Podcasts about Climate change

From April 16, 2019: Since November, Lawfare Contributor Michelle Melton has run a series on our website about Climate Change and National Security, examining the implication of the threat as well as U.S. and international responses to climate change. Melton is a student a Harvard Law school. Prior to that she was an associate fellow in the Energy and National Security Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, where she focused on climate policy.She and Benjamin Wittes sat down last week to discuss the series. They talked about why we should think about climate change as a national security threat, the challenges of viewing climate change through this paradigm, the long-standing relationship between climate change and the U.S. national security apparatus, and how climate change may affect global migration.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Stand Up is a daily podcast. I book,host,edit, post and promote new episodes with brilliant guests every day. Please subscribe now for as little as 5$ and gain access to a community of over 700 awesome, curious, kind, funny, brilliant, generous souls About Molly Wood!  I am the founder and CEO of Molly Wood Media, where I am attempting to find, introduce, and share climate solutions. I do that in three major ways: I find people and companies building climate solutions. I might invest in some of those startups, or refer them to climate-focused VC firms (such as Amasia, where I am a venture partner). Others, I might advise, and many of them, I would like to interview! To spread the word and go deep with these solutions, I summarize what I know in a weekly newsletter and interrogate these ideas in a weekly podcast, both called Everybody in the Pool. Thanks to all this ongoing learning, research, and investing, I provide consulting and business intelligence and keynotes to people who want help with their own positioning or storytelling around climate, or sometimes just want inspiration and advice on how to make this a bigger part of their business. If you would like to hire me as a startup advisor or consultant, please email me! 41 minutes  graduated from Emory University, Phi Beta Kappa 27  and summa cum laude, and from Vanderbilt Law School, where he was the research editor for the Law Review and member of Order of the Coif. He clerked for the Chief Judge Charles Moye Jr. for the Northern District of Georgia, and Albert J. Henderson of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. After his clerkships, Segall worked for Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher and the U.S. Department of Justice, before joining the Georgia State faculty in 1991. Segall teaches federal courts and constitutional law I and II. He is the author of the books Originalism as Faith and Supreme Myths: Why the Supreme Court is not a Court and its Justices are not Judges. His articles on constitutional law have appeared in, among others, the Harvard Law Review Forum, the Stanford Law Review On Line, the UCLA Law Review, the George Washington Law Review, the Washington University Law Review, the University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law, the Northwestern University Law Review Colloquy, and Constitutional Commentary among many others. Segall's op-eds and essays have appeared in the New York Times, the LA Times, The Atlantic, SLATE, Vox, Salon, and the Daily Beast, among others. He has appeared on CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, and France 24 and all four of Atlanta's local television stations. He has also appeared on numerous local and national radio shows. Listen and Subscribe to Eric's Podcast Supreme Myths and follow him on Tik Tok! Check out all things Jon Carroll Follow and Support Pete Coe Pete on YouTube Pete on Twitter Pete On Instagram Pete Personal FB page

Climate change poses a big threat to all life on earth, and birds are no exception. Garry George is the director of the Clean Energy Initiative for the National Audubon Society, and he says that wind turbines are essential to meet our carbon reduction goals. But they can also kill birds. Garry and his team at Audubon provide guidance on how to make wind farms safer for birds.More info and transcript at BirdNote.org. Want more BirdNote? Subscribe to our weekly newsletter. Sign up for BirdNote+ to get ad-free listening and other perks. BirdNote is a nonprofit. Your tax-deductible gift makes these shows possible.

In June, a first-of-its-kind lawsuit will go to trial in Montana. The case, Held v. Montana, centers on the climate crisis. Sixteen young plaintiffs allege their state government has failed in its obligation, spelled out in the state constitution, to provide residents with a healthful environment. The psychiatrist Dr. Lise Van Susteren is serving as an expert witness and intends to detail the emotional distress that can result from watching the environmental destruction unfolding year after year. “Kids are talking about their anger. They're talking about their fear. They're talking about their despair. They're talking about feelings of abandonment,” she tells David Remnick. “And they don't understand why the adults in the room are not taking more action.” Dr. Van Susteren is a co-founder of the Climate Psychiatry Alliance, a network of mental-health providers concerned with educating colleagues and the public about the climate crisis.

