Middle East — which is what ’ s happening right now — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The main reason the gas prices are high right now is because people are worried about what ’ s happening with Iran .
It doesn ’ t have to do with domestic oil production .
It has to do with the oil markets looking and saying , you know what , if something happens there could be trouble and so we ’ re going to price oil higher just in case .
Now , that ’ s not the future that we went .
We don ’ t want to be vulnerable to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other side of the world somehow affecting our economy , or hurting a lot of folks who have to drive to get to work .
That ’ s not the future I want for America .
That ’ s not the future I want for our kids .
I want us to control our own energy destiny .
I want us to determine our own course .
So , yes , we ’ re going to keep on drilling .
Yes , we ’ re going to keep on emphasizing production .
Yes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sure that we can get oil to where it ’ s needed .
But what we ’ re also going to be doing as part of an all-of-the-above strategy is looking at how we can continually improve the utilization of renewable energy sources , new clean energy sources , and how do we become more efficient in our use of energy .
( Applause . )
That means producing more biofuels , which can be great for our farmers and great for rural economies .
It means more fuel-efficient cars .
It means @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wind power — which , by the way , nearly tripled here in Oklahoma over the past three years in part because of some of our policies .
We want every source of American-made energy .
I don ’ t want the energy jobs of tomorrow going to other countries .
I want them here in the United States of America .
( Applause . )
And that ’ s what an all-of-the-above strategy is all about .
That ’ s how we break our dependence on foreign oil .
( Applause .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ we ’ re already seeing progress .
Yesterday , I went , in Nevada , to the largest solar plant of its kind anywhere in the country .
Hundreds of workers built it .
It ’ s powering thousands of homes , and they ’ re expanding to tens of thousands of homes more as they put more capacity online .
After 30 years of not doing anything , we finally increased fuel-efficiency standards on cars and trucks , and Americans are now designing and building cars that will go nearly twice as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the middle of the next decade .
And that ’ s going to save the average family $ 8,000 over the life of a car .
( Applause . )
And it ’ s going to save a lot of companies a lot of money because they ’ re hurt by rising fuel costs , as well .
All of these steps have helped put America on the path to greater energy independence .
Since I took office , our dependence on foreign oil has gone down every single year .
Last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ barrels per day than the year before .
Think about that .
( Applause . )
America , at a time when we ’ re growing , is actually importing less oil from overseas because we ’ re using it smarter and more efficiently .
America is now importing less than half the oil we use for the first time in more than a decade .
So the key is to keep it going , Oklahoma .
We ’ ve got to make sure that we don ’ t go backwards , that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re going to end our dependence on foreign oil , if we ’ re going to bring gas prices down once and for all , as opposed to just playing politics with it every single year , then what we ’ re going to have to do is to develop every single source of energy that we ’ ve got , every new technology that can help us become more efficient .
We ’ ve got to use our innovation .
We ’ ve got to use our brain power .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We ’ ve got to have a vision for the future , not just constantly looking backwards at the past .
That ’ s where we need to go .
That ’ s the future we can build .
And that ’ s what America has always been about , is building the future .
We ’ ve always been at the cutting-edge .
We ’ re always ahead of the curve .
Whether it ’ s Thomas Edison or the Wright Brothers or Steve Jobs , we ’ re always thinking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And that ’ s how we have to think about energy .
And if we do , not only are we going to see jobs and growth and success here in Cushing , Oklahoma , we ’ re going to see it all across the country .
All right ?
Thank you very much , everybody .
God bless you .
God bless the United States of America .
( Applause . )

“[We] are drilling all over the place — right now. That’s not the challenge . . . we don’t have enough pipeline capacity to transport all of it to where it needs to go — both to refineries, and then, eventually, all across the country and around the world.” ” [My] strategy … will … further reduce our dependence on foreign oil, put more people back to work, and ultimately help to curb the spike in gas[oline] prices that we’re seeing year after year after year.” – President Obama. Cushing, Oklahoma (March 22, 2012)
Eight years ago, with oil prices high and the body politic restless, President Obama gave a speech in the oil boondocks, specifically in Cushing, Oklahoma. At the central hub for American crude oil pipelines, he pitched his Administration’s record on oil and gas as if he was a friend, not a conniving foe.
