Lone Republican Takes Stand on Climate at GOP Debate, But Vows to Build Keystone XL If Elected
The first debate for the Republican presidential contenders took place last night in Cleveland, Ohio. Because of the 17-person field, the first debate night was split in two. The top 10 polling candidates debated at 9 p.m., while the bottom seven participated in what was dubbed the "Happy Hour Debate," at 5 p.m.
Scant attention was paid to environmental issues at the first Republican primary debate.
Real estate mogul Donald Trump, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Ohio Gov. John Kasich all made the cut for the 9 p.m. debate. The Happy Hour participants included: South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, former Texas Gov. Rick Perry, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, former CEO of Hewlett Packard Carly Fiorina, former New York Gov. George Pataki, and former Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore.
Scant attention was paid to environmental issues at the first Republican primary debate. Climate change was not even mentioned once during the 9 p.m. debate. The only time it came up during the earlier debate was when moderator Bill Hemmer brought it up in a negative way saying to Lindsey Graham, "You worked with Democrats and President Obama when it came to climate change—something you know is extremely unpopular with conservative Republicans. How can they trust you based on that record?"
Moderator: Lindsey Graham, with climate change, you believe in science. How can people trust you? So this is going well. #GOPDebate
— Emerson Collins (@ActuallyEmerson) August 6, 2015
“You can trust me to do the following: that when I get on the stage with Hillary Clinton, we won't be debating about the science," Graham replied. "We will be debating about the solutions. In her world, cap-and-trade would dominate. That will destroy the economy in the name of helping the environment. In my world, we would focus on energy independence and a clean environment.”
Lindsey Graham did not back away from believing in climate change. That was gutsy, especially in this crowd. #GOPDebate — Darryl Johns (@idarrylm) August 7, 2015
That sounds promising, but Graham goes on to say, “When it comes to fossil fuels, we’re going to find more here and use less,” he continued. “Over time we’re going to become energy independent. I am tired of sending $300 billion overseas to buy oil from people who hate our guts.” Graham supports more domestic coal and oil production and said later in the debate, that Clinton is “not going to build the Keystone pipeline. I will.”
Read page 1
"The choice between a weak economy and a strong environment is a false choice," he said, seemingly contradicting his earlier statement that a cap-and-trade program would "destroy the economy in the name of helping the environment." But Graham concludes by saying, "A healthy environment, a strong economy and an energy independent America—that would be the purpose of my presidency."
Full text of Lindsey Graham's remarks on #climate change at first presidential debate here: http://t.co/zpeMiWputw #GOPDebate #ActOnClimate
— Christopher N. Fox (@ChristopherNFox) August 6, 2015
Even though Graham's remarks are a far cry from a serious call to action on climate change, at least he isn't "debating about the science," which is more than most of the other candidates can say. As evidenced by Graham's comments, the most talked about issue by far in both debates wasn't even an issue. It was a person: Hillary Clinton. Many of the candidates gave obligatory swipes at President Obama, but every candidate made sure to take jabs at Clinton whenever possible. It took almost an hour into the 9 p.m. debate for anything eco-related to even come up.
When asked whether he would cut government funding for departments such as the Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee called the EPA's mandates unconstitutional without any explanation as to what he meant by that. Scott Walker embraced an "all-of-the-above" energy strategy and Jeb Bush made mention of the need to embrace the "energy revolution," which Slate describes as "a vaguely worded reference to the boom in natural gas and renewables." Bush also voiced his support for the Keystone XL pipeline, making sure to slam Clinton (of course) for not saying whether or not she supports it.
"Hillary Clinton can't even say she's for the Keystone XL pipeline after she's left [the State Department]," said Jeb Bush. "Give me a break. Of course we're for it." The rest of the main debate was full of standard Republican talking points: God, national security and illegal immigrants.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
Gov. Brown Asks GOP Presidential Candidates: What Are You Going to Do About Climate Change?
Neil deGrasse Tyson: Politicians, Stop ‘Cherry-Picking Science’ for Political Gain
Contribute
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
People relax in Victoria Gardens with the Houses of Parliament in the background in central London, as a heatwave hit the continent with temperatures touching 40 degrees Celsius on June 25, 2020. NIKLAS HALLE'N / AFP via Getty Images
The chance that UK summer days could hit the 40 degree Celsius mark on the thermometer is on the rise, a new study from the country's Met Office Hadley Centre has found.
