New Year NEW CLIMATE!

SUMMARY: Why the wild weather & floods across N. Hemisphere, rain at N. Pole? Then Alex talks with David Montgomery, author of "Dirt The Erosion of Civilizations", with co-author Anne Bikle, new book "The Hidden Half of Nature: The Microbial Roots of Life and Health". Radio Ecoshock 160106

Welcome to Radio Ecoshock in this new year of 2016. In this program I'll talk with two guests who tell us about the erosion of civilizations, climate answers in the soil, and the danger of killing off your own ecology - of microbes in your body. But first in this new year of 2016, I need a little time to talk with you.

Download or listen to this Radio Ecoshock show in CD Quality (56 MB) or Lo-Fi (14 MB) Or listen on Soundcloud right now!



Image courtesy endoftheamericandream.com

AWE AND DREAD

I suppose I knew it would come to this. We've just flashed past another awful marker toward a new climate age. At the end of 2015, the hottest year ever recorded, it rained, in the 24 hour darkness, at the North Pole.

Your remember where you were on September 11, 2001. You knew it was a giant wave, a marker where nothing would ever be the same. Scientists around the world felt the same dread and awe in 2007, when the Arctic ice melted back, revealing a dark sea to the sky for the first time in many thousands of years, maybe even in a million years. It wasn't supposed to happen in this century. We knew then, the Arctic would never recover. The pendulum swung toward the great melting. More heat from the sun would be absorbed by the planet, changing the energy balance not just in the Arctic, but everywhere.

We've run interviews with scientists like Dr. Jennifer Francis of Rutgers, explaining how the loss of that white shield at the top of the world, and a warming Arctic, has changed the Jet Stream. With less difference between the polar cold and the tropics, those high atmospheric winds have morphed from a powerful West-to-East stream, to a meandering river. That river has bends that tend to freeze over regions, and extending the breadth of continents and beyond. As Paul Beckwith has told us, what you get on the ground depends on which side of the stream you are on. It can be extra hot in the West, and extra snowy in the East, or visa versa.

Lately in the northern Hemisphere, we have not had the record-breaking hurricanes that slammed into North America in 2005. We have had straight-running power winds, called "Derechos". Multiple massive hurricanes, called typhoons in the Southern Hemisphere, hit East Asia this year. The Philippines was raked over, time after time.

What the Northern Hemisphere experienced in late 2015 leads to this quote from Dr. James Hansen, in his book "Storms of My Grandchildren". He wrote about " ‘continent-sized frontal storms packing the strength of hurricanes.". Robert Scribbler reminded me of that.

Hansen writes about such mega-storms as coming in the future, in the next generation. I say we are seeing it now. In fact, we just experienced another transcontinental storm, stretching from California beyond Scandinavia, with waves reaching Russian Siberia.

HOT OCEANS DRIVE WEATHER WEIRDNESS

This story is written in heat maps of the ocean, as measured from satellites. Scientists say up to 90% of the excess heat created by a more carbon-rich atmosphere has been soaked up by the oceans. That's a slow process, slow to heat, and slow to release. With that buffer, there is at least a 30 year delay for the impacts of our carbon emissions. The climate disruption we are feeling now is from rising greenhouse gas emissions in the 1980's. We've poured in almost as much again since then.

[image: earth.nullschool.net]

The oceans of the world communicate, slowly, sometimes at great depth, using the system known as "the great conveyor belt". The seas have been hot, and getting hotter, around Australia, the Philippines, Indonesia, and in East Asia generally. That heat has been moving downward toward the depths for about 15 years, since the last great El Nino of 1997/98. It mixes with colder waters below, which rising, create the La Nina weather systems we've taken for granted in this new century.

That cycle has to break. It always does. Now we have El Nino, but with the hotter seas, it's El Nino on steroids. It's the strongest El Nino recorded since the development of science.

You will hear endless collection of weather people on television explaining the floods, and soon snow storms, and even the strange warming in Eastern North America, on El Nino. That's why the cherry blossoms bloomed all up the East Coast. That's why folks in Phildelphia wore shorts and tee shirts on Christmas Day.

I've seen a report that out of over 200 local and national news casts monitored, only one even talked about the possible role of global warming. The other suspect, and notice we are never the suspects, is called "changes in the Jet Stream". It's true, but why don't they ask, why don't we ask, WHY is this such a strong El Nino? WHY has the Jet Stream changed. Why is the weather so weird, and why is never going to be normal again?

Usually, scientists tell us El Nino has little impact on the Atlantic Ocean. It is an affair of the Pacific. And yet we now see storms that blow over Texas, Missouri, and eastwards, seeming to continue on. In just days there are record winds in Iceland, and still more flooding across Ireland, Scotland, England, and Scandinavia.

In those ocean heat maps, we can see raging heat in the seas off New England. It's been so hot, the species are changing. It's still relatively warmer this winter. But that warmer water is being pushed away from Greenland by a new phenomenon that will stay with us for centuries. We now realize that massive meltwater from Greenland has created a pond of cold water in the very North Atlantic. Like putting ice into a drink, the ocean there is colder than it was, even with global warming.

So where are the hot waters of the Gulf Stream to go? They are pushed lower, heading toward Europe. The clash of the Greenland cold blob, and these record-hot waters, create mega-storms, and a storm track that is battering the British Isles again this winter. Centuries-old towns, that have not flooded since the Middle Ages, are flooded now. Historic bridges have washed away. In England, they call this storm "Frank", but it stretches from Spain to the North Pole.

Yes the mania to contain everything in concrete has had an effect. All those new suburbs and their roads, all the moors drained to raise grouse for the rich - all our activities have disturbed nature's buffers for heavy rains. Does any of that really matter when more than a foot of rain drops down from the sky in just 24 hours? No one alive in Great Britain has seen anything like this.

CLIMATE INSANITY: SUMMER IN THE ARCTIC WINTER

It doesn't stop there, or even with the big floods in Norway. The heated waters are pouring up the Norwegian coast and into the Arctic, above Finland and Russia. There is a rural inhabited area in Central-Eastern Siberia called Khatanga. According to Wikipedia, the previous December hight for Khatanga was -.2 C (31.6 F), and the average high in December is -25.5 C, or -13 F. Blogger Robin Wenstra tells us that there, in the Arctic Circle, this December it was 79 degrees Fahrenheit, or 26 degrees Celsius. I can't begin to tell you how insane and how impossible that is.

Here I'm just going to quote from Robert Scribbler's blog. Nobody can say it better.

"Unprecedented doesn’t even begin to describe rain over Arctic sea ice above the 80 degree North Latitude line on the evening of Tuesday, December 29, 2015. It’s something we’d rarely see during summer time. But this rain is falling through the black of polar night during the coldest time of the year.

There, over the Arctic sea ice today, the rains began in winter time.

As the first front of warm air proceeded over the ice pack to the north of Svalbard, the rains fell through 35-40 degree (F) air temperatures. It splattered upon Arctic Ocean ice that rarely even sees rain during summer-time. Its soft pitter-patter a whisper that may well be the sound to mark the end of a geological age.

For we just don’t see rain over Arctic sea ice north of Greenland during Winter time. Or we used to not. But the warmth that liquid water falling through the black of what should be a bone-cold polar night represents something ominous. Something ushered to our world by human fossil fuel industry’s tremendous emission of heat trapping gasses. Gasses that in the range of 400 ppm CO2 and 485 ppm CO2e are now strong enough to begin to roll back the grip of Winter. Gasses, that if they keep being burned until we hit a range between 550-650 ppm CO2 (or equivalent) will likely be powerful enough to wipe out Winter as we know it entirely over the course of long and tumultuous years of painful transition.

What does the beginning of the end of Winter sound like? It’s the soft splash of rain over Arctic Ocean sea ice during what should be its coldest season."

CLIMATE EVENTS GREATER THAN ANY TERRORISM

So you see, that is a 911 moment that hardly anyone sees. In fact, it's far greater than mere terrorism, or human wars over religion and oil. At Chrismas 2015, we saw "the beginning of the end of winter."

I also suspected the time would come when I could just rebroadcast old Radio Ecoshock shows, since the truth about climate change is already known, already told, and now already come. I said what we've just seen is another transcontinental storm. That's because I first noticed one in 2006, the year I began this radio show. I had to dig that out of the Radio Ecoshock archives on our web site. I think you'll agree it's eerily familiar, except now we've had another ten years of very driven science, to explain why these things are happening.