Joe Romm at the now-defunct Climate Progress called it Obama’s Worst Speech Ever: “We’ve Added Enough New Oil And Gas Pipeline To Encircle The Earth”, (oops: removed from the site). “Obama will … be remembered for a ‘failed presidency’ simply for failing to seriously fight for a climate bill,” Romm fussed. “And this [Cushing] speech certainly guts any possible claim for a climate legacy.”
What exactly did President Obama say? And how does this compare to the energy message of Presidential candidate Joe Biden today?
Obama’s speech follows (with emphasis added).
It is good to be back in Oklahoma. I haven’t been back here since the campaign, and everybody looks like they’re doing just fine. (Laughter.) Thank you so much for your hospitality. It is wonderful to be here.
Yesterday, I visited Nevada and New Mexico to talk about what we’re calling an all-of-the-above energy strategy. It’s a strategy that will keep us on track to further reduce our dependence on foreign oil, put more people back to work, and ultimately help to curb the spike in gas prices that we’re seeing year after year after year.
So today, I’ve come to Cushing, an oil town — (applause) — because producing more oil and gas here at home has been, and will continue to be, a critical part of an all-of-the-above energy strategy. (Applause.)
Now, under my administration, America is producing more oil today than at any time in the last eight years. (Applause.) That’s important to know. Over the last three years, I’ve directed my administration to open up millions of acres for gas and oil exploration across 23 different states. We’re opening up more than 75 percent of our potential oil resources offshore. We’ve quadrupled the number of operating rigs to a record high. We’ve added enough new oil and gas pipeline to encircle the Earth and then some.
So we are drilling all over the place — right now. That’s not the challenge. That’s not the problem. In fact, the problem in a place like Cushing is that we’re actually producing so much oil and gas in places like North Dakota and Colorado that we don’t have enough pipeline capacity to transport all of it to where it needs to go — both to refineries, and then, eventually, all across the country and around the world. There’s a bottleneck right here because we can’t get enough of the oil to our refineries fast enough. And if we could, then we would be able to increase our oil supplies at a time when they’re needed as much as possible.
Now, right now, a company called TransCanada has applied to build a new pipeline to speed more oil from Cushing to state-of-the-art refineries down on the Gulf Coast. And today, I’m directing my administration to cut through the red tape, break through the bureaucratic hurdles, and make this project a priority, to go ahead and get it done. (Applause.)
Now, you wouldn’t know all this from listening to the television set. (Laughter.) This whole issue of the Keystone pipeline had generated, obviously, a lot of controversy and a lot of politics. And that’s because the original route from Canada into the United States was planned through an area in Nebraska that supplies some drinking water for nearly 2 million Americans, and irrigation for a good portion of America’s croplands. And Nebraskans of all political stripes — including the Republican governor there — raised some concerns about the safety and wisdom of that route.
So to be extra careful that the construction of the pipeline in an area like that wouldn’t put the health and the safety of the American people at risk, our experts said that we needed a certain amount of time to review the project. Unfortunately, Congress decided they wanted their own timeline — not the company, not the experts, but members of Congress who decided this might be a fun political issue, decided to try to intervene and make it impossible for us to make an informed decision.
So what we’ve said to the company is, we’re happy to review future permits. And today, we’re making this new pipeline from Cushing to the Gulf a priority. So the southern leg of it we’re making a priority, and we’re going to go ahead and get that done. The northern portion of it we’re going to have to review properly to make sure that the health and safety of the American people are protected. That’s common sense.
But the fact is that my administration has approved dozens of new oil and gas pipelines over the last three years -– including one from Canada. And as long as I’m President, we’re going to keep on encouraging oil development and infrastructure and we’re going to do it in a way that protects the health and safety of the American people. We don’t have to choose between one or the other, we can do both. (Applause.)