<p>British summers currently only reach 40 degrees every 100 to 300 years. But the study, published in <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-16834-0" target="_blank"><em>Nature Communications</em></a> Tuesday, found that such temperatures could occur every 3.5 years if nothing is done to reduce <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/greenhouse-gases" target="_self">greenhouse gas</a> emissions and curb the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change/" target="_self">climate crisis</a>.</p><p>"Climate change has already influenced the likelihood of temperature extremes in the UK. The chances of seeing 40°C days in the UK could be as much as 10 times more likely in the current climate than under a natural climate unaffected by human influence," lead author Dr. Nikolaos Christidis said in a <a href="https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/press-office/news/weather-and-climate/2020/chances-of-40c-days-in-the-uk-increasing-due-to-human-influence" target="_blank">Met Office press release</a>. "The likelihood of exceeding 40°C anywhere in the UK in a given year has also been rapidly increasing, and, without curbing of greenhouse gas emissions, such extremes could be taking place every few years in the climate of 2100."</p>
<div id="f49f9" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="548418422f9dfc779c1082b8d99bfcca"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1277980676583600134" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">New research published today shows the chances of 40°C days in the UK are increasing rapidly due to #GlobalWarming… https://t.co/gNwrqnYPMA</div> — Met Office (@Met Office)<a href="https://twitter.com/metoffice/statuses/1277980676583600134">1593529311.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>To reach their conclusions, the researchers combined temperature measurements across the country with 16 different climate models, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jun/30/likelihood-of-40c-temperatures-in-uk-is-rapidly-accelerating" target="_blank">The Guardian explained</a>. They found that reducing emissions made a big difference in lowering future temperatures. Under a medium-emissions scenario, in which emissions are reduced but not enough to honor the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/paris-agreement" target="_self">Paris agreement</a> goal of limiting global warming to below two degrees, 40 degree days would occur every 15 years.</p><p>"This research shows human-caused climate change has set us on a course to see temperature extremes in the UK that would be highly unlikely under a 'natural' climate, although urgent action to reduce emissions now can significantly reduce the occurrence of extreme high temperatures in the UK in the future," coauthor and head of the Met Office National Climate Information Centre Dr. Mark McCarthy said in the press release.</p>
<p>The study also looked at the likelihood of other temperature extremes. Days 35 degrees or higher currently occur every five years on average but could happen nearly every other year by 2100 under a high-emissions scenario. The 40 and 35 degree days would be most common in the Southeast, but the North could see 30 degree days once per decade by 2100. They are now extremely rare in that region.</p><p>UK summers are already feeling the impacts of the climate crisis. The summer of 2018 was the joint hottest on record, and the country saw its highest recorded temperature of 38.7 in Cambridge during July 2019, The Guardian reported. The climate crisis has made <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/heat-wave" target="_self">heat waves</a> in the country 30 more likely, and temperature extremes caused 3,400 early deaths between 2016 and 2019. These impacts will only worsen as temperatures rise, which is a big reason why the Met Office conducted the study, Christidis told <a href="https://www.france24.com/en/20200630-uk-increasingly-likely-to-see-40c-temperatures" target="_blank">AFP</a>. He said he wanted to help the country plan better for extremes.</p>
<p>"Exceeding extreme temperature thresholds like the 40C in the UK would be accompanied by severe impacts — on <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/public-health" target="_self">public health</a>, transport infrastructure," he told AFP.</p><p>However, on a global scale, the UK won't be feeling the heat as intensely as other places.</p><p>"Heatwaves are a real risk to life in the UK, especially if we do not begin modifying our homes, workplaces and hospitals to manage their expected overheating," University of Leeds professor Piers Forster, who was not involved in the study, told The Guardian. "However, we should note that in terms of heatwaves, the UK will get off lightly compared with most other nations. Heatwaves in the major crop-growing regions of the world could have more profound effects, both globally and for the UK."</p>
From Your Site Articles
- As Extreme Weather Turns Deadly in the UK, Climate Activists Are ... ›
- UK Parliament First in World to Declare Climate Emergency ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
A crowd of people congregate along Ocean Drive in Miami Beach, Florida on June 26, 2020, amid a surge in coronavirus cases. CHANDAN KHANNA / AFP / Getty Images
By Melissa Hawkins
After sustained declines in the number of COVID-19 cases over recent months, restrictions are starting to ease across the United States. Numbers of new cases are falling or stable at low numbers in some states, but they are surging in many others. Overall, the U.S. is experiencing a sharp increase in the number of new cases a day, and by late June, had surpassed the peak rate of spread in early April.
<p>When seeing these increasing case numbers, it is reasonable to wonder if this is the <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30845-X/fulltext" target="_blank">dreaded second wave of the coronavirus</a> – a resurgence of rising infections after a reduction in cases.</p><p>The U.S. as a whole is not in a second wave because the first wave never really stopped. The virus is simply spreading into new populations or resurging in places that let down their guard too soon.</p>
<img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzQyOTc3NC9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYwMDgyNTQ5Nn0.pIiEitkLeMiGNtre8D4VqLrBTuBwisNJUEliEEswUbI/img.png?width=980" id="ca408" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="bd189e44e055fdff3f5d0c96e879b40b" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
Seven day rolling average of number of people confirmed to have COVID-19, per day (not including today). This chart gets updated once per day with data by Johns Hopkins. Johns Hopkins university doesn't provide reliable data for March 12 and March 13. Johns Hopkins CSSE Get the data
To Have a Second Wave, the First Wave Needs to End.