So here it is: a few minutes from the Radio Ecoshock show in late 2006, as I describe a transcontinental storm, that sounds so much like today.

Audio "Stormy Future" here. Blog here (posted in early 2007)

PAINFUL TO KNOW

In a way, it's painful to make this radio show. I hope it's not too painful to hear. For whatever strange reason, it hurts me to think of rain falling in the winter Arctic. I know that means more people flooded out of their peaceful homes, or blown out of them, further south. I know that means more millions of trees will die in California from the drought, including some of the ancient giants. I know that farmers will struggle, and we will pay more for what can be run through the weather gauntlet. I know it gets harder and worse. I know too much.

Over Christmas I played with my grandson. We made towers where marbles roll down through mazes. We read stories about lions and elephants. Will they still exist when he's grown? Will everything around him be tossed about by fires, strange frosts, weird rains?

What will I tell him if we give up, and stop trying to save what's left? What will you tell the children, that you did during the great climate crisis?

NEAR LOSS OF A CLIMATE WARRIOR

All this was driven deeper by the sudden news that over Christmas we nearly lost a powerful climate warrior. You may remember how Daphne Wysham organized the conference call of Mayors and activists against building more fossil fuel infrastructure. If you missed it, download or listen to this 14 minute report from Mayors and activists, as edited for Radio Ecoshock here.

For eight years Daphne hosted the syndicated radio show "Earthbeat". She recommended Radio Ecoshock to those stations, helping to make Ecoshock what it is today. Daphne has been fighting to save the climate from her new home in Portland Oregon.

Just before Christmas, Daphne and her partner suddenly found themselves plunging into a cold mountain river, their car sinking fast. She was in the water, gulping air from a tiny pocket, for long minutes, before a Sheriff's deputy managed to rescue her. Both Daphne and her partner were air-lifted to a Reno hospital. Both are going to recover. Daphne has already declared another year of continuing battle to prevent catastrophic climate change. We need her.

So life is short and tenuous. We have a few thousand years of human history behind us, and millenia yet to come. What changes will we leave, in our short visit here on Earth? I shudder to imagine what our descendants will think of us, as we rush to buy more new things, to fly off on vacations, to waste away the world. Or did we strive to localize food without petrochemicals? Did we walk or bike more than drive? Did we use social media and circles of friends to create allies? Is this the year, after the polar rain, after the emergence of transcontinental storms, that we break out of the deadly paradigm of the old fossil age?

You decide what you will do with your life and powers. I'll keep making radio, keep talking with scientists and activists. I'll wrap up this selfish little chat with a powerful comment left on the Radio Ecoshock blog, following last week's optimistic talk by scientist and author Tim Flannery.

NOT REALLY CHANGING ANYTHING...

Listener Wanda Harding wrote:

"I would like to be positive, but, it seems to me, that all these "solutions" are dreamed up to allow for the current, CAPITALISTIC SYSTEM TO CONTINUE... when ...and I am going to say it this way... WE KNOW THAT IS A REALLY BIG PART OF THE PROBLEM.... I do not see ANY ideas about REDUCING CONSUMPTION...ESPECIALLY FOR THE RICH... LESS FLYING, LESS BUYING... we just want to keep buying cars and stupid plastic stuff... that we DO NOT NEED... I do not hear anything about coming up with a whole new global culture that is not about consuming....especially things we do not need and activities we shouldn't be doing... LIKE PROFESSIONAL SPORTS... NASCAR...

Also, Tim brings up women in developing countries needing birth control... yes, they do and I am all for them having it and I bet they really want it...

However, why do we allow the upper classes, the rich to do what ever they want? Why do they not have to change their lifestyles? ... Oh,wait, gee they have to buy an electric car.... when someone says that there is a law passed that states that anyone making over maybe, 150,000 a year IS LEGALLY REQUIRED TO PUT SOME TYPE OF RENEWABLE ENERGY SYSTEM ON THEIR HOME ... THEN, WE WILL START TO MAKE SOME PROGRESS.. When the rich or even the business sector, is legally limited to how much they can fly or even IF hey can fly... then, I'll believe we are making progress...

when we start to REALLY go in the direction of small farmers...and use THAT AS A JOBS PROGRAM...and give out land grants for people to do so, and then, the do not have to travel to work in rural areas, negating the necessity of a car... at least not having to run one every day... then, I'll start to believe we are making progress... so far, all we do is come up with GADGETS... we STILL DO NOT BELIEVE WE HAVE TO CHANGE OUR BEHAVIORS AND LIFE STYLES.. "

Thank you Wanda Harding.

You see how it is? I know many of my listeners are powerful and articulate people. I appreciate so much all the emails you send me. In fact, without listener tips, ideas and criticism, I simply could not continue this program. Radio Ecoshock has become listener-powered. Thank you for giving me another year of opportunity, as hard as the news may be.

I've got some great guests lined up for you, including a top scientist from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, to explain this year's Arctic report card. Let's get to our first guests of 2016 now.

"DIRT", CLIMATE, AND HEALTH - DAVID MONTGOMERY AND ANNE BILKE

We're going to take a big journey, into time, and across the globe. Eventually, we will arrive right back at the center of your own body. Our tour guides are Dr. David Montgomery from the University of Washington, and biologist Anne Bikle.

I know this team just released a new book "The Hidden Half of Nature: The Microbial Roots of Life and Health." That is a personal journey with a big message for us all.

But at the risk of being rude, I start with David. A recent guest, Benoit Lambert, and several listeners, asked for this interview, based on his previous book "Dirt The Erosion of Civilizations." That is coming back, not only because we may farm ourselves right out of soil in this century - but also because of the promise we could reverse the process of climate change, putting giant amounts of carbon back into the soil.

David is a "geomorphologist" at the University of Washington. He also won a $500,000 MacArthur Foundation “genius” award in 2008.

This is a deep interview. We talk about how formerly fertile places like Syria and Libya became soil poor, leading to the troubles we see today. It happened even in Colonial America, where tobacco farming stripped the south, forcing migration westward. Soil degradation is happening all over the world, but now there are few frontiers left with new soil to use up. "Dirt" as Montgomery wrote in his classic book, determines the course of civilizations, including the present one.

But the soil also holds promise as a place that can be enriched, rather than eroded with ploughing , agrichemicals and monocrops. The process of putting organic life, and life-supporting microbes back into the soil means enriched food possibilities, but also means carbon can be removed from the atmosphere on a large scale, helping to alleviate climate disruption. Montgomery says we could alleviate up to 15% of fossil fuel use by relatively simple changes to the way we farm.

Here is a fascinating talk by David Montgomery, on You tube. I took extensive notes for my own use, including this: "Agricultural soil loss is not because humanity farms but arises from how we farm." From Plato to Roosevelt, from his study of 1400 papers on soil loss, Montgomery gives the big picture.

In our Radio Ecoshock interview, we discuss how long carbon can stay in the soil, and the possible role of biochar, to keep it there longer.

Montgomery got a personal lesson on how to restore soil with his partner biologist Anne Bilke. They rejuvenated poor soil in their Seattle area yard for a garden, without using petrochemicals. That gave Montgomery more hope for the future of humans.

But as the two studied the astounding world of microbes in the soil, disaster struck. Anne was hit was a bad kind of cancer - which it turns out is also caused by microbes. There are life-giving microbes, and from a human perspective, life-threatening microbes.

Their second book "The Hidden Half of Nature: The Microbial Roots of Life and Health" describes a new threat, and a new hope for the health of all of us. Not only is petro-industrial culture killing off life in the soil, it's killing off the essential balance of microbes in our own bodies. Over-use of antibiotics is just one facet, added to chemical-laden food. This is information you need to know.

Download or listen to this Radio Ecoshock interview with David Montgomery and Anne Bilke (31 minutes) in either CD Quality (30 MB) or Lo-Fi (8 MB).

Follow David and Anne at their web site: dig2grow.com. That is also their Twitter handle: @dig2grow. Here is their Facebook page.



Thanks for listening again this year! There's lots more Radio Ecoshock to come.

Alex

Paris Climate Vs. A Real Future

Welcome to Radio Ecoshock. I have lots for you in this program. Two reports direct from Paris, plus an interview on the best, maybe the only, way to really save the future.