So if you guys are talking to your friends, your neighbors, your coworkers, your aunts or uncles and they’re wondering what’s going on in terms of oil production, you just tell them anybody who suggests that somehow we’re suppressing domestic oil production isn’t paying attention. They are not paying attention. (Applause.)
What you also need to tell them is anybody who says that just drilling more gas and more oil by itself will bring down gas prices tomorrow or the next day or even next year, they’re also not paying attention. They’re not playing it straight. Because we are drilling more, we are producing more. But the fact is, producing more oil at home isn’t enough by itself to bring gas prices down.
And the reason is we’ve got an oil market that is global, that is worldwide. And I’ve been saying for the last few weeks, and I want everybody to understand this, we use 20 percent of the world’s oil; we only produce 2 percent of the world’s oil. Even if we opened every inch of the country — if I put a oil rig on the South Lawn — (laughter) — if we had one right next to the Washington Monument, even if we drilled every little bit of this great country of ours, we’d still have to buy the rest of our needs from someplace else if we keep on using the same amount of energy, the same amount of oil.
The price of oil will still be set by the global market. And that means every time there’s tensions that rise in the Middle East — which is what’s happening right now — so will the price of gas. The main reason the gas prices are high right now is because people are worried about what’s happening with Iran. It doesn’t have to do with domestic oil production. It has to do with the oil markets looking and saying, you know what, if something happens there could be trouble and so we’re going to price oil higher just in case.
Now, that’s not the future that we went. We don’t want to be vulnerable to something that’s happening on the other side of the world somehow affecting our economy, or hurting a lot of folks who have to drive to get to work. That’s not the future I want for America. That’s not the future I want for our kids. I want us to control our own energy destiny. I want us to determine our own course.
So, yes, we’re going to keep on drilling. Yes, we’re going to keep on emphasizing production. Yes, we’re going to make sure that we can get oil to where it’s needed. But what we’re also going to be doing as part of an all-of-the-above strategy is looking at how we can continually improve the utilization of renewable energy sources, new clean energy sources, and how do we become more efficient in our use of energy. (Applause.)
That means producing more biofuels, which can be great for our farmers and great for rural economies. It means more fuel-efficient cars. It means more solar power. It means more wind power — which, by the way, nearly tripled here in Oklahoma over the past three years in part because of some of our policies.
We want every source of American-made energy. I don’t want the energy jobs of tomorrow going to other countries. I want them here in the United States of America. (Applause.) And that’s what an all-of-the-above strategy is all about. That’s how we break our dependence on foreign oil. (Applause.)
Now, the good news is we’re already seeing progress. Yesterday, I went, in Nevada, to the largest solar plant of its kind anywhere in the country. Hundreds of workers built it. It’s powering thousands of homes, and they’re expanding to tens of thousands of homes more as they put more capacity online.
After 30 years of not doing anything, we finally increased fuel-efficiency standards on cars and trucks, and Americans are now designing and building cars that will go nearly twice as far on the same
gallon of gas by the middle of the next decade. And that’s going to save the average family $8,000 over the life of a car. (Applause.) And it’s going to save a lot of companies a lot of money because they’re hurt by rising fuel costs, as well.
All of these steps have helped put America on the path to greater energy independence. Since I took office, our dependence on foreign oil has gone down every single year. Last year, we imported 1 million fewer barrels per day than the year before. Think about that. (Applause.) America, at a time when we’re growing, is actually importing less oil from overseas because we’re using it smarter and more efficiently. America is now importing less than half the oil we use for the first time in more than a decade.
So the key is to keep it going, Oklahoma. We’ve got to make sure that we don’t go backwards, that we keep going forwards. If we’re going to end our dependence on foreign oil, if we’re going to bring gas prices down once and for all, as opposed to just playing politics with it every single year, then what we’re going to have to do is to develop every single source of energy that we’ve got, every new technology that can help us become more efficient.
