Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

A huge 89% majority of the world’s people want stronger action to fight the climate crisis but feel they are trapped in a self-fulfilling “spiral of silence” because they mistakenly believe they are in a minority, research suggests.

Making people aware that their pro-climate view is, in fact, by far the majority could unlock a social tipping point and push leaders into the climate action so urgently needed, experts say.

The data comes from a global survey that interviewed 130,000 people across 125 countries and found 89% thought their national government “should do more to fight global warming”.

The existence of a silent climate majority across the planet is supported by several separate analyses. Other studies demonstrate a clear global appetite for action, from citizens of rich nations strongly supporting financial support for poorer vulnerable countries and even those in petrostates backing a phase-out of coal, oil and gas. A decades-long campaign of misinformation by the fossil fuel industry is a key reason the climate majority has been suppressed, researchers said.

Prof Teodora Boneva, at the University of Bonn, Germany, who was part of the team behind the 125-nation survey, said: “The world is united in its judgment about climate change and the need to act. Our results suggest a concerted effort to correct these misperceptions could be powerful intervention, yielding large, positive effects.”

https://archive.ph/hR3ws

Interior Department officials are considering scaling back the boundaries of national monuments in the West to encourage energy development on public lands.

Access options:

• gift link - registration required
• archive.today

Comic story by Eleri Harris

Amid tariff threats from the US, energy and economic security are key issues in Canada's federal election.

Climate researchers argue their science has advanced enough to directly link emissions from particular companies to damages from specific extreme weather events

“Many of the barriers to these cases are not scientific but political or legal,”

There is no guarantee a court would accept the details of this methodology either, says Myles Allen at the University of Oxford, who proposed more than 20 years ago that climate science may eventually make it possible to sue emitters for damages. “Will the courts accept evidence of a statistical link between annual mean temperature and the impacts of extreme heat, as presented in this study, when it comes to attributing causes of the harm done by a specific heatwave? Some may.”

Australia is heading to the polls for a general election on 3 May.

The paper is here

Not my favorite source, but the only one with coverage of this right now.

China’s Xi Jinping and the EU’s Ursula von der Leyen were among the leaders on a private video call organized by the United Nations.

255 grams per week. That's the short answer to how much meat you can eat without harming the planet. And that only applies to poultry and pork.

Beef cannot be eaten in meaningful quantities without exceeding planetary boundaries, according to an article published by a group of DTU researchers in the journal Nature Food. So says Caroline H. Gebara, postdoc at DTU Sustain and lead author of the study."

Our calculations show that even moderate amounts of red meat in one's diet are incompatible with what the planet can regenerate of resources based on the environmental factors we looked at in the study. However, there are many other diets—including ones with meat—that are both healthy and sustainable," she says.