<p>A wave of an infection describes a large rise and fall in the number of cases. There isn't a precise epidemiological definition of when a wave begins or ends.</p><p>But with talk of a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/27/new-covid-19-clusters-across-world-spark-fear-of-second-wave" target="_blank">second wave in the news</a>, as an <a href="https://www.american.edu/cas/faculty/mhawkins.cfm" target="_blank">epidemiologist and public health researcher</a>, I think there are two necessary factors that must be met before we can colloquially declare a second wave.</p><p>First, the virus would have to be controlled and transmission brought down to a very low level. That would be the end of the first wave. Then, the virus would need to reappear and result in a large increase in cases and hospitalizations.</p><p>Many countries in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-0908-8" target="_blank">Europe and Asia have successfully ended the first wave</a>. <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/08/new-zealand-abandons-covid-19-restrictions-after-nation-declared-no-cases" target="_blank">New Zealand</a> and <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/06/08/how-iceland-beat-the-coronavirus" target="_blank">Iceland</a> have also made it through their first waves and are now essentially coronavirus-free, with very low levels of community transmission and only a handful of active cases currently.</p><p>In the U.S., cases spiked in March and April and then trended downward due to social distancing guidance and implementation. However, the U.S. never reduced spread to low numbers that were sustained over time. Through May and early June, numbers plateaued at <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/coronavirus-us-cases.html" target="_blank">approximately 25,000 new cases daily</a>.</p><p>We have left that plateau. Since mid-June, cases have been surging upwards. Additionally, the percentage of COVID-19 tests that are returning positive <a href="https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/testing/individual-states/arizona" target="_blank">is climbing steeply</a>, indicating that the increase in new cases is not simply a result of more testing, but the result of an increase in spread.</p><p>As of writing this, new deaths per day <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/coronavirus-deaths-united-states-each-day-2020-n1177936" target="_blank">have not begun to climb</a>, but some hospitals' intensive care units have <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/texass-largest-hospital-reaches-100-percent-icu-capacity-1513481" target="_blank">recently reached full capacity</a>. In the beginning of the outbreak, deaths often lagged behind confirmed infections. It is likely, as Anthony Fauci, the nation's top infectious-disease specialist said on June 22, that <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/coronavirus-deaths-lag-behind-surging-infections-but-may-catch-up-soon/2020/06/24/22263b50-b620-11ea-a510-55bf26485c93_story.html" target="_blank">deaths will soon follow the surge in new cases</a>.</p>
Different States, Different Trends
<p>Looking at U.S. numbers as a whole hides what is really going on. Different states are in <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/coronavirus-us-cases.html" target="_blank">vastly different situations right now</a> and when you look at states individually, four major categories emerge.</p><ol><li>Places where the first wave is ending: States in the Northeast and a few scattered elsewhere experienced large initial spikes but were able to mostly contain the virus and substantially brought down new infections. <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/new-york-coronavirus-cases.html" target="_blank">New York</a> is a good example of this.</li><li>Places still in the first wave: Several states in the South and West – see <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/texas-coronavirus-cases.html" target="_blank">Texas</a> and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/california-coronavirus-cases.html" target="_blank">California</a> – had some cases early on, but are now seeing massive surges with no sign of slowing down.</li><li>Places in between: Many states were hit early in the first wave, managed to slow it down, but are either at a plateau – like <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/north-dakota-coronavirus-cases.html" target="_blank">North Dakota</a> – or are now seeing steep increases – like <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/oklahoma-coronavirus-cases.html" target="_blank">Oklahoma</a>.</li><li>Places experiencing local second waves: Looking only at a state level, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/hawaii-coronavirus-cases.html" target="_blank">Hawaii</a>, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/montana-coronavirus-cases.html" target="_blank">Montana</a> and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/alaska-coronavirus-cases.html" target="_blank">Alaska</a> could be said to be experiencing second waves. Each state experienced relatively small initial outbreaks and was able to reduce spread to single digits of daily new confirmed cases, but are now all seeing spikes again.</li></ol><p>The trends aren't surprising based on how states have been dealing with reopening. The virus will go wherever there are susceptible people and until the U.S. stops community spread across the entire country, the first wave isn't over.</p>What Could a Second Wave Look Like?
<p>It is possible – though at this point it seems unlikely – that the U.S. could control the virus before a vaccine is developed. If that happens, it would be time to start thinking about a second wave. The question of what it might look like depends in large part on everyone's actions.</p><p>The <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.1086%2F592454" target="_blank">1918 flu pandemic</a> was characterized by a mild first wave in the winter of 1917-1918 that went away in summer. After restrictions were lifted, people very quickly went back to pre-pandemic life. But a second, deadlier strain came back in fall of 1918 and third in spring of 1919. In total, <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/1918-commemoration/1918-pandemic-history.htm" target="_blank">more than 500 million people were infected</a> worldwide and upwards of <a href="https://theconversation.com/compare-the-flu-pandemic-of-1918-and-covid-19-with-caution-the-past-is-not-a-prediction-138895" target="_blank">50 million died</a> over the course of three waves.</p><p>It was the combination of a quick return to normal life and a mutation in the flu's genome that made it more deadly that led to the horrific second and third waves.</p><p>Thankfully, the coronavirus appears to be much more <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meegid.2020.104351" target="_blank">genetically stable</a> than the influenza virus, and thus less likely to mutate into a more deadly variant. That leaves human behavior as the main risk factor.</p><p>Until a <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-needs-to-go-right-to-get-a-coronavirus-vaccine-in-12-18-months-136816" target="_blank">vaccine or effective treatment is developed</a>, the tried-and-true public health measures of the last months – <a href="https://theconversation.com/this-simple-model-shows-the-importance-of-wearing-masks-and-social-distancing-140423" target="_blank">social distancing,</a> <a href="https://theconversation.com/masks-help-stop-the-spread-of-coronavirus-the-science-is-simple-and-im-one-of-100-experts-urging-governors-to-require-public-mask-wearing-138507" target="_blank">universal mask wearing</a>, frequent hand-washing and avoiding crowded indoor spaces – are the ways to stop the first wave and thwart a second one. And when there are surges like what is happening now in the U.S., further reopening plans need to be put on hold.</p>From Your Site Articles
- U.S. Coronavirus Death Toll Now No. 1 in World - EcoWatch ›
- U.S. Coronavirus Deaths Pass 100,000 - EcoWatch ›
- U.S. Coronavirus Cases Top 2 Million as All 50 States Start ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
A Chesapeake Energy drilling rig is located on farmland near Wyalusing, Pennsylvania, on March 20, 2012. Melanie Stetson Freeman / The Christian Science Monitor / Getty Images
By Eoin Higgins
Climate advocates pointed to news Sunday that fracking giant Chesapeake Energy was filing for bankruptcy as further evidence that the fossil fuel industry's collapse is being hastened by the coronavirus pandemic and called for the government to stop propping up businesses in the field.