We’ve got to use our innovation. We’ve got to use our brain power. We’ve got to use our creativity. We’ve got to have a vision for the future, not just constantly looking backwards at the past. That’s where we need to go. That’s the future we can build.
And that’s what America has always been about, is building the future. We’ve always been at the cutting-edge. We’re always ahead of the curve. Whether it’s Thomas Edison or the Wright Brothers or Steve Jobs, we’re always thinking about what’s the next thing. And that’s how we have to think about energy. And if we do, not only are we going to see jobs and growth and success here in Cushing, Oklahoma, we’re going to see it all across the country.
All right? Thank you very much, everybody. God bless you. God bless the United States of America. (Applause.)
END
10:32 A.M. CDT


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-03-20--The Conversation: “Coronavirus response proves the world can act on climate change”

According to The Conversation , we listen to disease experts but ignore climate experts , even though they are both groups of experts , because we have an instinctive fear of disease .
Coronavirus response proves the world can act on climate change The alarms for both COVID-19 and climate change were sounded by experts , well in advance of visible crises .
It is easy to forget , but at the time of this writing , the total deaths from COVID-19 are less than 9,000 — it is the terrifying computer model predictions of much larger numbers that have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ action , despite the disruption this is causing to everyday life .
Yet computer models of climate change also predict a steady march of increasing deaths , surpassing 250,000 people per year within two decades from now .
As scientists who have studied climate change and the psychology of decision-making , we find ourselves asking : Why do the government responses to COVID-19 and climate change — which both require making difficult decisions to avert future disasters — differ so dramatically ?
We suggest four important reasons .
First , COVID-19 is deadly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an instinctive , personal level .
People react strongly to mortal threats , and although the virus appears to have much lower mortality for otherwise healthy people under 60 , those statistics do not quell universal personal safety fears .

Guest essay by Eric Worrall
According to The Conversation, we listen to disease experts but ignore climate experts, even though they are both groups of experts, because we have an instinctive fear of disease.
Coronavirus response proves the world can act on climate change
Eric Galbraith Professor of Earth System Science, McGill University
Ross Otto Assistant Professor of Psychology, McGill University
…
The alarms for both COVID-19 and climate change were sounded by experts, well in advance of visible crises. It is easy to forget, but at the time of this writing, the total deaths from COVID-19 are less than 9,000 — it is the terrifying computer model predictions of much larger numbers that have alerted governments to the need for swift action, despite the disruption this is causing to everyday life.
Yet computer models of climate change also predict a steady march of increasing deaths, surpassing 250,000 people per year within two decades from now.
As scientists who have studied climate change and the psychology of decision-making, we find ourselves asking: Why do the government responses to COVID-19 and climate change — which both require making difficult decisions to avert future disasters — differ so dramatically? We suggest four important reasons.
Instinctive fear
First, COVID-19 is deadly in a way that is frightening on an instinctive, personal level. People react strongly to mortal threats, and although the virus appears to have much lower mortality for otherwise healthy people under 60, those statistics do not quell universal personal safety fears.
…


iowaclimatescienceeducation--2020-03-20--Enviros Find What They Say Is The Silver Lining In The Coronavirus Outbreak

Environmentalists and activists say they ’ ve found a way to better sell climate change to a skeptical American public : paint global warming as a pandemic on par with the likes of coronavirus .
Environmentalists are pointing to drastic dips in carbon emissions in China and Europe during the coronavirus scourge to craft a new climate message .
They also suggest that there are some positive lessons to be learned from the virus , which has killed more than 8,000 people globally .
“ If we can think about how to prepare for climate change like a pandemic , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to all of this , ” Christopher Jones , an environmental researcher at the University of California , Berkeley , told NBC News in a report published Wednesday .
He added : “ We can help prevent crises in the future if we are prepared .
I think there are some big-picture lessons here that could be very useful.
” ( RELATED : Environmental Activists Are Blocking The Clean-Up Of A Polluted Mining Site In Idaho ) NBC News ’ s report cited a March 13 Washington Post report that analyzed data from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s satellites that seemed to suggest that nitrogen dioxide , or NO2 , fell dramatically over Northern Italy , a portion of Europe that has been the most negatively impacted .