In this episode, environmental social scientist Holly Jean Buck discusses the critique of emissions-focused climate policy that she laid out in her book Ending Fossil Fuels: Why Net Zero Is Not Enough.(PDF transcript)(Active transcript)Text transcript:David RobertsOver the course of the 2010s, the term “net-zero carbon emissions” migrated from climate science to climate modeling to climate politics. Today, it is ubiquitous in the climate world — hundreds upon hundreds of nations, cities, institutions, businesses, and individuals have pledged to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. No one ever formally decided to make net zero the common target of global climate efforts — it just happened.The term has become so common that we barely hear it anymore, which is a shame, because there are lots of buried assumptions and value judgments in the net-zero narrative that we are, perhaps unwittingly, accepting when we adopt it.Holly Jean Buck has a lot to say about that. An environmental social scientist who teaches at the University at Buffalo, Buck has spent years exploring the nuances and limitations of the net-zero framework, leading to a 2021 book — Ending Fossil Fuels: Why Net Zero Is Not Enough — and more recently some new research in Nature Climate Change on residual emissions.Buck is a perceptive commentator on the social dynamics of climate change and a sharp critic of emissions-focused climate policy, so I'm eager to talk to her about the limitations of net zero, what we know and don't know about how to get there, and what a more satisfying climate narrative might include.So with no further ado, Holly Jean Buck. Welcome to Volts. Thank you so much for coming.Holly Jean BuckThanks so much for having me.David RobertsIt's funny. Reading your book really brought it home to me how much net zero had kind of gone from nowhere to worming its way completely into my sort of thinking and dialogue without the middle step of me ever really thinking about it that hard or ever really sort of like exploring it. So let's start with a definition. First of all, a technical definition of what net zero means. And then maybe a little history. Like, where did this come from? It came from nowhere and became ubiquitous, it seemed like, almost overnight. So maybe a little capsule history would be helpful.Holly Jean BuckWell, most simply, net zero is a balance between emissions produced and emissions taken out of the atmosphere. So we're all living in a giant accounting problem, which is what we always dreamed of, right? So how did we get there? I think that there's been a few more recent moments. The Paris agreement obviously one of them, because the Paris agreement talks about a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks. So that's kind of part of the moment that it had. The other thing was the Special Report on 1.5 degrees by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which further showed that this target is only feasible with some negative emissions.And so I think that was another driver. But the idea of balancing sources and sinks goes back away towards the Kyoto Protocol, towards the inclusion of carbon sinks, and thinking about that sink capacity.David RobertsSo you say, and we're going to get into the kind of the details of your critique in a minute. But the broad thing you say about net zero is that it's not working. We're not on track for it. And I guess intuitively, people might think, well, you set an ambitious target and if you don't meet that target, it's not the target's fault, right. It's not the target's reason you're failing. So what do you mean exactly when you say net zero is not working?Holly Jean BuckWell, I think that people might understandably say, "Hey, we've just started on this journey. It's a mid-century target, let's give it some time, right?" But I do think there's some reasons why it's not going to work. Several reasons. I mean, we have this idea of balancing sources and sinks, but we're not really doing much to specify what those sources are. Are they truly hard to abate or not? We're not pushing the scale up of carbon removal to enhance those sinks, and we don't have a way of matching these emissions and removals yet. Credibly all we have really is the voluntary carbon market.But I think the main problem here is the frame doesn't specify whether or not we're going to phase out fossil fuels. I think that that's the biggest drawback to this frame.David RobertsWell, let's go through those. Let's go through those one at a time, because I think all of those have some interesting nuances and ins and outs. So when we talk about balancing sources and sinks, the way this translates, or I think is supposed to translate the idea, is a country tallies up all of the emissions that it is able to remove and then adds them all up. And then what remains? This kind of stuff, it either can't reduce or is prohibitively expensive to reduce the so called difficult to abate or hard to abate emissions. Those are called its residual emissions, the emissions that it doesn't think it can eliminate.And the theory here is then you come in with negative emissions, carbon reduction, and you compensate for those residual emissions. So to begin with, the first problem you identify is that it's not super clear what those residual emissions are or where they're coming from, and they're not very well measured. So maybe just explain sort of like, what would you like to see people or countries doing on residual emissions and what are they doing, what's a state of knowledge and measurement of these things?Holly Jean BuckSo the state right now is extremely fuzzy. And so I'll just back up and say that my colleagues and I looked at these long term strategies that are submitted to the UNFCCC under the Paris Agreement. Basically, each country is invited to submit what its long term strategy is for reaching its climate goals. And so we've read 50 of those.David RobertsGoodness.Holly Jean BuckYeah, lots of fun. And they don't have a standard definition of what these residual emissions are, although they refer to them implicitly in many cases. You can see the residual emissions on these graphs that are in these reports.But we don't have a really clear understanding in most cases where these residual emissions are coming from, how the country is thinking about defining them, what their understanding of what's truly hard to abate is. And I emphasize with this being a challenge, because what's hard to abate changes over time because new technologies come online. So it's hard to say what's going to be hard to abate in 10 or 20 years.David RobertsRight.Holly Jean BuckBut we could get a lot better at specifying this.David RobertsAnd this would just tell us basically without a good sense of residual emissions across the range of countries, we don't have a good sense of how much carbon removal we need. So is there something easy to say about how we could make this better? Is there a standardized framework that you would recommend? I mean, are any countries doing it well and precisely sort of identifying where those emissions are and explaining why and how they came to that conclusion?Holly Jean BuckSo there's 14 countries that do break down residual emissions by sector, which is like the first, most obvious place to start.David RobertsRight.Holly Jean BuckSo, number one, everybody should be doing that and understanding what assumptions there are about what sectors. And generally a lot of this is non-CO2 emissions and emissions from agriculture. There's some emissions left over from industry, too, but having clarity in that is the most obvious thing. And then I think that we do need a consistent definition as well as processes that are going to standardize our expectations around this. That's something that's going to evolve kind of, I think, from the climate advocacy community, hopefully, and a norm will evolve about what's actually hard to abate versus what's just expensive to abateDavid RobertsKind of a small sample size. But of the 14 countries that actually do this, are there trends that emerge? Like, what do these 14 countries currently believe will be the most difficult emissions to eliminate? Is there agreement among those 14 countries?Holly Jean BuckWell, it's pretty consistent that agriculture is number one, followed by industry, and that in many cases, transport, at least short transport, light duty transport is considered to be fully electrified. In many cases, the power sector is imagined to be zero carbon. But I will also say that the United Kingdom is the only one that even included international aviation and shipping in its projection. So a long way to go there.David RobertsAnd this is not really our subject here. But just out of curiosity, what is the simple explanation for why agriculture is such a mystery? What are these emissions in agriculture that no one can think of a way to abate?Holly Jean BuckI mean, I think it varies by country, but a lot of it is nitrous oxide. A lot of it has to do with fertilizer and fertilizer production, fertilizer over application and I think obviously some of it is methane too from the land sector, from cows. So I think maybe that is considered a more challenging policy problem than industry.David RobertsYeah, this is always something that's puzzled me about this entire framework and this entire debate is you look at a problem like that and you think, well, if we put our minds to it, could we solve that in the next 30 years? I mean, probably. You know what I mean? It doesn't seem versus standing up this giant carbon dioxide removal industry which is just a gargantuan undertaking. This has never been clear to me why people are so confident that carbon dioxide removal is going to be easier than just solving these allegedly difficult to solve problems over the next several decades.I've never really understood that calculation.Holly Jean BuckI think it just hasn't been thought through all the way yet. But I expect in the next five years most people will realize that we need a much smaller carbon removal infrastructure than is indicated in many of the integrated assessment models.David RobertsYeah, thank you for saying that. This is my intuition, but I just don't feel sort of like technically briefed or technically adept enough to make a good argument for it. But I look at this and I'm like which of these problems are going to be easier to solve? Finding some non-polluting fertilizer or building a carbon dioxide removal industry three times the size of the oil industry? It's crazy to view the latter as like, oh, we got to do that because we can't do the first thing. It just seems crazy. Okay, so for the first problem here with net zero is we don't have a clear sense of what these residual emissions are, where they come from, exactly how we define them, et cetera.So without that, we don't have a clear sense of the needed size of the carbon dioxide removal industry. That said, problem number two here is that even based on what we are currently expecting CDR to do, there doesn't appear to be a coordinated push to make it happen. Like we're just sort of like waving our hands at massive amounts of CDR but you're not seeing around you the kinds of mobilization that would be necessary to get there. Is that roughly accurate?Holly Jean BuckYeah, and I think it follows from the residual emissions analysis because unless a country has really looked at that, they probably don't realize the scale of CDR that they're implicitly relying on.David RobertsRight, so they're implicitly relying on CDR for a couple of things you list in your presentation I saw and residual emissions is only one of those things we're expecting CDR to do.Holly Jean BuckThere's the idea that CDR will also be compensating for legacy emissions or helping to draw down greenhouse gas concentrations after an overshoot. I don't think anybody is saying that exactly because we're not at that point yet, but it's kind of floating around on the horizon as another use case for carbon removal.David RobertsYeah. So it does seem like even the amount of CDR that we are currently expecting, even if most countries haven't thought it through, just the amount that's already on paper that we're expecting it to do, we're not seeing the kind of investment that you would want to get there. What does that tell you? What should we learn from that weird disjunct?Holly Jean BuckFor me, it tells me that all the climate professionals are not really doing their jobs. Maybe that sounds mean, but we have so many people that are devoted to climate action professionally and so it's very weird to not see more thinking about this. But maybe the more nice way to think about it is saying oh well, people are really focused on mitigation. They're really focused on scaling up clean energy which is where they should be focused. Maybe that's reasonable.David RobertsYeah, maybe this is cynical, but some part of me thinks, like if people and countries really believed that we need the amount of CDR they're saying we're going to need, that the models show we're going to need, by mid century they would be losing their minds and flipping out and pouring billions of dollars into this. And the fact that they're not to me sort of like I guess it feels like no one's really taking this seriously. Like everyone still somewhat sees it as an artifact of the models.Holly Jean BuckI don't know, I think the tech sector is acting on it, which is interesting. I mean, you've seen people like Frontier mobilize all these different tech companies together to do these advanced market commitments. I think they're trying to incubate a CDR ecosystem. And so why does interest come there versus other places? Not exactly sure. I have some theories but I do wonder about the governments because in our analysis we looked at the most ambitious projections offered in these long term strategies and the average amount of residual emissions was around 18% of current emissions. So all these countries have put forward these strategies where they're seeing these levels of residual emissions.Why are they not acting on it more in policy? I think maybe it's just the short termism problem of governments not being accountable for things that happen in 30 years.David RobertsYeah, this is a truly strange phenomenon to me and I don't even know that I do have any theories about it, but it's like of all the areas of climate policy there are tons and tons of areas where business could get involved and eventually build self-sustaining profitable industries out of them. But CDR is not that there will never be a self-sustaining profitable CDR industry. It's insofar as it exists, it's going to exist based on government subsidies. So it's just bizarre for business to be moving first in that space and for government to be trailing.It just seems upside down world. I can't totally