<p>"Fracking giant Chesapeake Energy just declared bankruptcy thanks to its massive $9 billion debt," <a href="https://twitter.com/foe_us/status/1277644540866965505" target="_blank">tweeted</a> Friends of the Earth. "Meanwhile the Trump administration continues to try and bail out this garbage fire industry with our tax dollars—despite clear risks."</p>
<div id="e5f24" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="6e7171f8e2904f47ed8066a7a21bd48a"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1277573943340171264" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">The poster company for US fracking has fallen. https://t.co/n1MWs3sszT</div> — Andrew Thaler (@Andrew Thaler)<a href="https://twitter.com/DrAndrewThaler/statuses/1277573943340171264">1593432338.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>The company, which at its peak in 2008 was <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/06/28/chesapeake-energy-once-power-gas-business-files-bankruptcy" target="_blank">valued</a> at $37 billion, had a market capitalization of just $115 million on Friday.</p><p>"The debt bubble made it unable for Chesapeake to maneuver when the pandemic ruined demand for energy," David Dayen <a href="https://prospect.org/coronavirus/unsanitized-medicare-for-coronavirus/" target="_blank">wrote</a> of the bankruptcy for <em>The American Prospect</em>.</p><p>News reports put most of the blame for the bankruptcy on former CEO Aubrey McClendon, who bought up leases and rights around the country as the fracking industry boomed. </p><p>As <em>Forbes</em> <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2020/06/29/chesapeake-energy-finally-succumbs-with-chapter-11-filing/#52549bb56b58" target="_blank">reported</a>, a number of bad business decisions and moves left Chesapeake in bad condition even before gas prices collapsed due to the slowed demand from the pandemic.</p>
<p>According to <em>Forbes</em>:</p><blockquote>As natural gas prices <a title="https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/rngwhhdm.htm" href="https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/rngwhhdm.htm" target="_blank">collapsed in the late 2000s</a>, McClendon next turned to sales of his own company's assets or portions of working interests in big play areas as a means of continuing to finance and pay down that debt. He sold shares of the company's working interests in the Barnett, the Eagle Ford, the Marcellus and the Haynesville to various other players, like <a title="https://bp.com" href="https://bp.com/" target="_blank">BP</a> and <a title="https://cnooc.com" href="https://cnooc.com/" target="_blank">CNOOC</a>, but every sale also meant less and less cash flow coming into the company itself. Many in the business during that time joked about it being a sort of a pyramid scheme in which the debts would ultimately end up outstripping the company's income and ability to pay.<br><br>McClendon also made the decision in 2010-11 to shift Chesapeake's gas-heavy asset mix to one more heavy in liquids. That strategic decision certainly helped during a time of $100 oil prices, but the bust of 2015-16 and the current COVID-19-related price collapse ultimately proved to heavy a burden for current CEO Doug Lawler—who was brought on board in 2013—and his management team to navigate. A company that once had a market cap of over $37 billion at one point in May saw its market cap drop as low as $200 million. A company that once employed over 8,000 individuals today employs around 2,300.</blockquote>
<p>John Thieroff, a senior analyst at Moody's Investors Service, <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/31f35631-7b7d-4fa1-8eef-6255bf18cf88?segmentId=b0d7e653-3467-12ab-c0f0-77e4424cdb4c" target="_blank">told</a> the <em>Financial Times</em> Sunday he expected other companies to follow suit.</p><p>"There will no doubt be others to file for bankruptcy in the near term as the sector looks to get out from under the copious amount of debt it took on during the boom," said Thieroff.</p><p>President Donald Trump has weighed bailing out the fossil fuel industry as part of a coronavirus pandemic recovery plan. The plans have been met with stiff resistance from environmental groups like Western Values Project, which <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2020/05/19/trump-admin-punishes-renewables-while-bailing-out-oil-and-gas" target="_blank">said</a> in May that the move was an example of the White House "using a public health crisis as an excuse to bail out the president's corporate cronies while leaving everyone else to fend for themselves."</p>
<p class=""><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/06/29/poster-company-us-fracking-has-fallen-chesapeake-energy-files-bankruptcy" target="_blank">Common Dreams</a>.</em></p>From Your Site Articles
- Fracking Industry's Propaganda Hypes Shale Gas Production and ... ›
- Another Blow to the Fracking Industry—Chesapeake Energy's ... ›
- Former Chesapeake Energy CEO Aubrey McClendon Is Back to ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Youth participate in the Global Climate Strike in Providence, Rhode Island on September 20, 2019. Gabriel Civita Ramirez / CC by 2.0
By Neil King and Gabriel Borrud
Human beings all over the world agreed to strict limitations to their rights when governments made the decision to enter lockdown during the COVID-19 crisis. Many have done it willingly on behalf of the collective. So why can't this same attitude be seen when tackling climate change?