But first I want you to hear 10 minutes from the former NASA scientist who warned us all about climate change, back in 1988. Here is Dr. James Hansen speaking December 2nd, at a press conference at COP21, the big climate summit in Paris, as posted on You tube by envirobeat.com

Dr. James Hansen

Statement by Dr. James Hansen, at a COP21 Paris press conference, December 2, 2015. Video on You tube. Transcript by Alex Smith, with bold face and sub-titles added by Smith.

"The problem is that fossil fuels appear to the consumer to be the cheapest energy. They're not really cheapest because they don't include their full cost to society. They're partly subsidized, but mainly they don't include the effects of air pollution and water pollution on human health. If you child gets asthma, you have to pay the bill. The fossil fuel company doesn't. And the climate effects, which are beginning to be significant and will be much larger in the future are also not included in the price of the fossil fuels.

So the solution would be fairly straight-forward. Let's add in to the price of fossil fuels the total cost - which you can't do suddenly but you can do it gradually over time, so that you can... people have time to adjust.

So I argue this should be done - and it has to be across the board, across all fossil fuels - coal, oil, and gas, at the source, at the domestic mine or the port of entry. And I also argue that that money should be given to the public, given equal amount to all legal residents of the country. That way the person who does better than average in limiting their carbon footprint will actually make money. In fact two thirds of the people would come out ahead. And it would also address the growing income inequality in the world, which is occurring in almost all countries, because low income people would tend to have a lower carbon footprint. People who fly around the world and have big houses would pay more, but they can afford to do that.

That's a transparent, market-based solution, a conservative solution which stimulates the economy. The economic studies in the United States show that after ten years, if you had a ten dollars a ton of CO2 carbon fee, distributed the money to the public - after ten years if would reduce emissions thirty percent. And after twenty years, more than fifty percent. And it would spur the economy, creating more than three million new jobs.

[SOLVING THE INTERNATIONAL PROBLEM]

Furthermore, this is the only viable international approach. You cannot ask each of 190 countries to individually limit their emissions. What we have to do is have the price of fossil fuels honest. That requires only a few of the major players to agree 'Let's have a rising common carbon fee'. And those countries that don't want to have that fee, we'll put a border duty on those countries and furthermore we will rebate to our manufacturers that carbon fee when they export to a non-participating nation. This, economists agree, is a fair way to do it, and it could rapidly move us off of fossil fuels.

But what we are hearing, is that although Christiana Figueres says many have said we need a carbon price, and investment would be so much easier with a carbon price, but life is much more complex than that. So what we are talking about instead is the same old thing. The same old thing that was tried in Kyoto asking each country to promise 'oh I'll reduce my emissions, I will cap my emissions, I'll reduce them twenty percent' or whatever they decide they can do.

You know, in science when you do a well-controlled experiment, and get a well-documented result, you expect that if you do the experiment again, you are going to get the same result. So why are we talking about doing the same thing again? I don't like to use crude language, but I learned this from my mother, so I'll use it anyway. This is 'half-assed' and it's 'half-baked'.

"HALF-ASSED AND HALF-BAKED"

It's half-assed because there's no way to make it global. You have to beg each nation. So I went to Germany to speak with... I was hoping to speak to Merkl but I got cut off at Sigmar Garbriel, the Minister. He said 'Oh, we're gonna do cap and trade, cap and trade with offsets.' And I said 'But that won't work, we've tried that.' So I said 'What's the cap on India?' And he said 'We'll tighten our carbon cap.' Well Germany is now two percent of the world emissions. So him tightening the German carbon cap is not going to solve the problem. You've got to have something that will work globally.

And it's half-baked, because there's no enforcement mechanism.... You know what I hear is all the Ministers are coming here, the heads of state, and they are planning to clap each other on the back, and say 'Oh we're really doing great. This is a very successful conference, and we're going to address the climate problem.' Well if that's what happens then we're screwing the next generation, and the following ones. Because we're being stupid and doing the same thing again that we did eighteen years ago.

"WE CAN'T PRETEND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN"

So what's the effect? You know you try very hard and you reduce our nation's emissions. Or an individual reduces their emissions. One effect of that is to reduce the demand for the product, and keep the price low. As long as fossil fuels are dirt cheap, they will keep being used. Burning coal is like burning dirt. You just take a bulldozer and you can bulldoze it out of the ground. It's very cheap but it does not include it's cost to society. It's a very dirty fuel with some negative effects which we now understand very well. We can't pretend that we don't know what's going to happen, if we stay on this path.

This is the path we're on, you know. To pretend that what we're doing is having any effect... It might slow down the rate of growth, but that's not what's needed. Science tells us we have to reduce emissions rapidly. And furthermore, the economic studies show that if you put an honest price on carbon emissions, you would reduce emissions rapidly. But if you don't have that price on there, you are not going to reduce emissions. You will reduce emissions some place, but then it keeps the price low, so somebody else will burn it.

[Another panelist asks: And that economic study you are refering to also found that if you put ten dollars per ton, and increased it ten dollars per ton over ten years, what was the effect in jobs?]

James Hansen: Well in the case of the United States economy, that's where the study was done in detail, it was three million new jobs in ten years and a significant increased in GNP [Gross National Product]. We need energy. But people thinking 'Oh, we have to do less...' - yeah we should have energy efficiency, but that would be encouraged by a rising price.

[ENERGY SHIFT]

We do need energy. We need energy to raise the poor people out of poverty. That's the best way to keep population under control. Those countries that have become wealthy now have fertility rates that are below the replenishment level. And the reason these countries became wealthy is because they had energy, and that energy was fossil fuels. Unfortunately we can't continue to use that as the mechanism to get out of poverty.

We need clean energies. And the way to make that happen... You know, I've met with 'Captains of Industry' I call them - leaders of not only utilities but even oil companies. These people have children and grandchildren. They would like to be part of the solution. If the government would give them the right incentive, by putting this across-the-board rising carbon fee, they say they would change their investments and they could do it rapidly.

It's not that the problem can't be solved. But it's not being solved. And nothing that I've heard so far indicates that we're intending to ... it's not too complex. It's the simplest approach you could have: an honest, simple rising carbon fee."

End of transcript of James Hansen in a Paris press conference, Dec 2nd, 2015.

GRAB THIS RADIO ECOSHOCK SHOW NOW

Download or listen to this one hour Radio Ecoshock show in CD Quality or Lo-Fi

Use this short link to pass on the Lo-Fi version of the show with social media: http://tinyurl.com/pwa3bkx

Or listen on Soundcloud right now!



LINDSEY ALLEN, RAINFOREST ACTION NETWORK, REPORTS FROM PARIS

Lindsey Allen, Executive Director of RAN













Next up, Lindsey Allen, the Executive Director of the Rainforest Action Network, or RAN, dials in from Paris.

I was glad to talk to Lindsey, partly because world media has failed to report non-governmental actions and voices in Paris (giving us the impression the NGO's and aboriginal people are not even there - they are). And partly because the Rainforest Action Network has done some great climate work.

For example, RAN has led the pack in exposing which big banks are loaning out billions to fund the construction of new coal plants around the world. They are profiting from the destruction of the climate. Check out that campaign here.

During our phone interview, Lindsey reveals that the very bank that is funding so much of the United Nations Conference of the Parties (COP21) meeting in Paris - the French giant BNP Paribas - is one of the top funders for coal expansion around the world! Lindsey Allen says BNP Paribas has invested about 17 billion dollars in coal. That tells you a lot about the world we live in, and the UN Climate talks.

But yes, climate activists are in Paris, and they are speaking out, despite clamp-downs by French police in the name of anti-terrorism. I notice crowds are allowed to gather for memorials, and for sports events, but not to call for real climate action...Naomi Klein agrees, and calls for a big march in Paris anyway.

Listen to this interim report from Paris with Lindey Allen here.

A PARIS REPORT FROM SCIENTIST PAUL BECKWITH

Paul Beckwith has been a regular on Radio Ecoshock. He's the scientist with two Masters degrees, working on his PHD in climate science at the University of Ottawa, in Canada. Paul takes the late Stephen Schneider's call for activism by scientists very seriously. Paul has his own You tube channel with lots of great videos, a new web page, and an active Facebook following.

Don't miss some fine videos Paul took in Paris. These include a financial panel with UK Bank of England Governor Mark Carney and American billionaire Michael Bloomberg. Paul was encouraged to hear some billionaires and financial heavyweights are prepared for serious action on climate change. We talk about that.