figure out government's motivations for not doing more and I can't totally figure out businesses motivations for doing so much.Holly Jean BuckWell, I think businesses acting in this R&D space to try to kind of claim some of the tech breakthroughs in the assumption that if we're serious about climate action we're going to have a price on carbon. We're going to have much more stringent climate policy in a decade or two. And when that happens, the price of carbon will be essentially set by the price of removing carbon. And so if they have the innovation that magically removes the most carbon, they're going to be really well set up for an extremely lucrative industry. This is all of course hinging on the idea that we're going to be willing to pay to clean up emissions just like we're willing to pay for trash service or wastewater disposal or these other kind of pollution removal services.Which is still an open question, but I sure hope we will be.David RobertsYeah, it's totally open. And this is another area where this weird disjunct between this sort of expansive talk and no walk. It's almost politically impossible to send money to this greenhouse gas international fund that's supposed to help developing countries decarbonize, right? Like even that it's very difficult for us to drag enough tax money out of taxpayers hands to fund that and we're going to be sending like a gazillion times more than that on something that has no visible short term benefit for taxpayers. We're all just assuming we're going to do that someday. It seems like a crazy assumption.And if you're a business and you're looking to make money, it just seems like even if you're just looking to make money on clean energy, it seems like there's a million faster, easier ways than this sort of like multidecade bank shot effort. I feel like I don't have my head wrapped around all those dynamics. So the first problem is residual emissions. They're opaque to us, we don't totally get them. Second problem is there's no evident push remotely to scale of the kind of CDR we claim we're going to need. And then the third you mentioned is there's no regime for matching emissions and removals.Explain that a little bit. What sort of architecture would be required for that kind of regime?Holly Jean BuckWell, you can think of this as a market or as a platform, basically as a system for connecting emissions and removals. And obviously this has been like a dream of technocratic climate policy for a long time, but I think it's frustrated by our knowledge capabilities and maybe that'll change in the future if we really do get better models, better remote sensing capacities. Obviously, both of those have been improving dramatically and machine learning accelerates it. But it assumes that you really have good knowledge of the emissions, good knowledge of the removals, that it's credible. And I think for some of the carbon removal technologies we're looking at this what's called MRV: monitoring, reporting, and verification.Is really challenging, especially with open systems like enhanced rock weathering or some of the ocean carbon removal ideas. So we need some improvement there. And then once you've made this into a measurable commodity, you need to be able to exchange it. That's been really frustrated because of all the problems that you've probably talked about on this podcast with carbon markets, and scams, bad actors. It's all of these problems and the expense of having people in the middle that are taking a cut off of the transactions.David RobertsYeah. So you have to match your residual emissions with removals in a way that is verifiable, in a way that, you know, the removals are additional. Right. You get back to all these carbon market problems and as I talked with Danny Cullenword and David Victor about on the pod long ago, in carbon offset markets, basically everyone has incentive to keep prices low and to make things look easy and tidy. And virtually no one, except maybe the lonely regulators has the incentive to make sure that it's all legit right there's just like there's overwhelming incentive to goof around and cheat and almost no one with the incentive to make sure it's valid.And all those problems that face the carbon offset market just seem to me like ten times as difficult. When you're talking about global difficult to measure residual emissions coupled with global difficult to measure carbon dioxide removals in a way where there's no double counting and there's no shenanigans. Like, is that even a gleam in our eye yet? Do we even have proposals for something like that on the table?Holly Jean BuckI mean, there's been a lot of best principles and practices and obviously a lot of the conversation around Article Six and the Paris agreement and those negotiations are towards working out better markets. I think a lot of people are focused on this, but there's definitely reason to be skeptical of our ability to execute it in the timescales that we need.David RobertsYeah, I mean, if you're offsetting residual emissions that you can't reduce, you need that pretty quick. Like, this is supposed to be massively scaling up in the next 30 years and I don't see the institutional efforts that would be required to build something like this, especially making something like this bulletproof. So we don't have a good sense of residual emissions. We're not pushing very hard to scale CDR up even to what we think we need. And we don't have the sort of institutional architecture that would be required to formally match removals with residual emissions. These are all kind of, I guess, what you'd call technical problems.Like, even if you accepted the goal of doing this or this framework, these are just technical problems that we're not solving yet. The fourth problem, as you say, is the bigger one, perhaps the biggest one, which is net zero says nothing about fossil fuels. Basically. It says nothing about the socioeconomics of fossil fuels or the social dynamics of fossil fuels. It says nothing about the presence of fossil fuels in a net-zero world, how big that might be, et cetera. So what do you mean when you say it's silent on fossil fuels?Holly Jean BuckYeah, so this was a desirable design feature of net zero because it has this constructive ambiguity around whether there's just like a little bit of residual emissions and you've almost phased out fossil fuels, or if there's still a pretty significant role for the fossil fuel industry in a net-zero world. And that's what a lot of fossil fuel producers and companies are debating.David RobertsYes, I've been thinking about this recently in the context of the struggle to get Joe Manchin to sign decent legislation. Like, if you hear Joe Manchin when he goes on rambling on about climate change, it's very clear that he views carbon dioxide removal as basically technological license for fossil fuels to just keep on keeping on. Like, in his mind, that's what CDR means. Whereas if you hear like, someone from NRDC talking about it, it's much more like we eliminated almost everything. And here's like, the paper towel that we're going to use to wipe up these last little stains.And that's a wide gulf.Holly Jean BuckI don't want to seem like the biggest net-zero hater in the world. I understand why it came up as a goal. I think it was a lot more simple and intuitive than talking about 80% of emissions reduction over 2005 levels or like the kind of things that it replaced. But ultimately, this is a killer aspect to the whole idea, is not being clear about the phase out of fossil fuels.David RobertsAnd you say you can envision very different worlds fitting under net zero. What do you mean by that?Holly Jean BuckWell, I mean, one axis is the temporality of it. So is net zero, like, just one moment on the road to something else? Is it a temporary state or is it a permanent state where we're continuing to produce some fossil fuels and we're just living in that net zero without any dedicated phase out? I think that right now there's ambiguity where you could see either one.David RobertsThat is a good question. In your research on this, have you found an answer to that question of how people view it? Like, I'd love to see a poll or something. I mean, this is a tiny subset of people who even know what we're talking about here. But among the people who talk about net zero, do you have any sense of whether they view it as like a mile marker on the way to zero-zero or as sort of like the desired endstate?Holly Jean BuckYou know, it's funny because I haven't done a real poll, but I've done when I'm giving a talk at a conference of scientists and climate experts twice I've asked this question, do you think it's temporary or do you think it's like a permanent desired state? And it's split half and half each time, which I find really interesting. Like, within these climate expert communities, we don't have a clear idea ourselves.David RobertsAnd that's such a huge difference. And if you're going to have CDR do this accounting for past emissions, for your past emissions debt, if you're going to do that, you have to go negative, right. You can't stay at net zero, you have to go net negative. So it would be odd to view net zero as the end state. And yet that seems like, what's giving fossil fuel companies permission to be involved in all this.Holly Jean BuckYeah. No, we do need to go net negative. And I think one challenge with the residual emissions is that carbon removal capacity is going to be finite. It's going to be limited by geography, carbon sequestration capacity, ecosystems and renewable energy, all of these things. And so if you understand it as finite, then carbon removal to compensate for residual emissions is going to be in competition with carbon removal to draw down greenhouse gas concentrations. And so we never get to this really net negative state if we have these large residual emissions, because all that capacity is using to compensate rather than to get net negative, if that makes sense.David RobertsYeah. Given how sort of fundamental those questions are and how fundamental those differences are, it's a little this is what I mean when I sort of the revelation of reading your book. Like, those are very, very different visions. If you work backwards from those different visions, you get a very, very different dynamic around fossil fuels and fossil fuel companies and the social and political valence of fossil fuels, just very fundamentally different. It's weird that it's gone on this long with that ambiguity, which, I guess, as you say, it was fruitful to begin with, but you kind of think it's time to de-ambiguize this.Holly Jean BuckYeah. Because there's huge implications for the infrastructure planning that we do right now.David RobertsRight.Holly Jean BuckIt's going to be a massive transformation to phase out fossil fuels. There's a million different planning tasks that need to have started yesterday and should start today.David RobertsYeah. And I guess also, and this is a complaint, maybe we'll touch on more later, but there's long been, I think, from some quarters of the environmental movement, a criticism of climate people in their sort of emissions or carbon greenhouse gas emissions obsession. And when you contemplate fossil fuels, it's not just greenhouse gases. There's like all these proximate harms air pollution and water pollution, et cetera, et cetera, geopolitical stuff. And I think the idea behind net zero was, let's just isolate greenhouse gas emissions and not get into those fights. But I wonder, as you say, we have to make decisions now, which in some sense hinge on which we were going to go on that question.Holly Jean BuckYeah, I mean, it was a huge trick to get us to focus on what happens after the point of combustion rather than the extraction itself.David RobertsYeah, it says nothing about extraction, too. So your final critique of net zero fifth and final critique is that it is not particularly compelling to ordinary people, which I think is kind of obvious. Like, I really doubt that the average Joe or Jane off the street would even know what you mean by net zero or would particularly know what you mean by negative carbon emissions and if you could explain it to them, would be particularly moved by that story. So what do you mean by the meta narrative? Like, why do you think this falls short?Holly Jean BuckI mean, accounting is fundamentally kind of boring. I think a lot of us avoid it, right? And so if I try to talk to my students about this, it's really work to keep them engaged and to see that actually all this stuff around net zero impacts life and death for a lot of people. But we don't feel that when we just look at the math or we look at the curve and we talk about bending the curve and this and that, we have this governance by curve mode. It's just not working in terms of inspiring people to change anything about their lives.David RobertsYeah, bending the curve didn't seem to work great during the pandemic either. This gets back to something you said before about what used to be a desirable design feature when you are thinking about other things that you might want to bring into a meta narrative about climate change. Most of what people talk about and what people think about is sort of social and political stuff. Like, we need to talk about who's going to win and who's going to lose, and the substantial social changes and changes in our culture and practices that we need. We need to bring all these things in.But then the other counterargument is those are what produce resistance and those are what produce backlash. And so as far as you can get on an accounting framework, like if the accounting framework can sort of trick various and sundry participants and institutions into thinking they're in a value neutral technical discussion, if you can make progress that way, why not do it? Because any richer meta narrative is destined to be more controversial and more produce more political backlash. What do you think about that?Holly Jean BuckNo, I think that the problem is we haven't invested at all in figuring out how to create desire and demand for lower carbon things. I mean, maybe the car industry has tried a little bit with some of the electric trucks or that kind of thing, but we have all this philanthropy, government focus, all the stuff on both the tech and on the carbon accounting pieces of it. We don't have very much funding going out and talking to people. About why are you nervous about transitioning to gas in your home? What would make you feel more comfortable about that?Those sorts of relational things, the conversations, the engagement has been gendered, frankly. Lots of times it falls to women to do this kind of relational work and hasn't been invested in. So I think there's a whole piece we could be doing about understanding what would create demand for these new