By Julie Conley, originally published on Common ...
Despite widespread acceptance of a consensus around the science of climate change, supposedly factual debates about the presence and causes of warming continue. Could climate science really be guilty of publication bias? A team of scientists led by Johan Hollander from Lund University concluded the answer was: no. This article was first published on The Conversation and ScienceNordic.
It is rare to encounter a scientific fact that stirs widespread debate and distrust quite like the matter of climate change.
Despite consensus among climate specialists about a theory that is supported by a mountain of facts from the physical, natural, and cultural sciences, the debate continues to be perpetrated by politicians, industrialists, academics, and armchair scientists.
When governments reject science, the rest of us are put at risk. By refusing to accept the facts and potential ramifications of climate change, as a society, we stand to delay or overlook actions that are urgently needed to reduce our impact on the environment and adapt our cities and farmlands to a different future.
By Chris Garrard, a member of the Art Not Oil coalition of groups that campaigns against oil sponsorship of arts and culture.
Yesterday in London, the doors opened at ‘New Scientist Live’, a four-day ‘festival of ideas and discovery’. The event features a line-up jam packed with big names such as astronaut Tim Peake, naturalist Chris Packham and author Margaret Atwood. Unfortunately, they have been joined by some equally well-known but less welcome names in the role of corporate sponsors: Shell and BAE systems.
So, as festivalgoers arrived, members of activist groups Campaign Against Climate Change and Art Not Oil made sure they were there to greet them – pointing out the destructive impacts of these unethical companies and the irony of partnering with Shell, a company that has previously attempted to undermine climate science.
Climate science denial is actually pretty rare, so why do we keep talking about it? asks Leo Barasi, author of the new book, The Climate Majority. Instead, he argues, let’s focus on a much more widespread problem: climate apathy.
We should stop talking so much about climate denial. That might seem a surprising message from the author of a book on public opinion about climate change, but I’m convinced it’s the right answer for those of us who want more action to cut emissions.
Look at the news and climate denial seems to be everywhere. It’s common in the media, as Newsweek readers and UK radio listeners have recently been reminded, while its grip on the White House seems stronger than ever.
Megan Darby reports for Climate Home on how a UK proposal for its future relationship with the EU calls for cooperation on energy security, but makes no mention of the Paris Agreement — a stated priority in Brussels.
The UK government made no mention of climate change in a paper published Tuesday on its proposed foreign policy relationship with the EU after Brexit.
The document calls for continued cooperation on defence and security issues, including energy security, as Britain prepares to leave the EU, emphasising shared values and interests. But fails to mention climate change, which the EU ranks among its foreign policy priorities.
By Ruth Hayhurst at DrillorDrop.
The anti-fracking campaigner, Joe Corre, is to go to court next week to oppose an injunction brought by INEOS Upstream against shale gas protesters.
Corre, son of fashion designer, Dame Vivienne Westwood, said on 6 September:
“Someone has to stand up against these disgusting bully boy tactics”.
Abbott becomes second former Australian prime minister to address Global Warming Policy Foundation. His speech will be called ‘Daring to Doubt’, writes Karl Mathiesen, editor of Climate Home.
Former Australia prime minister and government backbencher Tony Abbott is set to give the annual lecture to a London-based climate sceptic group.
Abbott will give his speech, entitled ‘Daring to Doubt’, to the London-based Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) on 9 October.
Anti-fracking activists have been making their case in court to overturn a decision that allowed shale gas company Cuadrilla to start work on a shale gas site in Lancashire, Ruth Hayhurst reports for Drill or Drop.
Opponents of Cuadrilla’s fracking plans near Blackpool brought their final legal challenge to the Court of Appeal in London this morning.
A community group and an individual campaigner were appealing against the ruling of a high court judge earlier this year.
Mr Justice Dove, sitting in Manchester, had dismissed challenges to the granting of planning permission for Cuadrilla’s plans for drill, frack and test up to four shale gas wells at a site on Preston New Road.
But the challengers, Preston New Road Action Group (PNRAG) and resident Gayzer Frackman, argued that the judge had misapplied planning policy and EU law in rejecting their cases.
By Ruth Hayhurst at DrillorDrop.
The shale gas firm, Cuadrilla has confirmed that drilling began today at its site at near Blackpool.
The Preston New Road site at Little Plumpton will see the first horizontal shale gas exploration wells in the UK.
A spokesperson for the company said drilling began early this afternoon but was unable to give a precise time.
The UK government has placed a lot of hope on fracking to provide a “lower carbon” source of energy. However, John Richard Underhill, chief scientist & professor of exploration geoscience at Heriot-Watt University argues the scale of shale gas reserves has been hyped. While the debate about fracking so far has been about economic benefits vs harm to the environment, no one is paying attention to the geology he writes at The Conversation.
Gas is hugely important to the UK. The country uses more than 65 billion cubic metres to heat most of its 25m homes and generate around a quarter of its electricity each year. Despite efforts to move to renewable energy sources such as wind and solar, demand for gas is likely to remain high for the foreseeable future.
Until 2004 all the gas the country needed was sourced from the UK, primarily from the North Sea and East Irish Sea. Since then, production has declined to the point where indigenous gas provides only 45 percent of the total. The shortfall comes from European pipelines (38 percent), particularly from Norway and Russia; and liquid natural gas (LNG) deliveries (17 percent), primarily from Qatar.