Beckwith also recorded a Paris keynote presentation by Al Gore, found here.

One thing we briefly discuss is the effort by climate deniers to look like legitimate participants in the climate "debate". The Heartland Institute, which is partly funded by the infamous Koch Brothers, has organized a press event in Paris, with the usual suspects - scientists and others, some of whom are known to accept funding from fossil fuel companies in order to say carbon dioxide is great for us! See this hot Greenpeace expose of climate deniers admitting they get paid by Peabody coal and other fossil fuel interests.

Paul, and other at the hostel where he is staying, debated whether to go and expose the false science being presented - or would that just add the conflict that media is always looking for, and thus spread these falsehoods? My opinion is go ignore the extremists. Most of the world knows them for what they are - while climate damage is becoming much too obvious to ignore any longer.

Download or listen to this report from Paris by Paul Beckwith in CD Quality or Lo-Fi

Use this tiny url to share Paul's talk in Twitter or other social media: http://tinyurl.com/hs94gfc

BENOIT LAMBERT - THE BIOCHAR SOLUTION

Now it's time to talk about real solutions in the real world. This is part of my continuing coverage of ways to stuff carbon back into the soil, with nature-based agriculture and biochar.

After interviewing many guests and scientists, I've come to the conclusion that our best way out of the climate mess is to use different agricultural methods to sequester carbon back into the soil.

It's just common sense. We have too much carbon in the atmosphere already (at least 430 parts per million carbon equivalent, when we need to be below 350 parts per million to keep our current climate.) Where will be put the extra carbon from the atmosphere? We don't have the technology to put it into the oceans. We do know how to put it back into the soil, and into the deeper ground as biochar.

Benoit Lambert lived in Europe for a couple of decades, returning to Quebec Canada to found a company which advises on biochar, and related carbon capture technology. It's called Biochar Generation.

Benoit Lambert

As world politicians and their experts meet in Paris for the COP21 climate summit, most will seek industrial answers for what they see as an industrial problem. Perhaps, they'll hear about machines to capture carbon and feed it back through a maze of new pipelines to old wells. Dangerous geonengineering will be on the menu.

But they almost didn't hear about the least known source of greenhouse gases, and the single best solution to reducing carbon in the atmosphere. I'm talking about clearing land for food, industrial agriculture, and ways to put carbon back in the soil. All that wasn't even on the menu, until a recent move by France to put it there.

I didn't know the role of the French Agriculture Minister, Stefane Le Foll, or the special ambassador for France at COP21, Laurence Tubiana - until I heard it from Benoit.

Just to be clear, our current industrial farming uses loads of fossil fuel products, including fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides. It is a major SOURCE of greenhouse gas emissions, not a help. How big a factor is food production to the overall burden of greenhouse gases?

According to Wikipedia: "Food systems contribute 19%–29% of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, releasing 9,800–16,900 megatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO2e) in 2008. Agricultural production, including indirect emissions associated with land-cover change, contributes 80%–86% of total food system emissions, with significant regional variation."

So we need a huge turnaround in our food systems. First of all, we need to get to zero emissions farming. But that's just the start! Then we need to turn the food system into a carbon capture mechanism.

We discuss how long carbon stays in the soil, the carbon cycle, and the truly amazing role played by biochar. Benoit thinks Canada is the perfect country to start the biochar industry on a huge scale, with all the forest waste in the country.

Lambert also explains the French "4 out of 1000" campaign. Get more on that here. It could really save the world climate.

Others have already called this one of the most important Radio Ecoshock interviews.

Download or listen to this interview with Benoit Lambert in CD Quality or Lo-Fi

Use this tiny url to share the Benoit Lambert interview on social media, including Twitter: http://tinyurl.com/omrtuzf

My thanks to everyone who Tweeted about last week's show with Dr. Kevin Anderson. It literally went around the world. I also appreciate the listeners who continue to donate money to keep this show going. If you think you can help, find out how on this page.

I'm Alex Smith. Thank you for listening, and let's get together again next week.

TRUE VOICES

Welcome back to Radio Ecoshock. Last week's program "Facing the Harsh Realities of Now" with David Wasdell set records for radio and listeners on soundcloud. If you missed it - don't. David Wasdell makes his case that we are already committed to at least 6 degrees of global warming, plus dozens of meters higher seas. Grab it from my web site at ecoshock.org, or listen at souncloud.com/radioecoshock.

This week I've got a broad mix for you. Courtney White says we can capture carbon back into the soil, even if only 2 percent of the population act. I'll talk new science with Justin Mankin - how disappearing snow cover will impact people around the world. We wrap with octogenarian activist and author Peter Seidel, saying we still have time.

CLIMATE - LET'S NOT GIVE UP YET

Before we get to our guests, dozens of listeners wrote in, saying they were dismayed by the damning climate revelations by David Wasdell. While I agree with David, that our true situation has been downplayed by governments, media, and misplaced scientific caution, I also try to keep balance.

You may want to consider three more ideas. First:

The very high temperatures and sea level rise David describes would likely only be attained in a few hundred years from now. That might give us time to develop ways and technologies to drastically reduce greenhouse gases. We might manage to reduce greenhouse gas levels, say to 280 ppm as was the case in pre-industrial days.

Some glaciers would still melt (once they start they are hard to stop). So we would still get sea level rise. The oceans would continue to give off residual heat. However, temperatures could start to decline, decade by decade. By then of course, the world, and all living creatures would be greatly changed, I think.

Second: In the coming week or two, I hope to present some other points of view, and possible reasons to hope. You'll hear some of those voices in this program.

Third: Keep in mind some scientists, including climate scientists, disagree with David's conclusions. Wise as he is, David is not officially a climate scientist. His high sensitivity figures can be disputed. I'm still looking into that.

But yes, I found Wasdell's interview convincing and rather crushing. I'm still mulling it over, as we all must. The Wasdell show takes the record on Souncloud for the most Radio Ecoshock listeners ever.

Meanwhile, thanks for joining us, and on with the show!

Download or listen to this new Radio Ecoshock show in CD Quality (56 MB) or Lo-Fi (14 MB)

Or listen on Soundcloud right now!



Photo courtesy of the Guardian newspaper, UK.

COURTNEY WHITE: PUT DANGEROUS CARBON BACK IN THE SOIL!

You know carbon is already too high in the atmosphere for our own climate safety. Perhaps you've heard the biggest and best solution is to put carbon back in the soil. But what are we supposed to do - go shovel carbon into the lawn after work? Our next guest says organic carbon capture is not a job for most of us, although we can help.

In June of 2014, I asked author and activist Courtney White about his book "Soil, Grass and Hope". You can download or play that interview here, or read the blog about it here.

Now Courtney is back with a collection of inspiring stories which point to fundamental answers. It's called "Two Percent Solutions for the Planet".

From Santa Fe New Mexico, we welcome Courtney Whiteback to Radio Ecoshock. Courtney founded and runs a non-profit called the Quivira Coalition. I ask Courtney what "quivira" means: it is a Spanish word found on the old maps of the rough country now known as "New Mexico". I suppose it could literally mean "who has been there" - but essentially it means "an unknown country". What a handy word and concept. With humans dumping eons worth of carbon into the air in just 2 centuries, we are all headed into "unknown country".

When Courtney left the Sierra Club in the late 1990's, he was heading into unknown country for sure. He wanted to find common ground between environmentalism, ranchers, and farmers - a group formerly not known for deep friendship and working together. Instead of conflict, Courtney literally was searching for common ground, a place to move forward.

Now of course, it turns out both ranchers and farmers may hold the key to preventing the very worst of climate change. Even though this small group forms only two percent of the population of the United States, they could drag all of America's carbon emissions back into the soil.

We learned from our Ecoshock guest Alan Savory that changes in livestock management can turn practices from desertification into enrichment of nature, and particularly add more carbon to the soil. You can download or listen to that 24 minute Allan Savory interview here. Or read the blog about it, with more links, here.

Likewise, farmers who stop plowing the soil, to use cover crops and no-till agriculture, can capture carbon into the soil by mimicking nature. We are not talking about insignificant amounts. Various experts have worked out we can reduce carbon in the atmosphere well below our current levels in just a couple of decades. It would take a multi-billion-dollar public works program, with support from every level of society, but it can be done. Combined with a big bio-char program, It's a climate solution that doesn't make the problem worse, and leaves our soil stronger for every generation that follows.