infrastructures, new practices, not just consumer goods but really adoption of lifestyle changes because you need that demand to translate to votes to the real supportive policies that will really make a difference in this problem.David RobertsYeah, I very much doubt if you go to talk to people about those things they're going to say, well, I want to get the appliance that's most closely going to zero out my positive conditions. You're not going to run into a lot of accounting if you ask people about their concerns about these things. So these are the problems. We're not measuring it well. We're not doing what we need to do to remove the amount of CDR we say we need. We don't have the architecture or the institutional structures to create some sort of system where we're matching residual emissions and removals.And as a narrative it's fatally ambiguous about the role of fossil fuels in the future and plus ordinary people don't seem to give much of a shit about it. So in this presentation you sort of raise the prospect that the whole thing could collapse, that the net-zero thing could collapse. What do you mean by that and how could that happen?Holly Jean BuckSo I think this looks more like quiet quitting than anything else because I do think it is too big to fail in terms of official policy. There's been a lot of political capital spent.David RobertsYeah, a lot of institutions now have that on paper, like are saying on paper that they want to hit net zero. So it seems to me like it would take a big backlash to get rid of it.Holly Jean BuckYeah. So I don't think some companies may back away from targets. There'll be more reports of targets not being on track. And I think what happens is that it becomes something like the Sustainable Development Goals or dealing with the US national debt where everybody kind of knows you're not really going to get there, but you can still talk about it aspirationally but without confidence. Because it did feel like at least a few years ago that people were really trying to get to net zero. And I think that sensation will shift and it'll become empty like a lot of other things, unfortunately.But I think that creates an opportunity for something new to come in and be the mainframe for climate policy.David RobertsNet zero just seems like a species of a larger thing that happens. I don't know if it happens in other domains, but in climate and clean energy it happens a lot, which is just sort of like a technical term from the expert dialogue, worms its way over into popular usage and is just awful and doesn't mean anything to anyone. I think about net metering and all these kind of terminological disputes. So it doesn't really I'm not sure who's in charge of metanarratives, but it doesn't seem like they're very thoughtfully constructed. So let's talk a little bit about what characteristics you think a better metanarrative about climate change would include.Holly Jean BuckFirst, I think it is important that we are measuring progress towards a goal for accountability reasons. But I think there needs to be more than just the metric. I think we have an obsession with metrics in our society that sometimes becomes unhealthy or distracts us from the real focus. But I do think there should be some amount of measuring specific progress towards a goal. I think that the broader story also has to have some affect or emotional language. There has to be some kind of emotional connection. I also think we have to get beyond carbon to talk about what's going on with ecosystems more broadly and how to maintain them and have an intact habitable planet and then just pragmatically.This has to be a narrative that enables broad political coalitions. It can't be just for one camp and it has to work on different scales. I mean, part of the genius of net zero is that it is this multi-scalar planetary, but also national, also municipal, corporate, even individual does all of that. So those are some of the most important qualities that a new frame or a new narrative would have to have.David RobertsThat sounds easier said than done. I can imagine measuring other things you mentioned in your book several sort of submeasurements other than just this one overarching metric. You could measure how fast fossil fuels are going away. You could measure how fast clean energy is scaling up. There are adaptation you can measure to some extent. So I definitely can see the benefit in having a wider array of goals, if only just because some of those just get buried under net zero and are never really visible at all. That makes sense to me. But the minute you start talking about a metanarrative with affect, with emotion, the way to get that is to appeal to people's values and things that they cherish and feel strongly about.But then we're back to the problem we talked about earlier, which is it seems like especially in the US these days, we're just living in a country with two separate tribes that have very, very different values. And so the minute you step beyond the sort of technocratic metric, which in a sense is like clean and clinical and value free and start evoking values, trying to create emotion, you get greater investment and passion in some faction and alienate some other faction. Do you just think that that's like unavoidable and you have to deal with that or how do you think about that dilemma?Holly Jean BuckI actually think people do have the same values, but they're manipulated by a media ecosystem that profits from dividing them, which makes it impossible for them to see that they do have aligned values. And I base that just on my experience, like as a rural sociologist and geographer talking to people in rural America. People are upset about the same exact things that the leftists in the cities I visit are upset about too. They really do value justice. They think it's unfair that big companies are taking advantage of them. There are some registers of agreement about fairness, about caring for nature, about having equal opportunities to a good and healthy life that I think we could build on if we weren't so divided by this predatory media ecology.David RobertsI don't suppose you have a solution for that, in your back pocket?Holly Jean BuckI have a chapter on this in a forthcoming book which you might be interested. It's edited by David Orr. It's about democracy in hotter times, looking at the democratic crisis and the climate crisis at the same time. And so I've thought a little bit about media reform, but it's definitely not my expertise. We should have somebody on your podcast to talk about that too.David RobertsWell, let me tell you, as someone who's been obsessed with that subject for years and has looked and looked and looked around, I don't know that there is such thing as an expert. I've yet to encounter anyone who has a solution to that problem that sounds remotely feasible to me, including the alleged experts. And it kind of does seem like every problem runs aground on that, right? Like it would be nice if people had a different story to tell about climate change that had these features you identify that brought people in with values and drew on a broader sense of balance with the earth and ecosystems.But even if they did, you have to have the mechanics of media to get that message out to tell that story. You know what I mean? And so you got one whole side of the media working against you and one at best begrudgingly working with you. It just doesn't seem possible. So I don't know why I'm talking to you about this problem. No one knows a solution to this problem. But it just seems like this is the -er problem that every other problem depends on.Holly Jean BuckYeah, I mean, we should talk about it because it's the central obstacle in climate action, from my point of view, is this broken media ecosystem and if we could unlock that or revise it, we could make a lot of progress on other stuff.David RobertsYes, on poverty, you name it. Almost anything that seems like the main problem you talk about. The narrative must be able to enable broad political coalitions, but you are working against ... I guess I'd like to hear a little bit about what role you think fossil fuels are playing in this? It seems to me pretty obvious that fossil fuels do not want any such broad political coalition about anything more specific than net zero in 2050, right. Which, as you point out, leaves room for vastly different worlds, specifically regarding fossil fuels. It seems like they don't want that and they're working against that and they have power.So who are the agents of this new narrative? Like, who should be telling it and who has the power to tell it?Holly Jean BuckSo I think sometimes in the climate movement we grant too much power to the fossil fuel industry. It's obviously powerful in this country and in many others, but we have a lot of other industries that are also relevant and powerful too. So you can picture agriculture and the tech industry and insurance and some of these other forms of capital standing up to the fossil fuel industry because they have a lot to lose as renewables continue to become cheaper. We should have energy companies that will also have capital and power. So I do think that we need to think about those other coalitions.Obviously, I don't think it needs to be all grounded in forms of capital. I think there's a lot of work to be done in just democratic political power from civil society too. What I'd love to see is philanthropy, spending more money on building up that social infrastructure alongside funding some of this tech stuff.David RobertsYeah, I've talked to a lot of funders about that and what I often hear is like, "Yeah, I'd love that too, but what exactly be specific, David, what do you want me to spend money on?" And I'm always like, "Well, you know, stuff, social infrastructure, media, something." I get very hand wavy very quick because I'm not clear on exactly what it would be. So final subject, which I found really interesting at the tail end, I think it's fair to say your sympathies are with phasing out fossil fuels as fast as possible. And there's this critique you hear from the left-left about climate change that just goes, this is just capitalism, this is what capitalism does.This is the inevitable result of capitalism. And if you want a real solution to climate change on a mass scale, you have to be talking about getting past capitalism or destroying capitalism or alternatives to capitalism, something like that. Maybe I'm reading between the lines, but I feel like you have some sympathy with that. But also then we're back to narratives that can build a broad political coalition, right? Narratives that can include everyone. So how do you think about the tension between kind of the radical rethinking of economics and social arrangements versus the proximate need to keep everybody on board?How is a metanarrative supposed to dance that line?Holly Jean BuckYeah, unfortunately, I think in this media ecosystem we can't lead with smashing capitalism or with socialism. It's just not going to work, unfortunately. So then what do you do? I think you have to work on things that would make an opening for that. Having more political power, more power grounded in local communities. It's not going to be easy.David RobertsEven if you let the anti-capitalist cat out of the bag at all, you have a bunch of enemies that would love to seize on that, to use it to divide. So I don't know, what does that mean? Openings, just reforms of capitalism at the local level? I mean, I'm asking you to solve these giant global problems. I don't know why, but how do you solve capitalism? What's your solution to capitalism? What does that mean, to leave an opening for post-capitalism without directly taking on capitalism? I guess I'd just like to hear a little bit more about that.Holly Jean BuckSo I think that there's a lot of things that seem unconnected to climate at first, like making sure we have the integrity of our elections, dealing with redistricting and gerrymandering and those sorts of things that are one part of it. Reforming the media system is another part of it. Just having that basic civil society infrastructure, I think, will enable different ideas to form and grow.David RobertsDo you have any predictions about the future of net zero? Sort of as a concept, as a guiding light, as a goal? Because you identify these kind of ambiguities and tensions within it that seem like it doesn't seem like it can go on forever without resolving some of those. But as you also say, it's become so ubiquitous and now plays such a central role in the dialogue and in the Paris plans and et cetera, et cetera. It's also difficult to see it going away. So it's like can't go on forever, but it can't go away. So do you have any predictions how it evolves over the coming decade?Holly Jean BuckWell, it could just become one of these zombie concepts and so that really is an opportunity for people to get together and think about what other thing they would like to see. Is it going to be measuring phase out of fossil fuels and having a dashboard where we can track the interconnection queue and hold people accountable for improving that? Are we going to be measuring adaptation and focusing on that? Are we going to be thinking more about the resources that are going to countries to plan and direct a transition and trying to stand up agencies that are really focused on energy transition or land use transition?I mean, we could start making those demands now and we could also be evolving these broader languages to talk about and understand the motion. So we have some concepts that have been floated and already sort of lost some amount of credibility, like sustainability, arguably just transition. We have Green New Deal. Will that be the frame? Is that already lost? What new stuff could we come up with? Is it regeneration or universal basic energy. I think there's a lot of languages to explore and so I would be thrilled to see the Climate Movement work with other movements in society, with antiracist movements, with labor movements and more to explore the languages and the specific things we could measure and then take advantage of the slipperiness of net zero to get in there and talk about something else we might want to see.David RobertsOkay, that sounds like a great note to wrap up on. Thank you for coming. Thank you for the super fascinating book and for all your work, Holly Jean Buck. Thanks so much.Holly Jean BuckThank you.David RobertsThank you for listening to the Volts podcast. It is ad-free, powered entirely by listeners like you. If you value conversations like this, please consider becoming a paid Volts subscriber at volts.wtf. Yes, that's volts.wtf, so that I can continue doing this work. Thank you so much and I'll see you next time. Get full access to Volts at www.volts.wtf/subscribe

