Many are the same as those that passed voter suppression laws that Democrats inaction has tacitly approved:
“Florida Becomes Fifth State To Bar Schools From Teaching Critical Race Theory”
Giant swallowtail (Papilio cresphontes)
Driftless Area South Central Wisconsin, Dane County USA
2020 7/31 _F2A4628aaa
No coincidence that this is taking place at a time of severely concentrated wealth:
“"Wake-up call": World sees first rise in child labor in 20 years, U.N. says”
*
Classic American politics:
“IN THE LEAST WIRED COUNTRY ON EARTH, U.S. MILITARY ASKS AIRSTRIKE VICTIMS TO FILE COMPLAINTS ONLINE
Leaflets convinced many Somali militants to switch sides, but America is less interested in hearing from people hurt by its drones.”
*
This is bologna pairing of specific cause and specific effect to make a conclusion. Trust me, “…if it were not but for Trump,…” this would have never happened. For starters there wouldn’t be a protest:
“Watchdog finds clearing of protesters from Lafayette Park wasn't for Trump photo op”
*
Speechless. Apparently, they plan on mowing the area under and around the panels:
“Largest solar array in Dane Co. is now operational”
*
“Earth now has a 5th ocean, according to National Geographic, which upgraded the status of the waters around Antarctica”
*
“The brain power of these two leaders is disgraceful. They are just shameless sycophants of the rich. This is pathetic. At least the special interests will be sure to line the Democrats pockets and that’s what it’s all about”
“Biden, Johnson sign new Atlantic Charter on trade, defense amid Covid recovery
The agreement commits to combatting cyberthreats and climate change and to bringing the pandemic to an end.”
*
“Winning on climate, losing on wildlife: Scientists warn against ‘green fails’ doing more harm than good
50 of the world’s leading biodiversity and climate experts warn narrow actions to reduce carbon emissions – such as inappropriate tree planting – are environmentally dubious”
“Some of the world’s most respected scientists have hit out at supposedly ‘green’ measures which have turned out to be “epic fails” for climate and biodiversity.
In a major new report 50 of the world’s leading biodiversity and climate experts warn narrow actions to reduce carbon emissions – such as inappropriate tree planting – are environmentally dubious.
Humans need to get much better at developing climate solutions that work in favour of nature, the team from the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) said.
“It’s quite possible to come up with solutions for climate change which actually harm biodiversity and potentially people,” stressed Prof Alex David Rogers, a marine biologist and member of the report’s scientific steering committee.
They listed a host of examples where well-meaning efforts to reduce carbon emissions have had a detrimental effect on wildlife and biodiversity, and in some cases even increased carbon emissions.
In the UK, planting trees on carbon-sucking peatlands has been an “epic fail for climate and biodiversity”, according to Professor Pete Smith from the University of Aberdeen.
Replacing mangroves and salt marshes, which act as natural coastal buffers and carbon sinks, with high-carbon concrete defences can also do more harm than good. Around 60 per cent of China’s coastline is concrete, a trend scientists say is devastating for the country’s migrating sea birds.
Deep sea ocean mining could be a green failure waiting to happen.
Dozens of ventures are intent on exploring the deep ocean floor to see if it could be mined for materials such as cobalt and nickel, used to make electric cars.
But scientists say they are only just getting to grips with the biodiversity and carbon-storing ability of the deep ocean. Opening up mining operations in this delicate habitat could be environmentally disastrous, they warn.
Professor Camille Parmesan, also member of the report’s scientific steering committee, said it is counterproductive to install ‘climate’ measures that reduce biodiversity.
“Nature-based solutions are about being smart and thinking about what should be done where, and how to do that,” she said. “Diverse healthy ecosystems not only work better, they store carbon better and they are more resilient to climate change.”
Measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or cope with the impacts of climate change should be assessed in terms of their overall risks and benefits to nature, the scientists said. They stressed that a “fundamental and considerable” change in approach is needed to make sure climate action helps nature too.
The ‘green’ measures which turned out to be “epic fails”
Planting on peatland Last year the Forestry Commission approved a planning application to plant 20 hectares of conifers on an ancient peat bog in Cumbria. The landowner was unaware of the site’s carbon-sucking value, and no one from the Forestry Commission or Natural England spotted the potential damage in time. The site was drained, ploughed and planted last summer, releasing the peat bog’s massive carbon stores into the environment. The Forestry Commission has since apologised and said “lessons have been learned” from the incident.
Concrete coastlines In Bohai Bay on China’s east coast intertidal mud flats home to millions of seabirds are slowly disappearing underneath a wall of concrete sea walls. It’s a trend in China – around 60 per cent of its coastline is concrete, as the country battles to protect its shores from rising sea levels and transform mud flats into usable land. This is destroying the ecosystems China’s migratory birds depend on, and ironically making us more vulnerable to storms and surges, scientists say.
Bioenergy disasters Biofuel made from sugarcane and other crops provides about 15 per cent of Brazil’s energy and is exported around the world as a ‘green’ alternative to fossil fuels. But its carbon benefits depend on where it is grown. Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro has been steadily weakening environmental protections in Brazil to allow farmers greater freedom to encroach on biodiversity hotspots like the Amazon and the Cerrado. If carbon-rich forest and grassland is cleared for biofuels in this way, the net environmental effect is plummeting biodiversity and higher emissions.”
*
Another underestimation of the problem:
“Arctic coastal sea ice thinning twice as fast than thought”
*
“Plastic consumption and recovery by application area in 2018-19 (tonnes and %recovery rate)”
*
“Annual Australian plastics consumption and recover 2015-15 to 2018-19 (tonnes)”
*
“The future s not in plastics
The cost of Plastics:
40% Share of plastic waste that ends up in the environment
5-10% Share of plastics that is really recycled
19% Share of 1.5 degree carbon budget that the plastics industry plans to use by 2040
$1000/t the externality cost of a tonne of plastic
11mt Annual flow of plastics into the oceans
5t How much CO2 is emitted per tonne of plastic
46kg Annual plastic usage per person
$350bn Annual untaxed externality cost of plastics”
Comments