<p>Stephen Reicher is a social psychologist at the University of St. Andrews in Scotland, where he researches collective behavior and social identity. DW spoke to him for <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/on-the-green-fence/id1474805073" target="_blank">the second season</a> of the environmental podcast <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/environment-podcast-on-the-green-fence/a-48670967" target="_blank">On The Green Fence</a>. </p><p><em>DW: We've watched the collective move very fast in response to this crisis. Were you amazed by that?</em></p><p>Stephen Reicher: At one level, I wasn't. If you look at the literature on what happens in emergencies, the traditional literature plays into this notion of the public as a problem — the idea that human beings are always psychologically frail and they always have difficulty in dealing with complex information. And under a crisis, they crack, they panic. You would never have a Hollywood disaster film without people running, screaming, waving their hands in the air and blocking the exits.</p><p>But actually, that isn't what happens in disasters. When people come together, when they have a sense that others will support them, especially in situations of difficulty, then it makes them better able to cope and more psychologically resilient. Collectivity is the resource that allows us to cope practically, but also psychologically, to get through these times.</p>
<p><em>Why was the response to the coronavirus seemingly so easy, particularly when compared to the far more existential threat of climate change? What is the difference between these two?</em></p><p>The temporality of the issue, the fact that it is immediate, the ways in which it is tangible and the way in which it is unarguable.</p><p>If you are talking about the events that are happening now due to climate change and that are killing people, it is probabilistic that climate change was critical to them. The probabilities are very, very high. But it is not immediately self-evident in the same way that it's evident that somebody is dying from coronavirus. These things become arguable.</p><p>And that's where the second factor comes in, which is the political factor. In some places it has been consensual, and it has been pretty positive. And that's because politicians have not tried to argue or mobilize against compliance with medically necessary measures. In other places, that's not true — in the United States, for instance, where Trump has been supporting those in various states who have been calling it a "lockdown tyranny." And in Brazil, and in India.</p><p>The other absolutely obvious point differentiating coronavirus from climate change are the political differences and the differences in terms of political leadership — in terms of a) how we understand what's going on, and b) how we should respond to what's going on.</p>
<p><em>If I understood you correctly, if there were general consensus and a general realization that we are facing an existential threat and everybody really believed the science, the collective would be moved to action. Is it really that simple or is something else holding us back?</em></p><p>At the moment we are acting collectively towards members of our community who are currently alive, and we can see whether they will live or die. It is much more abstract in the sense of climate change because we are acting for many of those who are not yet born — they might be our children or grandchildren.</p><p>It's the articulation of the psychological and lived experience with the ideological way in which we make sense of it and explain it and are told how to behave. The reason why the political, in many ways, is more powerful in undermining action on climate change is because it is much more abstract. It is a much less direct experience.</p>
<p><em>Do we need role models to catalyze change? And if so, what kind of role models? If Greta Thunberg, for instance, can't pull it off, then who could?</em></p><p>We need leadership. I don't think it's entirely coincidental that some of the countries where coronavirus is raging most dangerously are those with toxic leadership, as in the United States, as in Brazil. Whereas in some of those countries which are doing well — like New Zealand — the leadership takes a very different form indeed.</p><p>Leadership can take many forms. It doesn't have to be traditional. It doesn't have to be hierarchical. It doesn't have to be a single individual. It can be distributed. But you need voices which, firstly, serve to create a sense of community and communal responsibility. Secondly, they need to form a relationship with the public. A leader needs to be seen in many ways as one of us, as acting for us, and as achieving for us, in order to be effective.</p><p><span></span>Leadership is effective to the extent that we believe that a leader is representative of us, understands who we are and what we value. More than ever, we do need good, inclusive leadership that engages with the public rather than imposes on the public.</p>
<p><em>On a personal level, Steve, if you as a social psychologist could mold the change that we'd need to achieve for a sustainable world, how would you go about putting the collective on the right track?</em></p><p>The group is always going to be part of the solution. Groups can do awful things and groups can do magnificent things. The problem doesn't lie in group psychology, per se. It depends on the specific ideologies and cultures that define the groups we belong to. How inclusive or exclusive are they? What are the norms and values that define the nature of our community? Are they values of compassion or are they values of strength and domination? Not all groups are good, but that depends upon the group culture.</p><p>The thing that is absolutely clear, however, is that if you get rid of groups, then you get rid of the one vehicle of change that we've actually got. If you get rid of groups, you freeze the status quo. The power of the powerless lies in their combination. I think we can wield that power for good rather than for ill.</p>
<p><em>Do you think we're going to pull this off? If the science is right, we are running out of time. When it comes to the changes that have to be made, are we going to be magnificent? Are we going to be horrible?</em></p><p>There is a problem with the debate that's going on at the moment. Some people are telling us that coronavirus is going to change the world for the good — we're going to realize that collectivity is terrible, we're going to realize that precarity is destructive and that inequalities kill. And other people are saying, no, no, no, it's going to be completely awful — we're all going to be divided, we're going have a recession which will pit us against each other.</p><p>The danger of making predictions in those forms is that it gives rise to fatalism. Either you believe it's going be awful so there is nothing you can do about it, or you believe it's going to happen anyway and therefore you don't need to do anything about it. Those were the critiques, for instance, of mechanical forms of Marxism.</p><p>I don't think there is any inevitable outcome. I'm not a prophet. If we want to move forward progressively, we've got to harness the power of the collective. We've got to understand how it's within the collective that we become agents who can actually make and change our own world.</p><p>To predict is to be counterproductive. It pacifies people. It says "the future will be like this," rather than to say "we need to fight for the future."</p>
<p class=""><em>Reposted with permission from </em><em><a href="https://www.dw.com/en/coronavirus-and-climate-change-collective-action-is-the-only-way-forward/a-53595386" target="_blank">Deutsche Welle</a>.</em><a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/r/entryeditor/2646306339#/" target="_self"></a></p>From Your Site Articles
- The Crunch Question on Climate: How Can I Help? - EcoWatch ›
- The Power of Collective Action Gangnam Style - EcoWatch ›
- Scientist Finds Remarkable Way to Connect People Emotionally ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
No Social Distancing or Mask Requirement at Trump's Mt. Rushmore Fireworks Event
16h
Health + Wellness
A crowd awaits the evening lighting ceremony at Mount Rushmore National Memorial in South Dakota on June 23, 2012. Mindy / Flickr
Fire experts have already criticized President Trump's planned fireworks event for this Friday at Mt. Rushmore National Memorial as a dangerous idea. Now, it turns out the event may be socially irresponsible too as distancing guidelines and mask wearing will not be enforced at the event, according to CNN.