Our country has been poisoned, and if we don't remove the poison and start using the antidote, America may soon be completely unrecognizable as a “free” nation: tag, you're it! Also Florida: Will people move or vote them out? Is it time for Democrats to force Republican lawmakers to look at the pictures their policies have created? Dean Obeidallah - Is the GOP banning TikTok because young people are using it to defeat republicans? These guys really are committed to destroying the country so people will vote for Trump - Can they get more craven? Crazy Alert! Marjorie Taylor Greene boyfriend in drag - How long will that romance last? See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Kwasi Wrensford studies two related species: the Alpine chipmunk and the Lodgepole chipmunk. The two have very different ways of coping with climate change. In this episode, Kwasi explains to host Emily Kwong how these squirrelly critters typify two important evolutionary strategies, and why they could shed light on what's in store for other creatures all over the globe.

As inequality grows, many of our fellow Americans call a tent pitched on a city street their home. What should our response to this be? Also- Alex Lawson of Social Security works joins Thom to discuss the Republican attempt to hold our economy hostage- again.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

How far will Republicans go in keeping American women from making choices about their own bodies? And how does a law from 1873 help G.O.P. activists push their agenda?Plus- Thom reads from his book 'The Hidden History of American Oligarchy: Reclaiming our Democracy from the Ruling Class'.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Our climate is changing, and regardless of whether you think it's human caused or natural it is changing. If you don't believe that you need to get outside more. John Gierach [58:00], thoughtful guy that he is, wanted to talk about this subject and how he deals with changes that have happened in his lifetime, and what we can all do to deal with climate change and still enjoy fly fishing, because as he says "we still gotta live" and to some of us fly fishing is life. I n the Fly Box this week we have lots of questions, many of them quite basic but still fun to answer because you can always give them a new twist. What is the best rig to catch trout with worms? (I hope he meant worm flies and not real worms) What can I do to keep my Depth Charge line from tangling? I am moving to Texas and want one rod for inland bass and one for inshore saltwater. Is there one outfit that can do this? Am I better off buying one high-end rod or several lower priced rods if I fish in a variety of trout situations? Can you overline bamboo and fiberglass fly rods? I have a dog that likes to chase rocks and sticks. Any tips on how to train a dog to be a good fishing companion?  Is there any way to tell a trout rise from a chub rise? I am confused by fly line numbers and hook numbers. Can you explain them? What do fish deep in a lake take my Pat's Rubber Legs fished quickly? What do the fish think it is?  How do you fish your Rabbit's Foot Emerger patterns? What do I do with my rod when tying on a new fly or landing a fish? Is there a better knot than a clinch knot for tying on size 18 to 22 flies? My welded loop has cuts in it. What can I do to fix that? What kind of dry/dropper arrangement do you use when there is nothing visibly hatching? A good tip from a listener on walking the banks of your favorite rivers in low water to get a sense for the bottom structure. Can you tell the difference between a male and female trout by looking at the anal fin?

Follow Everyday Positivity On Instagram

Josh Hawley wants to be a man | Rural health clinic in Kentucky making a difference with federal funds | $11B for clean energy projects in rural areas | Conservatives worry they're ruining their own schools | Sean and Adam talk about the role of public schools in rural AmericaSean: Welcome back to flyover view, heartland news and views from the gateway arch to the rocky mountains and the stories impacting folks in the heartland, my name is Sean Diller and I'm here subbing for our regular host Kevin Smith, and with me is Adam Sommer, whaddya say, ready to start the show? Adam: Is Ron DeSantis wishing he'd never picked a fight with a mouse? Josh Hawley (name drop) Is A Man, Bro. In his new book, Josh Hawley, the Sr. Sen. for Missouri, not from, is ready to transform America by calling on men and boys to lead.HOW? Great question - it seems, mostly, that Hawley is fixated on sex. Men should stop masturbating and porn should basically be illegal. Oh, he must be super concerned for the women being exploited then..NOPE… just with Men being weakened by lust. Hawley is up for reelection in 2024 against Lucas Kunce. You may recall Kunce from his 2022 campaign for the Democratic nomination and a particular video in which Kunce climbs a very tall poll in his shoes and using his hands. Based on Hawley's book and his assertion of being the arbiter of manliness, we have to assume the 2024 Missouri senate race will be a series of feats of strength culminating in a caber toss right out of the scottish highland games in which the candidate who throws a tree the farthest will win the seat. No word yet from the Hawley campaign on if Josh's incredibly soft hands can handle the splinters, we will monitor this one closely. In more useful news… The federal Rural Health Clinic program started as a way to provide safety-net care to underserved populations. https://dailyyonder.com/rural-health-clinic-program-offering-head-to-toe-womb-to-tomb-care/2023/05/17/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=Center%20for%20Rural%20Strategies&utm_campaign=17d1501c13-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2023_05_17_03_36&utm_term=0_-17d1501c13-%5BLIST_EMAIL_ID%5D&mc_cid=17d1501c13&mc_eid=33f9e891eeWaylon Williams (great name) was born in Eastern Kentucky and at just 5 weeks old is already doing his name proud. Waylon is the first child born at a new facility in rural eastern Kentucky called “Beacons of Hope” a temporary housing facility for women facing substance abuse problems., part of the primary care centers of eastern Kentucky.Beacons of Hope is an extension of PCCEK's Pregnancy & Beyond, an addiction-treatment program that offers obstetrical services, medication for substance use disorder, prenatal education, pediatrics, and counseling – services that in so many rural communities nationwide are in critically short supply or entirely absent. The town of Hazard, where the largest of PCCEK's four clinics is located, is in Perry County. Perry County ranks 117th among Kentucky's 120 counties in health outcomes. Life expectancy is 67, as compared with 78.5 for the country. Great to see some blue solutions helping out in the blue grass stateMoney and Power, as usual, go hand in handhttps://missouriindependent.com/briefs/rural-electric-co-ops-to-get-10-7b-in-usda-funds-for-clean-energy-grants-loans/The U.S. Department of Agriculture will begin to administer two loan and grant programs worth nearly $11 billion to boost clean energy systems in rural areasRural areas can have more difficulty than more urban ones in attracting private sector investment, White House National Climate Advisor Ali Zaidi said. The programs are intended to allow those rural areas to take advantage of an industry-wide trend to invest in clean energy production.“There's a favorable wind blowing here,” he said. “This allows rural communities to put up a sail.”The programs are meant to put rural electric cooperatives on equal footing with larger privately owned companies that have already put major funding into clean energy deployment, Vilsack said.The programs represent the largest single funding effort for rural electrification since President Franklin Roosevelt signed the Rural Electrification Act in 1936, a USDA press release said.The money is meant not only to address the climate impacts of fossil fuel energy and reduce home energy costs, but to act as an economic engine for rural areas, Zaidi said.So get ready folks, because that leftist liberal woke power is gonna be indoctrinating your meter before you know it. Conservatives concerned about right wing extremists impact on schoolshttps://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/woodland-park-colorado-school-board-conservatives-rcna83311?fbclid=IwAR2ernEIIXvA4Vgdw4sD106umXpcK6cjzAGItWm9m4QtUe1TzQipAU4GIvA&mibextid=Zxz2cZIn a story that comes as no surprise to people who live in reality, a school board in Woodland Park, Colorado is now home to a cadre of hard core right wing extremists and folks are not pleasedChief among those concerned? Conservatives (whaaat?)That's right, it seems actual conservative folks have finally figured out that the MAGA members of their party might not be the best people to put in charge. Lose Your School, You Lose Your Town - is the headlineContrary to Lobbyist Social Media Postings, Rural Schools Are At Major Risk, and educators in rural states are not sitting this out. https://www.nea.org/advocating-for-change/new-from-nea/school-vouchers-and-rural-schoolsRural schools are also hubs for community engagement through concerts, theatrical productions, and sports. Often, they are a town's largest employer.  “At our school, we offer a lot, because our community expects a lot,” says Steve Peterson, a teacher in Decorah, a town in northeastern Iowa. “They want good programs—academic, but also extra-curricular opportunities.” Sean and Adam talk about the rural public school we went to

12-year-old London needs Dr. Laura's help with how to handle panic attacks caused by her fear of climate change. Email questions or comments: drlaura@drlaura.comParticipate on the radio program: call 1-800-Dr-Laura / 1-800-375-2872 or make an appointment https://www.drlaura.com/make-an-appointment. Follow on social media:Facebook.com/DrLauraInstagram.com/DrLauraProgramTwitter.com/DrLauraProgramPinterest.com/DrLauraYouTube.com/DrLauraBecome a Dr. Laura Family Member: https://www.drlaura.com/ See https://www.drlaura.com/privacy-policy for privacy information.

The excitement around ChatGPT and other large language models has put AI firmly in the spotlight in recent months. Public perception is that we're entering a new age of AI; it is a brand-new technology that promises to change our lives. In the world of energy, though, AI is not a new concept. GE was developing its AI capabilities more than a decade ago. BP invested in an AI company in 2017 to support oil exploration and production. And so far, although you can see the impact of AI in many parts of the world of energy, it has not exactly transformed the fundamentals of the industry. So when people get excited about AI in energy today, and expecting revolutionary change, are they just buying into some well-orchestrated hype?Amy Myers-Jaffe is Director of the Energy, Climate Justice and Sustainability Lab at New York University. She joins Ed and explains the real-world benefits of automation and AI for electricity networks. Automating home energy use and business operations in conjunction with power supplies could have huge implications for energy. The gang is also joined this week by Michael Webber. Michael is the Josey Centennial Professor in Energy Resources, in the Walker Department of Mechanical Engineering at The University of Texas. He's also CTO of Energy Impact Partners, a cleantech venture fund.Together, the team examine whether AI will transform energy and our lives in the same way the internet did. And they assess the question: is AI the tool that will ultimately open the door to a net zero energy system? Subscribe to the show so you don't miss an episode and follow us on Twitter, we're @theenergygang Wood Mackenzie's Solar & Energy Storage Summit is back, taking place at the Palace Hotel in San Francisco on June 21 and 22. Join expert solar and storage analysts for discussions with leading grid-scale utilities, solar and energy storage developers and federal policy makers.  How is the IRA catapulting the development of solar andstorage in North America? How can we continue to build a productive environmentfor solar and energy storage as we move forward with the energy transition?What is required to nurture the development of a thriving localized storagecomponent supply chain?  Expect two days of panel discussions, presentations andworkshops, as we explore the opportunities for solar and storage in the comingdecades.  If you are interested in sponsoring or attending find outmore on woodmac.com/events/solar-energy-storage-summit See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Who is really creating a crisis over the debt ceiling and why? Congressman Mark Pocan takes listener calls on this issue and more.Plus- Thom reads from 'State Capture: How Conservative Activists, Big Business, and Wealthy Donors Reshaped American States and the Nation'.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Oil and Gas pipelines have become a hot topic in today's energy debates. New projects like the Keystone pipeline could help rein in rising oil and gas prices. But they're meeting unprecedented resistance from politicians, environmentalists — and even bankers. Today I'm joined by Diana Furchtgott-Roth, who's going to shed some light on the difference between green energy “pipe dreams” and real-world pipeline facts. Topics Discussed: An Introduction to Diana Furchtgott-Roth (00:00:48) Transporting oil: Truck, Train, Tanker or Pipeline? (00:04:35) The Economic Reality of Climate Change (00:11:30) Giving Away America's Energy Independence (00:23:10) The Government's Green Energy Blunder (00:31:40) Guest Bio: Diana Furchtgott-Roth is an economist and adjunct professor of economics at George Washington University. She served as the chief economist of the United States Department of Labor, and she was nominated by President Donald Trump to serve as Assistant Secretary of Transportation for Research and Technology. She's also a columnist for Forbes.com and author of Disinherited: How Washington Is Betraying America's Young. Resources Mentioned: Disinherited: How Washington Is Betraying America's Young Transcript: https://charlesmizrahi.com/podcast/Don't Forget To... Subscribe to my podcast! Download this episode to save for later Liked this episode? Leave a kind review! Subscribe to Charles' Alpha Investor newsletter today: https://pro.banyanhill.com/m/2196282