We end up talking about "Farm Hacking" and all sorts of resources.

Find the Quivira Coalition web site here. A vimeo video for the new book "Two Percent Solutions for the Planet" is here. The subtitle is: "50 Low-Cost, Low-Tech, Nature-Based Practices for Combatting Hunger, Drought, and Climate Change."

Download or listen to this 24 minute interview with Courtney White in CD Quality or Lo-Fi

JUSTIN MANKIN: DISAPPEARING SNOW, AS WORLD WARMS, CHANGES EVERYTHING

This is Radio Ecoshock, beaming the real eco-truth out to the world. Now it's time to talk with a leading climate scientist.

Last summer, the river in my little valley displayed it's bottom for the first time. No one living can remember seeing it. It wasn't really lack of rain. It was the thin, thin covering of snow in the mountain head-waters. On a warming planet we will get less snow. But few of us have really worked out what that means, around the world.

A multinational team of crack scientists just released the paper "The potential for snow to supply human water demand in the present and future”. It's not looking good.

From the Columbia University Earth Institute, and affiliated with the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, we talk with Dr. Justin Mankin.

Scientist Justin Mankin

Justin is lead author of the paper that stimulated this call: “The potential for snow to supply human water demand in the present and future.” As the Columbia U press release says: "The other authors of the study are Daniel Viviroli of the University of Zurich; Lamont-Doherty postdoctoral researcher Deepti Singh; Arjen Y. Hoekstra of the University of Twente in the Netherlands; and Noah Diffenbaugh of Stanford University."

You can read the full text of that paper, as a .pdf file, here. Or read it online as an open access full text paper in the Journal "Environmental Research Letters" here.

It's probably best and easiest if I just reprint the paper abstract here:

"Runoff from snowmelt is regarded as a vital water source for people and ecosystems throughout the Northern Hemisphere (NH). Numerous studies point to the threat global warming poses to the timing and magnitude of snow accumulation and melt. But analyses focused on snow supply do not show where changes to snowmelt runoff are likely to present the most pressing adaptation challenges, given sub-annual patterns of human water consumption and water availability from rainfall.

We identify the NH basins where present spring and summer snowmelt has the greatest potential to supply the human water demand that would otherwise be unmet by instantaneous rainfall runoff. Using a multi-model ensemble of climate change projections, we find that these basins—which together have a present population of ~2 billion people—are exposed to a 67% risk of decreased snow supply this coming century. Further, in the multi-model mean, 68 basins (with a present population of >300 million people) transition from having sufficient rainfall runoff to meet all present human water demand to having insufficient rainfall runoff.

However, internal climate variability creates irreducible uncertainty in the projected future trends in snow resource potential, with about 90% of snow-sensitive basins showing potential for either increases or decreases over the near-term decades. Our results emphasize the importance of snow for fulfilling human water demand in many NH basins, and highlight the need to account for the full range of internal climate variability in developing robust climate risk management decisions."

In the interview, we flesh that out for the rest of us. There are a lot of uncertainties. Some places will receive more rainfall, even enough rainfall to cover the losses from disappearing snow cover. The Indus Valley (Northern India and Pakistan) is such a case, Mankin tells us.

Other regions, including California, will not make up for lost snow with rain. As you can tell from the abstract, around 300 million people will find themselves with insufficient water. They can pump from the underground water table for a while, but then that gets exhausted, because it is not being recharged. Richer countries may be able to build more reservoirs - although that option may already be tapped out in the Western United States.

At that point, assuming desalinization of sea water can't scale up fast enough, I presume disappearing snow will become another driver of vast climate migrations. You heard it here first.

Download or listen to this 18 minute Radio Ecoshock interview with Justin Mankin in CD Quality or Lo-Fi

PETER SEIDEL SAYS: "THERE IS STILL TIME"

Our next guest was an architect who published designs for ecologically sound cities starting in 1968, and for a model eco-city in the Cinncinati area in the 1970's. Like many who offer technical solutions, over the years Peter Seidel's books began to ask "what is wrong with us?" Why can't we adopt obvious answers to serious problems.

Author Peter Seidel





His 1998 book was "Invisible Walls: Why We Ignore the Damage We Inflict on the Planet ...and Ourselves."

Apparently Peter hasn't given up yet. His latest book is titled "There Is Still Time".

This is how our conversation began:

"ALEX: Just the other day, I considered giving up on this Radio Show. I thought "Humans are not capable of solving the problems we create.

Let me tell you the story of Jack Alpert. Working at General Motors in the 1960's, he found the major cause of death in car accidents was people being thrown through the windshield. As an engineer, Jack invented seat belts and they worked. But he was horrified when people wouldn't wear them, until decades of tickets and fines later. Peter, what is it about human nature that we won't act to save our own lives?"

We talk about the probability that our inability to solve problems may be institutional. For example, can corporations and capitalism really prevent a climate catastrophe? I also ask Peter about his earlier work. For example, in 2009, in the journal "Futures", he published a piece called "Is it inevitable that evolution self-destruct?" Then Seidel took another route to painting our predicament, in his science fiction book "2045: A Story of Our Future". That takes current trends, including climate change and corporate conglomeration, and extends them forward to 2045.

I know some Radio Ecoshock listeners feel deep in their hearts that there isn't still time. The infrastructure for a 5 degree hotter world is built, and we don't show any signs of changing. Major ice sheets at the poles seem committed to melting. I ask Seidel why he thinks "there is still time"? Despite the title of his book, Peter admits like most of us, he isn't sure. Maybe we have passed key tipping points. But despite trying to communicate these mega-problems for decades - Peter just can't give up trying. Looking into the faces of our descendants, and the innocent creatures around us, none of us can.

Even as he approaches 90, Peter Seidel tries to stimulate action to save the ecosphere and the future. I admire that.

Download or listen to this 14 minute interview with Peter Seidel in CD Quality or Lo-Fi

IS THERE A FUTURE?

In my opinion: humans have a couple of unfortunate psychological traits that can interfere with our ability to see eco-truth, especially about climate change. First of all, I've noticed a tendency among older men to confuse their realization of their own mortality, with the death of everything. If I'm going, it's all going to end with me, they think.

Related to that, and proven by at least two thousand years of history, we have an in-bred cultural expectation that we will live to see the end of days, at least for humanity, if not all existence. It's sad to think that many people left lives well-lived in disappointment, because they did not see the apocalypse, or the return of the Savior.

Both these ideas, or drives really, can lead us to demand the most extreme interpretations of reality. At Radio Ecoshock, I know we are in for difficult struggles ahead, but I hope we all know the last chapter has not yet been written, if there is a "last chapter". The story of natural life on Earth is composed almost entirely of twists and surprises.

I remain convinced there is a future, and we should try, and try again, to make it the best possible for all those who come after us.

I'm Alex Smith. My special thanks to all the wonderful people who supported the continuing production of this program, during our brief fundraising drive this fall. If you missed it, and want to help out Radio Ecoshock, please check out this page for details.

Next week, I've got some special guests to discuss the problems with the Paris climate talks, and real solutions.

Thank you for listening, and caring about your world.

Permaculture, Climate & Survival

SUMMARY: From 15th Annual International Permaculture Convergence in London, September 9th, 2015: "Cool Talk" by Albert Bates from The Farm in Tennessee. Albert interviews Transition Towns founder Rob Hopkins. Australian permaculturalist Rosemary Morrow tells us Western permies are the minority, compared to East Asia, India, Africa, and the Pacific Islands.

WELCOME

If you don't know what permaculture is when we start, you will by the end of this intensive radio feature.

Download or listen to this Radio Ecoshock show in CD Quality (56 MB) or Lo-Fi (14 MB)

Or listen right now on Soundcloud!



ALBERT BATES

Albert Bates is the author of books like "The Biochar Solution: Carbon Farming and Climate Change" and "The Post-Petroleum Survival Guide and Cookbook: Recipes for Changing Times". He is the host of "The Great Change" blog at peaksurfer.blogspot.ca.

But that just touches the surface. Formerly an environmental lawyer, Bates is one of the long-time residents of the Tennessee intentional community "The Farm". That's where so many great alternative ideas and low-tech solutions are created. We last had Albert on Radio Ecoshock for an interview on January 29th, 2014. Find the blog for that show here. Or you can download or listen to that previous interview here.