<p>The fireworks event at the iconic monument in South Dakota will be the first in more than a decade, and it will bring together thousands of supporters who will be crammed together in a fenced-in area for a view of the display. The event is happening as coronavirus cases are surging across the country, amidst a <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/drought" target="_self">drought</a> in South Dakota that makes the surrounding trees flammable, and during a national conversation about rethinking monuments with racist histories.</p><p>South Dakota's Republican Governor Kristi Noem said the people who attend the celebration will be asked to choose their own comfort level with social distancing and mask wearing. While masks will be handed out to anyone who wants them, they will not be required, according to <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/s-dakota-gov-noem-says-we-will-not-be-social-n1232507" target="_blank">NBC News</a>.</p>
<p>"We will have a large event at July 3rd. We told those folks that have concerns that they can stay home, but those who want to come and join us, we'll be giving out free face masks, if they choose to wear one. But we will not be social distancing," Noem said on Fox News on Monday night, as NBC News reported. "We're asking them to come, be ready to celebrate, to enjoy the freedoms and the liberties that we have in this country."</p><p>She added that state officials have asked the people of South Dakota to practice personal responsibility. "Every one of them has the opportunity to make a decision that they're comfortable with," she said, as NBC News reported.</p>
<p>The unwillingness to mandate that people follow <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/daily-life-coping/visitors.html" target="_blank">CDC guidelines</a> and practice social distancing has drawn criticism from the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/indigenous-peoples" target="_self">Native American</a> community, which has suffered disproportionately from the coronavirus. Several groups led by Native American activists are planning protests for Trump's visit on Friday.</p><p>"Trump coming here is a safety concern not just for my people inside and outside the reservation, but for people in the Great Plains. We have such limited resources in Black Hills, and we're already seeing infections rising," said Oglala Sioux President Julian Bear Runner in an interview with <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jul/01/mount-rushmore-donald-trump-sioux" target="_blank">The Guardian</a>.</p><p>"It's going to cause an uproar if he comes here. People are going to want to exercise their First Amendment rights to protest and we do not want to see anyone get hurt or the lands be destroyed," added Bear Runner.</p>
<p>Mt. Rushmore, which is carved into the Black Hills Forest, is still considered sacred land by the Sioux. Its construction and the visit from the U.S. president stand in clear violation of treaties that the Sioux people signed with the U.S. government, according to Bear Runner.</p><p>The land was granted to the Sioux in perpetuity, but the U.S. reneged on the deal when gold was discovered in the Black Hills in the late 1800s.</p><p>"The lands on which that mountain is carved and the lands he's about to visit belong to the Great Sioux nation under a treaty signed in 1851 and the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868 and I have to tell him he doesn't have permission from its original sovereign owners to enter the territory at this time," Bear Runner told The Guardian.</p>
<p>Trump, who has repeatedly refused to wear a face mask and encouraged states to reopen early before the virus was under control, tends to provoke the same behavior in his fans. The refusal to mandate social distancing guidelines stands in stark contrast to South Dakota's Department of Health <a href="https://doh.sd.gov/news/coronavirus.aspx#Avoid" target="_blank">website</a>, which says that in order to avoid the illness, people should "avoid close contact with people ... stay at home as much as possible," and "put distance between yourself and other people." It also says, "everyone should wear a cloth face cover when they have to go out in public," as <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/s-dakota-gov-noem-says-we-will-not-be-social-n1232507" target="_blank">NBC News</a> reported.</p>
<p>Asked to reconcile the difference between the governor of South Dakota and the guidelines from the CDC and the states' health department, Noem spokesman Ian Fury told CNN, "We're not anticipating that folks will be maintaining six feet of social distancing. We are encouraging attendees to follow CDC guidelines, extensive safety signage will be posted at the event, and masks will be available, but attendees will be exercising their personal responsibility in choosing to attend."</p>
<p><br/></p>From Your Site Articles
- Trump's Fireworks Show at Mt. Rushmore Is a Dangerous Idea, Fire ... ›
- Attendees at Trump's First Rally Since March Can't Sue if They Get ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Mountains of produce, including eggs, milk and onions, are going to waste as the COVID-19 pandemic shutters restaurants, restricts transport, limits what workers are able to do and disrupts supply chains. United States government work
By Emma Charlton
Gluts of food left to rot as a consequence of coronavirus aren't just wasteful – they're also likely to damage the environment.