“The goal is net zero, which is a balance between the emissions we put into the air and the emissions we take out….We have solutions and…it's not that the technologies don't work, it's not that we don't know how to use them. It's because  we haven't made the choice to actually use them at the size and scale that we need to, as quickly as we want to, to avoid all these really terrible, terrible impacts of a changing climate.” Melissa Lott on Electric Ladies Podcast An extraordinary new Nova documentary on PBS hosted by veteran science journalist Miles O'Brien gives a deep dive into what “carbon zero” actually means – in plain English for us non-scientists – and how we can get there in time to save the planet and our lifestyle. How? Listen to Melissa Lott, Director of Research at the Center for Global Energy Policy at Columbia University, and the lead scientists in the documentary, explain it in ways we can all understand in this fascinating discussion with Electric Ladies host Joan Michelson.  You'll hear about: What carbon zero really is – and how to get there The impact of the new trifecta of federal legislation – the Inflation Reduction Act, the Infrastructure Investment Act and the CHIPS and Science Act. Where we get our electricity from today and what has to change to eliminate emissions The impact on each industry – in ways that may surprise you Plus, insightful career advice, such as… “Create your path because it probably hasn't been created before. And follow your passions and the things you want to contribute to…At the end of the day….it's about understanding where you want to have impact and then creating the path forward….When I started in this work, the thing I do now did not exist. It didn't, now it does. And I'm so glad that I positioned myself to be able to do the work that I do today because it speaks to me on many, many levels and it brings together different pieces of me, and it's a way that I can contribute. So,….It's about how are you going to create and be that change you want to see?” Melissa Lott on Electric Ladies Podcast Read Joan's Forbes articles here too. You'll also like: Halla Hrund Logadottir, Director-General, Iceland's National Energy Authority, on how the country has become 85% renewable energy. Sandrine Dixson-Decléve, Co-president of the Club of Rome (global leaders), on how to pivot the global economy to net zero Janet Gail Besser, of Smart Power Alliance, on their 5-point plan to get the U.S. energy system to net zero. Michele Wucker, thought leaders and author of “You Are What You Risk: The New Art & Science to Navigating an Uncertain World.” Jennifer Gerbi, Ph.D., Deputy Director and Acting Director, ARPA-E, the innovation arm of the Department of Energy Subscribe to our newsletter to receive our podcasts, blog, events and special coaching offers.. Thanks for subscribing on Apple Podcasts or iHeartRadio and leaving us a review! Follow us on Twitter @joanmichelson

Klaus Schwab. Larry Fink. George Soros. The World Economic Forum. Climate change. These are all inextricably linked -- and their common denominator is this: Danger to America. If you're not in tune with what's taking place in politics on the global level, and how it all trickles into America's political system down to the individual citizen -- with the effect of stripping individual citizens of their individual rights -- then you're missing the big war for liberty. Make no mistake about it: fascism is coming on strong and it's a must for patriotic Americans to see both the forest and the trees in order to fight effectively. Steve King, former congressman of Iowa, has some shocking insights into the latest anti-American activities the leader of the World Economic Forum {Schwab} is doing with the leader of Blackrock Investments (Fink) as well as with the leader of global philanthropy-slash-government-takeover (Soros), and how these players are all hurtling America toward taxpayer funded enslavement to the left's climate gods. Former Iowa congressman, Steve King, has been digging in deep and investigating some recent climate change schemes that take private properties and use them for environmental causes that truly only enrich the pockets of a select few billionaire investors. And he warns: this agenda is poised to spread like wildfire across America -- around the world -- if patriots don't take notice and fight.

In this special edition of AMERICA First One on One, Sebastian talks to historian Niall Ferguson about how 2023 could be the end of Act II of the saga of President Donald J. Trump if he wins a triumphant comeback victory.Support the show: https://www.sebgorka.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

But many feel unprepared to teach the topic, and they worry about pushback from parents. Learn more at https://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/

This episode is part of our Skilled Labor Series hosted by MCJ partner, Yin Lu. This series is focused on amplifying the voices of folks from the skilled labor workforce, including electricians, farmers, ranchers, HVAC installers, and others who are on the front lines of rewiring our infrastructure.Nathanael Johnson has spent the past 18 years as an award-winning journalist who has written features for Harper's Magazine, New York Magazine, Wall Street Journal, and produced stories for the likes of NPR and This American Life. Recently, Nathanael has switched career paths and now is training to become an electrician. In the past, we've chatted with folks on the show who've spent decades in the trades, but we wanted to hear the story of someone who's earlier in their journey in the field. More interestingly, we wanted to understand the motivations behind someone's decision to make the switch from a computer job to a skills trade job, and the joys, misconceptions, challenges and rewards that come with it.In this episode, we cover: [01:26]: How Yin and Nathanael got connected [02:37]: Nathanael's early exposure to nature and the “aesthetics of environmentalism”[05:13]: His liberal arts education and cutting through jargon in academia[07:43]: Starting his career as a newspaper reporter in rural Idaho[13:13]: Nathanael's journey to becoming a climate reporter for Grist[15:01]: Falling out of love with journalism and discovering electrical work [17:51]: The clear and immediate impact of electrical work vs. uncertain impact of writing[21:18]: Fears about switching careers and dealing with internalized class stigma [25:29]: How we can “dewire” cultural stigmas about skilled trade careers[28:26]: The need to rebuild the educational pipeline and infrastructure for trade careers[30:33]: The issue of representation and redefining what an electrician looks like[32:20]: Nathanael's advice on testing new career paths[35:41]: Pay, schedule, job security, and work-life balance as an electrician[41:47]: Nathanael's favorite moments as an electrician so farRecommended Resources: Scott Brown Carpentry (YouTube Channel)Get connected: Nathanael TwitterYin Twitter / LinkedInMCJ Podcast / Collective*You can also reach us via email at info@mcjcollective.com, where we encourage you to share your feedback on episodes and suggestions for future topics or guests.Episode recorded on March 28, 2023. 

Hamilton and the other Framers envisioned a Supreme Court that was immune to public opinion, the arguments of presidents and senators, and great wealth alike - but today's GOP has a different plan… China agrees with DeSantis and a few other states - library books should not have "unhealthy ideas." What's unhealthy? Whatever the dictator decides. Speaking of China - Comedy firm gets a $2 minion fine for a military joke - Is this giving Desantis any idea of next steps? Phil Ittner - Veteran War Correspondent based in Kyiv, Ukraine. Plus, a bit of humanity hits the war in Ukraine.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Greg in LA binge on Youtube here! Sean Cunningham on InstagramLonesome Motel on InstagramOur Episode on YoutubeNFT episode for funding filmmakersHolly Shannon's WebsiteZero To Podcast on AmazonHolly Shannon's new Youtube Channel, Subscribe here!Holly Shannon, InstagramHolly Shannon, LinkedinHolly Shannon, TwitterBuy Me a Coffee 