Albert Bates

This time around, Albert contacted me with some great suggestions for a couple of programs on his passion, permaculture. There is a huge long video of a day-long series of talks on You tube (links at the bottom of this post), from the 15th Annual International Permaculture Convergence held in London on September 19th. Actually there were official presentations, by most of the leading names in permaculture, but also workshops, and meet-ups of all kinds. I'll be playing you a couple of the best talks.

Even better, Albert arranged to interview some hard-to-find permaculture folks, specifically for Radio Ecoshock. You'll hear him talk with Transition Town co-founder Rob Hopkins this week, and with more internationally known permaculture leaders next week.

Here is Albert Bates' own presentation in London (19 minutes). He calls it "cool talk" and he explains why "cool" works better than something like "carbon sequestration". It's all in our tribal memes. Anyway, you'll hear about "cool food" and other cool products - including biochar paint that can actually clean the air in your room, and cows that don't need antibiotics.

Here's the big, big news in my opinion. You know that almost everything we do creates carbon emissions, as we burn fossil fuels. Bates says there is a different way to burn... almost anything - and not create greenhouse gases. In fact, the "pyrolysis" method of burning (can be done in a cheap camp stove even) - grabs and stores carbon instead of releasing it. The "bio char" remainders can be used in many products, fed to cows, or just dumped in the ground - where it will hold on to the carbon for up to 1,000 years.

That means we could create a society where almost everything we do LOWERS the carbon in the atmosphere. The test workshops for that society are the "eco-villages" which Albert and other permaculturalists are building in many countries. Bates has a big carbon negative settlement in the works, in an undisclosed location, working with a national government.

It's possible we could lower carbon in the atmosphere to 350 parts per million, or even lower. There is a way. That's big. Huge.

So listen to this 19 minute talk from Albert, in CD Quality or Lo-Fi.

ALBERT INTERVIEWS TRANSITION TOWNS CO-FOUNDER ROB HOPKINS

Next Albert interviews Transition Towns founder Rob Hopkins for Radio Ecoshock. Rob Hopkins is the co-founder of the original Transition Town in Totnes, England, and central to the spread of these low-carbon, more self-reliant communities world-wide. I think there are transition towns in up to 100 countries now.

Albert is also a realist. Things look dark right now. There is a possibility of petro-collapse, as oil and gas dwindle and become uneconomical to get out of the ground. A "ponzi-collapse" is also lurking around the corner. The international trade and monetary system is being kept alive by swindles and money printing. It could collapse at any time. Of course, climate disruption is already upon us, and getting worse.

So Bates asks Rob Hopkins, and again his other guests next week, do they still have hope, and if so, why? I think Hopkins gives a good answer, to help all of us.

Rob Hopkins

Listen to or download this 13 minute interview of Rob Hopkins in CD Quality or Lo-Fi. And don't forget these interview links in the Radio Ecoshock blog are permanent. Go ahead and share them on Facebook, Tweet about them, or share them however you can. Even years later, these links will work, and these interviews will be important for many people.

A PERMACULTURE CONVERGENCE TALK FROM ROSEMARY MORROW

We wrap with another speech from the latest International Permaculture Convergence in London England last September. Rosemary Morrow started learning about permaculture in Australia in the early 1980's. She's founded branches in Cambodia, Vietnam, and many other places. This speech was recorded at the 15th Annual International Permaculture Convergence in London, September 9th, 2015.

Rosemary Morrow

If you are looking for inspiration, when things look bleak and impossible, this is the talk for you. People who have nothing, living in a war zone, or worse, have improved their lives and survival using permaculture. If they can do it, you can do it, says Rosemary.

Plus, nobody needs to wait for a university education in permaculture. Learn what you can, get a little training if you can, watch some You tube videos, and start trying. You can only improve the planet. I've lightly edited this talk for radio. Listen to or download this speech by Rosemary Morrow in CD Quality or Lo-Fi.

Follow Rosemary Morrow on Facebook here. Her two best-known books are "Earth User's Guide to Permaculture" (2nd Edition, 2010) and "Earth User's Guide to Teaching Permaculture" (2014).

You can watch the whole 9 hours of Day Two of the Convergence on You tube here. Or find a listing of various videos from this Convergence here.

My thanks to Albert Bates for his talk, interview, and guidance in assembling this program. We'll have more to come next week. I'm Alex. Help support Radio Ecoshock is you can. Thank you for tuning in.

CLIMATE DEADLINE

SUMMARY: America's famous scientist Michael Mann unloads climate reality. Kristin Ohlson says "The Soil Will Save Us". Frances Moore: climate stalls European food production. Radio Ecoshock 150225

Listen to or download this Radio Ecoshock show in CD Quality or Lo-Fi

Or listen on Soundcloud right now!



Coming up in this Radio Ecoshock show: a frank conversation with one of the world's most famous and attacked climate scientist, Dr. Michael Mann, originator of the "hockey stick" graph of a rapidly heating world. Then we are off to the solutions corner, with Kristin Ohlson, author of the ""The Soil Will Save Us". We wrap this triple-header with new science about the impact of climate change on European crops. I'm Alex Smith. Dig in.

Our music this week comes from Down Temple Dub, the Remix album of music from Desert Dwellers. Find them at blackswansounds.com. Great stuff.

DR. MICHAEL MANN ON CLIMATE REALITY

He's a super-star of climate scientists, even though he didn't chose that. Dr. Michael Mann was already a leading American climate expert in 2001 when he become a lead author for the Third Scientific Assessment Report by Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ( the IPCC).

That report featured a stunning graphic showing global temperature data for the past 1,000 years. It was gathered from a huge variety of measurements by scientists all over the world. Because this graph showed a steep rise upward over the past century or so, it was called "the hockey stick".

That image, and its lead author became the target and punching bag for the fossil fuel industry and a wild bunch of climate deniers. Mann was attacked at his University. He was a target of the so-called "Climategate" hacked emails, carefully timed to damage the 2009 Copenhagen Climate talks. It got so bad that Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli demanded an investigation into Michael Mann by the University of Virginia. Thankfully, the University successfully fought off Cuccinelli in court, striking a blow for academic freedom.

Michael Mann sued the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) and the National Review for their attacks on the hockey stick graph and himself. We'll get an update on that.

Through it all, Michael Mann has certainly taken on science as a contact sport, appearing many times in media, including debating climate deniers. He co-founded the authoritative voice of science, realclimate.org. Oh, and by the way, Dr. Mann also continued his prodigious scientific research to unearth evidence of climate change. His work has won too many awards to list them all.

Dr. Michael E. Mann is Distinguished Professor of Meteorology at Penn State University. He is part of the Department of Geosciences and the Earth and Environmental Systems Institute (EESI), and he's director of the Penn State Earth System Science Center.

It's tempting to spend lots of time talking about climate deniers, but our listeners are way beyond that. We know it's real. Some of us think it's too late to avoid wrenching changes to everything, for all the species. I ask Michael Mann: "have humans wasted too much time already?" Mann emphatically says we have wasted decades, meaning climate change will be worse.

Just ten years ago, we had reports, like the Stern Report in the UK, which accepted greenhouse gases in the atmosphere would be safely reigned in at 550 parts per million carbon dioxide, or even higher. Now we know those emission levels will likely lead to a mass extinction event, with seas rising tens of meters over the coming centuries. If 550 is good for business, it is deadly for the species of this planet.

I ask Dr. Mann to help us with a common problem, trying to judge where we really are with greenhouse gases. The common figure we get is that we are hovering around 400 parts per million of CO2 these days. But does that include the gradually rising levels of methane, and all the other exotic greenhouse gases humans are churning out? It does not. Scientists conclude we are really already past the 450 ppm mark in CO2 equivalent, with those other gases. That's the level which we think leads to two degrees of warming, which all nations have already agreed is "dangerous" climate change. So why do we talk about 400 ppm, when we've already gone much higher, as far as nature is concerned?

Speaking of methane, we hear a chorus of people who worry frozen methane in the sea bed will reach melting temperature, and cause a sudden shift of warming. How does Michael Mann assess the methane risk? Listen to this interview to find out.

As an aside, when I asked Dr. David Archer about a methane burst, he said almost in a joking way that maybe it could be a good thing, if humans got to experience a burst of heating that died down in a decade, before they hit centuries of warming from long-lasting carbon dioxide.