<p>Mountains of produce, including eggs, milk and onions, are going to waste as the COVID-19 pandemic shutters restaurants, restricts transport, limits what workers are able to do and disrupts supply chains. And as that food decays, it releases methane, a powerful greenhouse gas.</p><p>Fresh milk and eggs have been dumped, and some ripe crops reploughed back into fields, according to reports in the <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/closed-due-to-coronavirus-restaurants-clear-out-their-pantries-11586005203?mod=article_inline" target="_blank">Wall Street Journal</a> and the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/11/business/coronavirus-destroying-food.html" target="_blank">New York Times</a>. While consumer demand for some supermarket items has risen as a result of lockdowns, it's unlikely to offset steep declines elsewhere, such in restaurants and school and workplace canteens.</p>
Methane on the Rise
<p>Not only is this a tragic waste of food at a time when many are going hungry, it is also an <a href="https://donatedontdump.net/2014/07/07/the-effects-of-food-waste-on-the-environment-by-junemy-pantig/" target="_blank">environmental hazard</a> and could contribute to global warming. Landfill gas – <a href="https://www.epa.gov/lmop/basic-information-about-landfill-gas" target="_blank">roughly half methane and half carbon dioxide (CO2)</a> – is a natural byproduct of the decomposition of organic material.</p><img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzQyOTEyMi9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYwODYyODk1N30.AyyC8WbvDKRQeTPpTksAIkGT_Sy5qJqK3ok1_GiaNWc/img.png?width=980" id="49c22" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="48f85bf45b5f3ba2648a87bedab555bc" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
Food decay leads to production of greenhouse gases, methane and carbon dioxide. EPA
<p>Methane is a potent greenhouse gas, 28 to <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/SYR_AR5_FINAL_full.pdf" target="_blank">36 times more effective than CO2 at trapping heat</a> in the atmosphere over a 100-year period, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.</p><p>"Many export-oriented producers produce volumes far too large for output to be absorbed in local markets, and thus <a href="https://unctad.org/en/pages/newsdetails.aspx?OriginalVersionID=2333" target="_blank">organic waste levels have mounted substantially</a>," says Robert Hamwey, Economic Affairs Officer at UN agency UNCTAD. "Because this waste is left to decay, levels of methane emissions, a greenhouse gas, from decaying produce are expected to rise sharply in the crisis and immediate post-crisis months."</p><img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzQyOTE3Ny9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYwNzYyMzEzNH0.ckRClc0SX50kOEZYHgLLx_OoFHMIxtPVF4BBc4eDoBo/img.png?width=980" id="3a11c" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="6fe3b382949cce9971508db403d0973d" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
Food supply chains are easily disrupted. UN FAO
<p>Dumping food was already a problem before the crisis. In America alone, <a href="https://www.refed.com/?sort=economic-value-per-ton" target="_blank">$218 billion is spent growing, processing, transporting</a> and disposing of food that is never eaten, estimates ReFED, a collection of business, non-profit and government leaders committed to reducing food waste. That's equivalent to around 1.3% of GDP.</p><p>Since the pandemic took hold, <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-52267943" target="_blank">farmers are dumping 14 million liters</a> of milk each day because of disrupted supply routes, estimates Dairy Farmers of America. A chicken processor was forced to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/11/business/coronavirus-destroying-food.html" target="_blank">destroy 750,000 unhatched eggs a week</a>, according to the New York Times, which also cited an onion farmer letting most of his harvest decompose because he couldn't distribute or store them.</p>Food Prices Collapsing
<p>The excess has also seen prices collapse. The <a href="http://www.fao.org/worldfoodsituation/foodpricesindex/en/" target="_blank">FAO Food Price Index</a> (FFPI) averaged 162.5 points in May 2020, down 3.1 points from April and reaching the lowest monthly average since December 2018. The gauge has dropped for four consecutive months, and the latest decline reflects falling values of all the food commodities – dairy, meat, cereal, vegetable – except sugar, which rose for the first time in three months.</p><p>All this while the pandemic is exacerbating other global food trends.</p><p>"This year, some 49 million extra people may fall into extreme poverty due to the COVID-19 crisis," said António Guterres, Secretary-General of the UN. "The number of people who are acutely food or nutrition insecure will rapidly expand. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGhLKAbNDiY&feature=youtu.be" target="_blank">Even in countries with abundant food, we see risks of disruptions in the food supply chain</a>."</p><div id="c20f1" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="9bd104b5fbd7a34965124f57f3c1357a"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1271747397002067968" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Our food systems are failing us. And #COVID19 is making things worse.