More than 1,800 people who were exposed to the virus have died in Italy over the last several weeks as the country has seen nearly 25,000 cases overall .
Nearly 430 people died in the country in one day after contracting coronavirus , which originated in Wuhan , China in November 2019 .
“ As we move to restart these economies , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think about what we value , ” Jacqueline Klopp , co-director of the Center for Sustainable Urban Development at Columbia University in New York City , told NBC .
“ Do we want to go back to the status quo , ” she rhetorically asked before adding : “ or do we want to tackle these big structural problems and restructure our economy and reduce emissions and pollution ?
” One environmentalist journalist pointed out that China ’ s draconian crackdown is creating the most benefits .
“ Every cloud has a silver @ @ @ @ @ @ @ environmental journalist and commentator , said during a Thursday episode of NewsTalk .
The air quality improved “ dramatically ” over China during the past few months thanks in part to Beijing ’ s move to idle industries , he added .
The reasons why the public is handling the pandemic differently than , say , climate change is because one is happening over decades while the other is an immediate concern , according to Craig Altemose , the executive director of Better Future Project , a group pushing climate change policy .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in stark contrast to our slow , half-hearted response to the climate crisis , ” Altemose wrote Wednesday in an editorial for the Boston Globe .
The reasons are obvious , he added : “ COVID-19 is a crisis playing out over the course of days rather than decades .
”

From The Daily Caller
Chris White Tech Reporter
March 19, 2020 12:50 PM ET
Environmentalists and activists say they’ve found a way to better sell climate change to a skeptical American public: paint global warming as a pandemic on par with the likes of coronavirus.
Environmentalists are pointing to drastic dips in carbon emissions in China and Europe during the coronavirus scourge to craft a new climate message. They also suggest that there are some positive lessons to be learned from the virus, which has killed more than 8,000 people globally.
“If we can think about how to prepare for climate change like a pandemic, maybe there will be a positive outcome to all of this,” Christopher Jones, an environmental researcher at the University of California, Berkeley, told NBC News in a report published Wednesday.
He added: “We can help prevent crises in the future if we are prepared. I think there are some big-picture lessons here that could be very useful.” (RELATED: Environmental Activists Are Blocking The Clean-Up Of A Polluted Mining Site In Idaho)
NBC News’s report cited a March 13 Washington Post report that analyzed data from one of the European Space Agency’s satellites that seemed to suggest that nitrogen dioxide, or NO2, fell dramatically over Northern Italy, a portion of Europe that has been the most negatively impacted.
More than 1,800 people who were exposed to the virus have died in Italy over the last several weeks as the country has seen nearly 25,000 cases overall. Nearly 430 people died in the country in one day after contracting coronavirus, which originated in Wuhan, China in November 2019.
Other academics are offering similar critiques.
“As we move to restart these economies, we need to use this moment to think about what we value,” Jacqueline Klopp, co-director of the Center for Sustainable Urban Development at Columbia University in New York City, told NBC.
“Do we want to go back to the status quo,” she rhetorically asked before adding: “or do we want to tackle these big structural problems and restructure our economy and reduce emissions and pollution?”
One environmentalist journalist pointed out that China’s draconian crackdown is creating the most benefits.
“Every cloud has a silver lining,” John Gibbons, an environmental journalist and commentator, said during a Thursday episode of NewsTalk.
The air quality improved “dramatically” over China during the past few months thanks in part to Beijing’s move to idle industries, he added.
The reasons why the public is handling the pandemic differently than, say, climate change is because one is happening over decades while the other is an immediate concern, according to Craig Altemose, the executive director of Better Future Project, a group pushing climate change policy.
“The international response to COVID-19 stands in stark contrast to our slow, half-hearted response to the climate crisis,” Altemose wrote Wednesday in an editorial for the Boston Globe. The reasons are obvious, he added: “COVID-19 is a crisis playing out over the course of days rather than decades.”