Progressives back Mike Johnston in Denver mayor's race | Colorado Gov. Jared Polis signs slate of clean energy bills | $11B in federal funds allocated for rural clean energy projects | Missing and Murdered Indigenous Peoples crisis commission meets in Flagstaff, AZ (WARNING: contains graphic descriptions of violence) | Colorado Gov. Jared Polis signs nation's first Right-to-Repair law | Violent Femmes perform their self-titled debut in Denver, Austin and Houston this week.  Song playsIntro by hostWelcome to High Country - politics in the American West. My name is Sean Diller; regular listeners might know me from Heartland Pod's Talking Politics, every Monday.Support this show and all the work in the Heartland POD universe by going to heartlandpod.com and clicking the link for Patreon, or go to Patreon.com/HeartlandPod to sign up. Membership starts at $1/month, with even more extra shows and special access at the higher levels. No matter the level you choose, your membership helps us create these independent shows as we work together to change the conversation.Alright! Let's get into it: COLORADO NEWSLINE: Progressives back Mike Johnston in Denver mayor's raceBY: CHASE WOODRUFF - MAY 15, 2023 4:00 AMAs ballots begin to hit mailboxes for Denver's June 6th runoff election, Johnston and Kelly Brough, the other top-two finisher in April's first round of voting - have rolled out a veritable smorgasbord of endorsement announcements.Former mayoral candidates Ean Thomas Tafoya, Terrance Roberts, Jim Walsh, Al Gardner and Leslie Herod all endorsed Mike Johnston. Rep Herod (who was my preferred choice for mayor) said “Having shared countless debate and forum stages with Mike over the past months, I know that he has the passion, commitment, and vision to tackle Denver's toughest problems. Mike and I share the value of public service, hard work, and doing right by our communities, and I am excited to work with him to deliver on our progressive vision for Denver.”Meanwhile, Brough, the former Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce head who secured her spot in the runoff with just over 20% of the first-round vote, has picked up endorsements from Democratic state Sen. Chris Hansen as well as Thomas Wolf, an investment banker who campaigned on harsh anti-homelessness policies and received 1% of the vote for Mayor in April.Sen. Hansen said “Denver needs a proven executive — Kelly Brough is the leader we can trust to deliver results. It's going to take all of us to tackle Denver's biggest challenges, and I'm proud to join Kelly's team.”Brough also picked up endorsements from Democratic state Rep. Alex Valdez and former Tattered Cover CEO Kwame Spearman, both of whom entered the mayor's race but later withdrew. Brough and Johnston emerged from the crowded field of mayoral candidates after becoming by far the race's two best-funded candidates, each raising about $1MM in direct contributions and benefiting from millions more in outside super PAC expenditures from billionaires and real-estate interests.After a first round that featured a wide range of perspectives and ideologies, the runoff campaign has featured few stark disagreements on policy between the two candidates, both of whom are veteran figures in Colorado's centrist political establishment.Brough served as then-Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper's chief of staff from 2006 to 2009, then led the conservative-leaning Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce for 12 years before stepping down ahead of her mayoral run. Some of her top endorsers include former Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter and former Denver Mayor Wellington Webb, both Democrats.On Friday, she touted the endorsement of the Greater Metro Denver Ministerial Alliance, a coalition of clergy and civil rights leaders in the city's Black community. Pastor Paul Burleson, the Alliance's vice president of political affairs, said that Brough's experience is key to her appeal.Brough has also picked up endorsements from the Denver Police Protective Association and other unions representing law enforcement officers and firefighters. She was one of the only candidates in the mayor's race to endorse a return of “qualified immunity,” a legal doctrine that bars people from suing law enforcement officers in their individual capacity. Colorado lawmakers, led by Herod, passed a landmark police reform bill that abolished qualified immunity in the wake of George Floyd's murder in 2020. - Just one reason I love Leslie Herod.During his time in the state Senate, Mike Johnston became one of the state's leading champions of education reform, a movement that has galled teachers' unions and progressives who've accused him of undermining public education. From 2020 to 2022 he was the CEO of Gary Community Ventures, a Denver-based philanthropic organization founded by oil tycoon Sam Gary.Though hardly a progressive firebrand himself, Johnston spoke at Wednesday's event of the coalition he hopes to build as mayor. Along with former mayoral rivals, he received endorsements from Democratic state Sens. Julie Gonzales (another legislator I have tremendous respect for) and James Coleman (who is my state senator but someone whom I don't know much about), adding to a list of supporters that also includes former Mayor Federico Peña and former Colorado House Speaker Terrance Carroll.Rep. Leslie Herod said “Make no mistake: We are the progressives in this race, and we have chosen to back Mike. We are the candidates who have consistently spoken about putting people over structures, putting people over businesses — people always first.”So for my part I'll be following State Sen. Julie Gonzales and Rep. Leslie Herod, voting for Mike Johnston.Final thought: Johnston might not be seen as progressive, but if he wins this election assembling a progressive coalition to bear a developer/business-backed candidate in Kelly Brough, then progressives should absolutely have a strong voice in the Johnston administration if he wants to keep his job. But first he's got to win.COLORADO NEWSLINE: Gov. Jared Polis signs slate of clean energy measures, utility regulation billBY: CHASE WOODRUFF - MAY 11, 2023 5:36 PMGov. Jared Polis has signed into law a bill that commits Colorado for the first time to a net-zero greenhouse gas emissions target, along with other measures to address spiking utility rates and the state's long-term energy future.Flanked by Democratic lawmakers and state energy officials, Polis signed Senate Bill 23-16 at an event at the Denver Botanic Gardens. The bill, a wide-ranging package of reforms aimed at boosting clean energy efforts in a variety of industries, was approved on party-line votes by Democratic majorities in the General Assembly just before its adjournment on May 8.SB-16 sets a statutory goal of a 100% reduction in Colorado's greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, revising that target upwards from a 90% goal set by the Legislature in 2019. It's the first time the state has formally established the net-zero goal that scientists with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have said is necessary to avert the most catastrophic impacts of global warming.To get there, the bill contains what sponsors called a “potpourri” of measures to accelerate the transition to clean energy, including sections that streamline the process for the installation of electric transmission lines and rooftop solar panels; stricter requirements on large insurance companies to assess climate risk; tax credits for the purchase of electric-powered lawn equipment; and more authority for the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission to regulate carbon capture projects.COGCC chair Jeff Robbins applauded the bill's efforts to encourage carbon capture, which he called “critical as a tool in addressing climate change.”“The COGCC is well poised with its resources and regulatory understanding to now help carbon storage be deployed safely and responsibly in Colorado,” Robbins said in a press release.Gov. Polis also signed House Bill 23-1252, which establishes a new state grant program for geothermal energy projects and requires large natural-gas utilities to develop emissions-reducing “clean heat plans.”Senate Bill 23-291, a package of reforms to state utility regulations, and House Bill 23-1234, a bipartisan measure aimed at streamlining permitting and inspection processes for solar projects were also both signed into law. SB-291 emerged from hearings held earlier this year by the Joint Select Committee on Rising Utility Rates, a special panel of lawmakers convened by Democratic leaders following sharp increases in many Coloradans' utility bills in 2022.It directs the state's Public Utilities Commission to more closely scrutinize how privately-owned utilities manage volatility in natural-gas prices, the main culprit in rate increases that caused the average monthly payment for customers of Xcel Energy, Colorado's largest utility, to rise by more than 50% last year. Other provisions in the bill are aimed at assessing the long-term future of natural gas infrastructure as more homes and businesses transition to all-electric heating and cooking appliances.In a press release, Advanced Energy United, an industry group representing clean energy companies, said the legislation creates a “national model” for dealing with volatility in the natural gas market.“This bill will help make Colorado's energy system more affordable long-term, and should be seen as a model for states across the country on how to manage high gas prices and a transition to cost-saving alternatives to gas, like high-efficiency heat pumps, rooftop solar and battery storage,” said Emilie Olson, a senior principal at Advanced Energy United.House Bill 23-1272, creates or extends a variety of clean energy tax credits, including incentives for the purchase of electric vehicles, e-bikes, electric heat pumps, industrial decarbonization technologies and more.Gov. Polis said “These exciting money-saving changes for Coloradans mean reliable, lower energy costs and good-paying jobs, as we continue to fuel the innovation that makes Colorado a national leader in clean energy. We are cutting red tape, creating good paying jobs and improving air quality as we continue to make bold progress towards achieving 100% renewable energy by 2040.”ARIZONA MIRROR: Rural electric co-ops to get $10.7B in USDA funds for clean energy grants, loansBY: JACOB FISCHLER - MAY 16, 2023 7:11 AMThe U.S. Department of Agriculture will begin to administer two loan and grant programs worth nearly $11 billion to boost clean energy systems in rural areas, administration officials said Tuesday. The programs are the New ERA program for rural electric cooperatives, and the PACE program for other energy providers. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said the funding “continues an ongoing effort to ensure that rural America is a full participant in this clean energy economy.”White House National Climate Advisor Ali Zaidi said, “Rural areas can have more difficulty than more urban ones in attracting private sector investment. The programs are intended to allow those rural areas to take advantage of an industry-wide trend to invest in clean energy production.He said, “There's a favorable wind blowing here. This allows rural communities to put up a sail.”The programs are meant to put rural electric cooperatives on equal footing with larger privately owned companies that have already put major funding into clean energy deployment.The programs represent the largest single funding effort for rural electrification since President Franklin Roosevelt signed the Rural Electrification Act in 1936.The money is meant not only to address the climate impacts of fossil fuel energy and reduce home energy costs, but to act as an economic engine for rural areas.Rural electric cooperatives are eligible for the New ERA program, and up to 25% of the funding in that program can be in the form of direct grants. Utilities can use the money to build renewable energy systems, zero-emission systems and carbon capture facilities.The USDA will begin to accept initial applications for funding on July 31. Applicants are expected to write more detailed proposals for funding after the USDA accepts their initial applications.The PACE program provides loans to renewable energy developers and electric service providers “to help finance large-scale solar, wind, geothermal, biomass, hydropower projects and energy storage in support of renewable energy systems,” the release said. The program is targeted to “vulnerable, disadvantaged, Tribal and energy communities,” the release said. It's in line with a Biden administration goal to allocate at least 40% of the overall benefits of certain federal spending to disadvantaged communities.The USDA can forgive up to 40% of most of the loans in the program. Up to 60% of loans to applicants in some U.S. territories and tribal communities can be forgiven.Initial applications for that program will open June 30.ARIZONA MIRROR:National commission on the MMIP crisis meets in Arizona to hear testimony, recommendationsBY: SHONDIIN SILVERSMITH - MAY 15, 2023 1:50 PMFive empty chairs sat at the front of the Not Invisible Act Commission hearing, each wrapped in a shawl, blanket or quilt representing a different group of individuals impacted by human trafficking or with a loved one who is missing or murdered.