Sadly, science does not operate in a chamber of reason. In 2012, North Carolina lawmakers proposed a law prohibiting considering rising seas in planning. That wasn't enacted, but now we have 56 percent of Republicans in Congress who either deny climate change is real, or think humans aren't causing it. At the same time, the oil-rich Koch brothers promise to spend about 880 million dollars in the 2016 election.

Again in 2012, Michael Mann published his story in the book "The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars: Dispatches from the Front Lines." In it, he joined a chorus of scientists who discovered that the same tired voices of the tobacco lobby are now getting money from energy companies to discredit climate change and climate scientists.

SCIENCE FOR SALE TO THE FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRIES - ANOTHER "SKEPTIC" OUTED

We just got news about another scientist for sale this past week. Greenpeace released a scathing report showing the alleged "Harvard Astrophysicist" Willie Soon was paid over a million dollars by the fossil fuel industry. Soon was one of the few scientists climate deniers and the industry could rely on. He kept publishing papers saying the sun could be causing climate change, instead of carbon emissions.

It turns out Willie Soon is not a climate expert at all. And this week after the revelations by Greenpeace, Harvard University said he had never been on their staff. They disavowed him. Really Soon was connected to a Harvard-Smithonian project, not directly part of the University.

As you can read all over the place, Soon corresponded with oil companies like Exxon, coal and utility companies, promising "deliverables" and discussing his very large payments from those companies, that totalled over 1.2 million dollars over the past few years. Of course Soon received money through organizations funded by the notorious Koch brothers.

Even worse, Soon did not disclose these payments in his scientific papers, as he is required to do. Various scientific journals say they will have to re-evaluate his work. The Smithsonian Institute say Soon violated their guidelines, and will be the subject of an internal investigation.

Soon's most famous work was with Sallie Baliunas - trying to discredit the hockey stick graph and Michael Mann. Read all about it here (New York Times), and here (The Guardian, UK).

BIG FOSSIL FUEL ATTACKS SCIENTIST MICHAEL MANN

These very same companies paid various front groups, including Foundations, millions of dollars. Those organizations then used every tactic to create tobacco-style doubt about global warming. They also attacked major scientists. Michael Mann became the biggest target. Critics tried to get him kicked out of his University. He received all kinds of threats, and abuse on the Internet. Hostile Republicans called Mann to testify to both the House and the Senate, to defend his science. He did.

GEOENGINEERING?

The National Academy just gave a green light to doing more research into geoengineering, like artificially creating more cloud cover. Should we develop some kind of lifeboat tech, in case the climate becomes much worse, much faster than we thought? I ask Michael for his opinion.

As you can hear, Mann has severe reservations about geoengineering - other than efforts to simply remove carbon dioxide from the air, which finds harmless and likely beneficial. Shooting sulfur into the air, to mimic volcanoes can have harmful expected consequences, he says, and likely some impacts we don't yet know about.

Because it's still before the courts. Dr. Mann cannot talk directly about his defamation lawsuit against the Competitive Enterprise Institute and the National Review. However, he did tell us about the on-going attacks on scientists, and muzzling of them.

Find Michael Mann's personal web page here. It's loaded with good info and links.

Listen to this 23 minute interview with Dr. Michael Mann in CD Quality or Lo-Fi

THE SOIL WILL SAVE US: AUTHOR KRISTIN OHLSON

More scientists say our best and maybe only hope to bring greenhouse gases down is: - putting carbon back in the soil. Several listeners have asked for more on this big solution.

This week I've reached out to an award-winning author and freelance journalist from Portland, Oregon, Kristin Ohlson. Her book is "The Soil Will Save Us - How Scientists, Farmers, and Foodies Are Healing the Soil to Save the Planet" It's a Finalist for the 2015 Oregon Book Awards.

It was only about ten years ago I heard a few experts say the world started warming about 8,000 years ago - and agriculture is the reason why. Our methods of tilling the soil, and heavily grazing the same spots with farm animals, has released many gigatons of carbon from the soil, and into the atmosphere.

Author Kristin Ohlson

One of the heros of this book is Gabe Brown, from North Dakota. Gabe has a ranch of about 5,000 acres near Bismark N.D. He was losing money using traditional techniques, and switched over to carbon farming techniques, with very few chemicals. He now has a profit well above the County average, partly because he doesn't have to pay for fertilizers. Now Brown advises farmers all over America, and in fact around the world.

Also, we learn from Kristin that we don't have to convert every farm and farmer everywhere to save the climate with soil carbon. David Johnson of New Mexico State University says carbon farming on just 11% of our farmlands could offset all the emissions of an industrial society.

Back in 2011, I interviewed a Vermont carbon farmer, Abe Collins. He helped kick off something called "the soil carbon challenge". Abe Collins was part of a crew, including Peter Donovan, who attempted to get "carbon farming" recognized in the New England carbon trading scheme. As I said in my blog then, why pay big companies to off-set emissions, when farmers can capture carbon - AND feed us sustainably?

On February 23rd, Kristin was in Los Angeles for something called the "Urban Soil Carbon Water Summit". There is a meaningful role that city folks can play too, in the way the big landscape under the city is treated.

Listen to Kristin Ohlson on Radio Ecoshock in CD Quality or Lo-Fi.

Find Kristin Ohlson here on Facebook and Twitter, plus her own web site here.

EUROPE'S CROPS STAGNATING - IS IT CLIMATE CHANGE?

In the past couple of years there has been a tidal wave of warnings that the world cannot feed the extra 3 billion people expected in the next decades. In fact, with the impacts of climate change, we may not be able to feed the current population - which we are doing poorly as it is.

We are not talking about hippy bloggers. These voices of worry come from Greg Page, the conservative executive chairman of the Cargill food empire, from investment gurus like Jeremy Grantham, and from the Pentagon.

That means it is time to talk with the scientists, about what we know, and what we don't, when it comes to climate change and food stress. It will take a series of interviews and programs to do it.

We start this week with new science about climate and the stagnation of food production in the heavily populated European Union. Our guest is Frances C. Moore. She's close to a PHD at Stanford, while working with the MacArthur "genius" award-winning scientist David B. Lobell.

Francis C. Moore, Stanford

Frances is the lead author in two key parts of the puzzle. In 2014 she and Lobell published a letter about the ability of European farmers to adapt to shocks brought on by climate change. At the start of 2015, Moore was the lead author of a paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy - titled "The fingerprint of climate trends on European crop yields".

These authors find that climate change is provably a factor in Europe's inability to produce still more food. For example, in wheat and barley, they estimated about 10% of the stagnation was brought on by climate change. Of course, that's averaged over the whole European Union. There are more extreme cases of crop losses in Spain and Italy, for example, where the contribution of climate change would be greater.

This paper shows the impact of climate change will continue to hamper the development of European crops. At the present time, Europe exports a lot of food. If, due to drought, heat waves, or extreme rainfall events, Europe cannot export as much, that leads to food stress in poorer parts of the world. Lack of food can lead to social instability, and wars. Co-author David Lobell published a paper finding that climate stress is linked to civil war in Africa.

Last year, Frances Moore and David Lobell published a letter in the journal Nature Climate Change. The title is "Adaptation potential of European agriculture in response to climate change". In a nutshell, they found the ability of farmers to adapt to a shift in climate depends partly on the whether the farmers consider the problem as a short-term thing, or work on a long-term plan.

In the short-term, the farmer thinks this is just unusual weather, and so makes fewer fundamental changes. The long-term farmer, realizing climate change is happening, may build in better infrastructure to hold water, or to drain water. He or she may look at adaptations in hotter regions and adopt those. Or the farmer may have to change crops to more heat tolerant varieties.

Frances C. Moore is one of the bright young minds at the Stanford School of Earth, Energy, & Environmental Sciences in California. Listen to this 18 minute Radio Ecoshock interview with Frances C. Moore in CD Quality or Lo-Fi

To compare what is happening with climate and crops in Europe to the United States, check out this recent report on "Midwest Agriculture and Climate Risk"

. For the larger global picture, try this article "5 Reasons why peak food is the world's No. 1 Ticking time bomb".

THANKS FOR LISTENING AND SUPPORTING THIS PROGRAM!