We must invest in the future & transform our… https://t.co/uV8Kkn78Q1</div> — FAO (@FAO)<a href="https://twitter.com/FAO/statuses/1271747397002067968">1592043182.0</a></blockquote></div><p>The World Economic Forum has launched its <a href="https://www.weforum.org/great-reset/about" target="_blank">Great Reset initiative</a>, which urgently calls for global stakeholders to cooperate in managing the consequences of the COVID-19 crisis. It calls on policymakers to put the environment at the heart of plans to rebuild as we emerge from the pandemic.</p>
<p class=""><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/06/covid-19-food-waste-mountains-environment/" target="_blank">World Economic Forum</a>.</em></p>From Your Site Articles
- Food Waste Set to Increase by 33 Percent Within 10 Years - EcoWatch ›
- Reducing Food Waste Is Good for Economy and Climate, Report Says ›
- 23 Organizations Eliminating Food Waste During COVID-19 ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
The gates of the unusually low drought-affected Carraizo Dam are seen closed in Trujillo Alto, Puerto Rico on June 29, 2020. RICARDO ARDUENGO / AFP via Getty Images)
Puerto Rico's governor declared a state of emergency on Monday after a severe drought on the island left 140,000 people without access to running water, despite the necessary role that hand washing and hygiene plays in stopping the novel coronavirus, as The Independent reported.
<p>The island will start water rationing on July 2, as 26 percent of the island is under a severe drought and 60 percent is under a moderate drought, according to <a href="https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/CurrentMap/StateDroughtMonitor.aspx?PR" target="_blank">U.S. Drought Monitor</a>, as The Independent reported. According to Governor Wanda Vasquez, that means 21 of 78 municipalities are affected by the severe drought while another 29 are affected by the moderate drought.</p>
<p>The rationing will affect 140,000 clients of the water service, including some in the capital of San Juan, according to <a href="https://apnews.com/485aa49fc349decdbbef5e663d92dc74#:~:text=SAN%20JUAN%2C%20Puerto%20Rico%20(AP,territory%20amid%20a%20coronavirus%20pandemic.&text=Gov.%20Wanda%20V%C3%A1zquez%20said%2021,29%20by%20the%20moderate%20drought." target="_blank">The Associated Press</a>, as the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority starts to shut off water for certain blocks of the day.<br></p><p>That means some residents will be without water for 24 hours every other day as part of strict rationing measures. Puerto Rico's utilities company asked residents not to stockpile excessive amounts of water because it would exacerbate an already bad situation.</p><p>There will also be 23 water trucks spread across the most impacted parts of the island. Officials asked that anyone seeking water from the trucks wear a mask and adhere to social distancing guidelines, according to <a href="https://apnews.com/485aa49fc349decdbbef5e663d92dc74#:~:text=SAN%20JUAN%2C%20Puerto%20Rico%20(AP,territory%20amid%20a%20coronavirus%20pandemic.&text=Gov.%20Wanda%20V%C3%A1zquez%20said%2021,29%20by%20the%20moderate%20drought." target="_blank">The Associated Press</a>.</p>
<p>Some residents in the northeastern part of the state were already rationing water earlier in June.</p><p>Many residents rely on a system of reservoirs in Puerto Rico for water, but several have not been dredged for years, leaving sediment to collect and allowing the excess loss of water, according to <a href="https://thehill.com/changing-america/sustainability/infrastructure/505082-puerto-rico-declares-state-of-emergency-cuts" target="_blank">The Hill</a>. The water rationing efforts will target households connected to the Carraízo reservoir, one of 11 that Puerto Rico's government operates. It has not been dredged since the late 1990s.</p><p>Five other reservoirs are under a state of observation. Officials have already taken other measures, including activating water wells and transferring more than 30,000 clients from Carraízo to another reservoir, according to the AP.</p>
<p>"We're asking people to please use moderation," said Doriel Pagán, executive director of Puerto Rico's Water and Sewer Authority, adding that she could not say how long the rationing measures will last, as The Independent reported.</p><p>She told The Associated Press that the utility company is talking with FEMA about a $300 million dredging investment. But that project will not bring any short-term relief since the process is long and requires various studies for FEMA to approve the project.</p><p>According to The Associated Press, the upcoming water rationing efforts will target households connected to the Carraízo reservoir, one of 11 that Puerto Rico's government operates. Pagán said that reservoir was last dredged in the late 1990s. Five other reservoirs are under a state of observation. Officials have already taken other measures, including activating water wells and transferring more than 30,000 clients from Carraízo to another reservoir.</p>
<p>As the <a href="https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/CurrentMap/StateDroughtMonitor.aspx?PR" target="_blank">U.S. Drought Monitor</a> map shows, much of the drought blankets the southern and eastern parts of the island, including San Juan and Ponce. The southern part of Puerto Rico was hit by a powerful <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/earthquake-puerto-rico-2644424292.html" target="_self">6.4 earthquake at the beginning of 2020</a>.</p><p>The current drought in Puerto Rico came on quickly. In mid-May, no parts of the island, which is a U.S. territory, were under drought, though some spots were abnormally dry. Now, a long dry spell has left many parts of the island with four to eight inches less rain than normal over the past 30 days, according to <a href="https://weather.com/safety/news/2020-06-30-severe-drought-puerto-rico-state-of-emergency" target="_blank">The Weather Channel</a>.</p><p>Residents in most areas will be prohibited from excessive use of water such as watering gardens during daylight hours, filling pools, and using a hose or non-recycled water to wash cars, as The Independent reported.</p><p>Some thunderstorms are expected for today and tomorrow. "However, we are not expecting enough rain ... to solve the problem we're seeing," said Fernanda Ramos, a meteorologist with the U.S. National Weather Service in San Juan, as The Independent reported.</p>
From Your Site Articles
- When the Government Failed Puerto Rico, Local Communities ... ›
- Latino Voters Worried About Climate Change Could Swing 2020 ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less