“We want to allow space for representing our relatives,” commission member Grace Bulltail said, noting the traditions in many Indigenous families to always preserve a space for absent loved ones. “We're doing that to honor our loved ones,” Bulltail said, explaining that, by putting the chairs there, the commission hearing was holding space for them.The chair wrapped in a red shawl with white and yellow handprints honored the missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls. The chair wrapped in a red, orange, bridge, and white Native design shawl with a black blazer draped over it was to honor the missing and murdered Indigenous men and boys. Another chair was wrapped in a light blue, white and purple quilt. Pinned to the quilt was a picture of 11-year-old Ashlynne Mike, a Navajo girl who was abducted and killed on the Navajo Nation in 2016. This chair honored Indigenous children.The chair wrapped in a maroon shawl with floral designs honored the LGBTQI and two-spirit Indigenous community. The chair wrapped in a brown Pendleton honored Indigenous veterans.The Not Invisible Act Commission, organized by the U.S. Department of the Interior,  held a public hearing at the Twin Arrows Casino near Flagstaff to hear testimony and recommendations from victims and families impacted by human trafficking and the missing and murdered Indigenous peoples crisis. The commission also heard from local tribal leaders and advocates. The Not Invisible Act was passed into law in October 2020, establishing the commission as a cross-jurisdictional advisory committee of federal and non-federal members, including law enforcement, tribal leaders, federal partners, service providers, family members of missing and murdered individuals, and survivors.The meeting at Twin Arrows was the commission's third public hearing. This summer, it has four more planned in Minnesota, northern California, New Mexico and Montana. The hearings are being held in communities impacted most by the MMIP crisis.Commissioners heard emotional testimony from Seraphine Warren and Pamela Foster as they shared their experiences of losing a loved one and advocated for change.Ms. Warren is the niece of Ella Mae Begay, a Navajo woman who went missing from her home in Sweetwater, Arizona, on the Navajo Nation on June 15, 2021. Warren continued to advocate for not only her aunt but all Indigenous people.Speaking through tears, she told her aunt's story. “I know it wasn't her legacy to be stolen or to be murdered,” Warren said. “Just because she isn't here doesn't mean she can't be part of change.”Begay is still missing, but there have been developments in her case. In March, Preston Henry Tolth, 23, of New Mexico, was indicted by a federal grand jury in Phoenix for assault and carjacking.The indictment alleges that, on June 15, 2021, Tolth assaulted Begay, resulting in serious bodily injury, according to the U.S. Department of Justice. Tolth then took her Ford F-150 pickup truck and drove it from Arizona to New Mexico with the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury to Begay.Warren said during Tolth's arraignment hearing on April 7 in Flagstaff that she heard details about the night her aunt went missing that she was not ready for.Warren, in tears, told the commission that Tolth told federal agents that he “snapped” and struck her in the face multiple times, causing her to bleed from the nose and mouth. Tolth told authorities that he wasn't sure if she was dead, Warren said, and when he drove away, he said he regretted hitting her, since all he wanted was the truck.Tolth is being held in custody and is expected to go to trial later in May.Pamela Foster is the mother of Ashlynne Mike, the 11-year-old Navajo girl abducted and killed on the Navajo Nation in 2016. Foster has been at the forefront of advocacy efforts for Indigenous children and people since she lost her daughter. On the afternoon of May 2, 2016, Ashlynne Mike and her 9-year-old brother, Ian Mike, didn't make it home from school. When they got off the school bus in Shiprock, New Mexico, on the Navajo Nation, a predator tricked them into getting into his van by promising them a ride home.Hours later, passersby found Ian Mike wandering alone in the area. Police located Ashlynne Mike's body on May 3, 2016, and discovered she had been sexually assaulted, strangled, and bludgeoned repeatedly with a tire iron.She said, “I miss my daughter every single day. I became a voice for my daughter the moment I received word that her life was taken from her.”She talked about how the system failed when her children were missing in 2016. She said that May 1 to May 6 is a nightmare for her every year, because she relives what happened to her children.Foster talked about the hours from when her children disappeared to when they found her daughter's body; she ran into countless obstacles that left her without support.“It was very hard to sit there and know that there were no resources available for my children,” Foster said. “I absolutely had nothing.”She said local law enforcement was not adequately trained to handle child abductions. There was no clear communication between local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies. Instead of searching for her children, Foster said they were trying to figure out exactly what protocols were needed to start looking.“Time was lost,” Foster said, and they did not send out an AMBER Alert until the following day. Foster recalled the alert went out at 2 a.m., and she said that helped no one because not many people were awake then. She remembers hearing officers from the neighboring jurisdictions tell her they couldn't go out to look for her daughter until they were given the clearance to do so by the Navajo Nation Police Department. Foster said it frustrated her how long it took for that to happen. She said the anger and hurt about what happened to Ashlynne led her to be a voice for her daughter.“I promised her I would do something for all of our other Indigenous children. To give them the protection that they need so they don't go through the same thing.”Foster has led many grassroots efforts to support Indigenous children, including advocating and petitioning for the AMBER Alert system to include Indian Country.Foster said she wanted to change, and she knew the justice system in Indian Country needed to be updated, so she focused her efforts on the AMBER Alert system. Her advocacy resulted in the Ashlynne Mike AMBER Alert in Indian Country Act of 2018, which makes tribes eligible for AMBER Alert grants to integrate into state and regional AMBER Alert communication plans.“I always say that I've never received justice for what happened to my daughter because nothing can bring her back,” Foster said. “There will never be justice, but we can learn how to move forward in changing laws to make things better for our people.”The goal of the hearing was for the federal commissioners to listen and hear recommendations on the best course of action for the MMIP crisis. Commissioners will use the suggestions to develop their final report for the Department of Interior.Foster's big recommendation was not only geared at the commissioners, but other attendees of the hearing. She encouraged them to tell their tribal leaders to receive the AMBER Alert in Indian Country Act training. “It is free,” she said, adding that it is a vital program for Indigenous communities because it will train police officers and social workers from the tribe. Because tribes are sovereign nations, the Department of Justice has to receive a request in order to run the training on tribal land: “Have your tribal leaders request this training for your community because the children are our next generation,” Foster said. “There's still a lot of tribes that need to be trained.”When Seraphine Warren was finished sharing her aunt's story, she laid out her recommendations. “Transparency and swift action is key,” she said, “which means that when a person is missing, law enforcement should immediately inform all jurisdictions and issue press releases to media channels to inform the public.”“Family members need to be regularly and constantly updated with the progress of the investigation, and families should be prioritized if any remains are found in any jurisdiction.” Some of the other recommendations included allowing families to hire private investigators, providing them access to case files, supporting families in organizing their task force, providing families with constant and reliable access to grief counseling services, medical attention, financial and legal assistance, and safe housing for families of missing or murdered loved ones. ASSOCIATED PRESS: If you're not first, you're last. DENVER (AP) — Sitting in front of a hulking red tractor, Democratic Gov. Jared Polis signed a bill Tuesday making Colorado the first state to ensure farmers can fix their own tractors and combines with a “right to repair” law — which compels manufacturers to provide the necessary manuals, tools, parts and software farmers would need.Colorado, home to high desert ranches and sweeping farms on the plains, took the lead on the issue following a nationwide outcry from farmers that manufacturers blocked them from making fixes and forced them to wait precious days or even weeks for an official servicer to arrive — delays that hurt profits.While farmers wait and their increasingly high-tech tractors or combines sit idle, a hailstorm could decimate an entire crop. Or, a farmer could miss the ideal planting window for their crops to grow.Lawmakers in at least 10 other states have introduced similar legislation, including in Florida, Maryland, Missouri, New Jersey, Texas and Vermont. But Colorado has taken the lead. At the signing ceremony Tuesday afternoon, under a light drizzle of rain, Gov. Polis said: “This bill will save farmers and ranchers time and money and support the free market in repair” before exclaiming, “first in the nation!”Behind the governor and arrayed farmers and lawmakers sat a red Steiger 370 tractor owned by a farmer named Danny Wood. Wood's tractor has flown an American flag reading “Farmers First,” and it has been one of two of his machines to break down, requiring long waits before servicers arrived to enter a few lines of computer code, or make a fix that Wood could have made himself.As the signing ceremony ended, Gov. Polis and Rep. Brianna Titone, who ran the bill in the state House, climbed inside the tractor for a photo as the ceremony ended.Great job, Rep. Titone! Huge win for this up-and-coming legislator. When I first saw her speak announcing her initial candidacy in 2017, I didn't know what to expect. Honestly, I didn't expect a lot, and I didn't particularly expect her to even win. And then, winning that seat was just the first of many instances where I've seen her demonstrate a level of depth, grit, and smarts that rival any of her peers. Great job Rep. Titone, you rock. CONCERT PICK OF THE WEEK: Violent Femmes - performing their self-titled album - Levitt Pavilion in Denver on Sunday May 21. The cult favorite folk punk band from Milwaukee is celebrating 40 years since the release of their first album in 1983. More info at vfemmes.comWelp, that's it for me! From Denver I'm Sean Diller. Original reporting for the stories in today's show comes from Colorado Newsline, Arizona Mirror, Denver Post, Associated Press and Denver's Westword.Thank you for listening! See you next time.

Guests: Vice President Kamala Harris, Dr. Marshall Shepherd, and Dr. Isaiah BoldenAll of us Weather Geeks know how important our changing climate is for the future of our world. It is going to shape our lives and our children's lives if we do not take action soon, and that action needs to be more than on a personal level. We need our government bodies all the way up to the White House to take action. We had the amazing opportunity to sit down with Vice President Kamala Harris and Dr. Isaiah Bolden from Georgia Tech back in February to have a roundtable discussion on climate change and how the Presidential office plans to address it.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.