We've burned through all the time there is. Check out all our past shows as free mp3 downloads at ecoshock.org. Or find Radio Ecoshock on Soundcloud.

I'm Alex Smith. Thanks for listening.

96F/36C Degrees in the Shade!

Coping with extreme climate heat. Carbon farming with Courtney White, socially responsible investing with NYC advisor Louis Berger, plus tips for staying alive, and keeping the garden alive, during extended heat. Radio Ecoshock 140618

Yes, the hot summer is coming to the northern Hemisphere. If you are in the American south or California, it's been toasty for some months already.

The future looks hotter still, as our emissions cause the climate system to swing toward it's greenhouse state. Farms will be in trouble, and so will your own home garden. Later in this program I'll continue with our series on growing in the heat. We'll hear great tips from experts in Florida and Colorado - ideas I'm already applying in my own garden.

I also have two interviews for you. Pretty well every aspect of our problems, and the solutions, involve the flow of big money. Many of us are unwilling partners in the mal-investment in corporations profiting from damaging the environment. It could be pensions, investments, or just your savings in the bank - where is it going? We'll talk with a heavy-weight New York investment advisor about the realities of Socially Responsible Investing.

But first, I want to get back to one of the few natural big-scale possibilities to save ourselves from the worst of climate change. It's not glamorous. It's just really, really important.

Download/listen to this Radio Ecoshock show in CD Quality or Lo-Fi





TAKING CARBON FROM THE ATMOSPHERE AND PUTTING IT IN THE SOIL - COURTNEY WHITE

You know we are in a big mess with climate change. At this point we need big solutions - and there may be something much more natural than geoengineering. Is it possible we could even turn back the clock, even a little, on global warming?

I've interviewed experts about the importance of carbon in the soil. Some stress there is more carbon in the earth than in the atmosphere, so we must not continue to release it by poor agricultural practices and deforestation. Others strongly believe we can capture a lot of carbon out of the atmosphere, putting it back in the soil. This could be the best, or even at this point the only, way to actually reduce the build-up of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere.

We've had Alan Savory as a guest on Radio Ecoshock. He pioneered the use of carefully controlled cattle herds to replenish carbon in the soil. We just had a guest, Kip Anderson of the film Cowspiracy, tell us that some researchers, including the World Watch Institute, say the livestock industry is the largest single source of greenhouse gas emissions on the planet. Can we still eat meat without killing the climate?

I keep listening for more soil carbon news. It's not big on CNN or You tube, but it's big news for the future. That's why I was pleased to find Courtney White has tied a lot of on-the-ground experience together for his new book "Grass, Soil, Hope." In a foreward, Michael Pollan wrote "this book promises to stir up hope even among those made cynical by relentless bad news."

Courtney White takes us on "A Journey through Carbon Country."

It's pretty wild that governments are willing to spend countless billions on all kinds of schemes, including giant farm subsidies, but I'm not aware of any government willing to pay carbon farmers.

Courtney, was a Sierra Club activist, but now he calls that the "conflict industry". We talk about why.

White went on to found the Quivira coalition, which he led until recently. Now he's taken time off to tour the country to research this book, and the promise of soil carbon.

Download/listen to this Radio Ecoshock interview with Courtney White in CD Quality or Lo-Fi

More links for Courtney White:

Here is a video about the new book.

Here is a link to the publishers page for the book.

And you can read famous foody Michael Pollan's foreword to "Grass, Soil, Hope" here.

Find the Quivira Coalition web site here.

SOCIALLY RESPONSIBLE MONEY - IS IT POSSIBLE?

Here on Radio Ecoshock we normally interview scientists, authors, and activists. But behind almost every problem and solution we encounter, there is a flow of big money.

After the financial crash, and admissions of guilt by major institutions we trusted, many of us are suspicious of investing. Big money is being channeled into projects that actually wreck the world. Is socially responsible investing possible?

Whether you have money to invest or not, the answer to this question could literally determine your future and the fate of our civilization. We can pretend that world of high finance is too dirty, or will fall any day. Instead, I've called up Louis Berger, the Principal and Co-Founder of Washington Square Capital in New York.

Berger was big in the financial end of Hollywood, before becoming an advisor for the Swiss bank UBS. He then co-founded his own investment firm.

I hang around the Zero Hedge website, with peak oil people, and a crowd with a bleak view of our prospects. So I ask Louis if he is optimistic or pessimistic about the economy? He is guardedly optimistic, seeing many signs of recovery - but says the original problems in the financial system were not fixed. Also, the whole market system is still too heavily dependent on the Federal Reserve buying 35 billion dollars worth of assets every month.

IS IT REALLY "GREEN"?

We talk about the move for Universities and Churches to divest from fossil fuels. Berger says the big fossil fuel companies are a bad investment in the long run anyway. as people become more aware of climate change, he thinks some kind of carbon tax is inevitable.

We discuss how to find out if "green" investments really are OK for the planet. And we talk about Louis' article about the risks of some green investments, based on the case of Mosaic - the crowd-funded company investing in small-scale solar projects. It's a good company he says, but it could be hard to get your money out if needed, and there is some risk the project could fail.

WHY INVESTMENT MATTERS

We know there are almost 50 million Americans on food stamps, and millions more very poor people in Canada, the United Kingdom, - pretty well everywhere in the developed world. At the same time, there are more millions who are making good money, plus a wave of inheritances as the generations change. What questions should the millenial generation have for experts who advise where to invest?

This whole question of investing puts some people in a strange spot. They may picture themselves critical of banks and the stock market, and yet depend on them, whether they know it or not, for pensions and savings. That's a stress-point for some folks, and they try to sit on the sidelines with cash. But is there really any "sidelines" or opting out of this financial system? All the money flows somewhere.

There is a growing resentment against Too Big To Fail Wall Street Banks, who appear to get away with price fixing or even fraud with no criminal charges. It's my impression this resentment is spilling over to ANY investment, or anyone in the investment field. This kind of disconnect could hurt the whole industry - and Louis Berger says the distrust is valid, considering the way the Too Big To Fail banks operated.

Here are some key points from investment guru Louis Berger:

"* Our view on socially responsible investing is that it's a way for a person to take ownership and responsibility over their investments -- to ensure that the companies they're invested in are aligned with their values.

* In the last several years, many progressives in the US have begun questioning their consumer choices -- where/how their food is grown, goods are made, energy is sourced etc. It's a natural progression to begin thinking about how and where their money is invested.

* Traditionally, most people have separated their investments and their philanthropy -- invest their money at a bank or brokerage and make a charitable contribution to a non-profit working in a space they care about (ex: environmental protection). Trend is now towards merging the two.

* There seems to be a movement towards SRI in the millennial generation. We're encountering new clients that are young and care about environmental/humanitarian issues. Often, they've inherited money from a parent or grandparent. They also inherit a financial advisor who is either not interested or incapable of providing SRI advice. We see it as a major growth opportunity going forward as this wealth transfer continues and the vast majority of financial advisors are not equipped to provide SRI advice. The big banks have begun to take notice as well.

* While we understand there are limitations to the amount of social good one can make by investing in the public markets, the fact is we live in a world (perhaps more so in the US) where at least some portion of our net worth is tied up in the stock/bond markets (brokerage account, retirement/pension account, college savings account, etc). This is the way our financial system currently works. Therefore, it's imperative for those people who care about environmental and humanitarian issues to ensure the companies they invest in are on the same page. By investing in oil/gas, weapons manufacturers, mining companies, tobacco companies etc -- even if it's unintentional -- you are not only endorsing their corporate behavior, you are helping to foster their growth.

* SRI is challenging many companies and industries to begin changing the way they do business. There is still a very long way to go, but it's definitely moving the needle in the right direction."

Find more info about Louis Berger here.

Download/listen to this Radio Ecoshock interview with Louis Berger in CD Quality or Lo-Fi

HOW WILL WE GROW FOOD DURING EXTREME HEAT?

Last week we heard Marjory Wildcraft with tips on gardening in extreme heat. Marjory will be joining us in a program soon. You may think you will grow some of your own food - but how will you deal with record heat or drought? Even more worrying, as we heard on our show a couple of years ago from You tube garden guru HumptyDumptyTribe, if the nights don't cool down, plants won't produce fruit. You can have flowers, busy bees, and still get no tomatoes. That's going to be a problem for most of us in the coming years.

Let's start with this recording of a You tube video from Carol Omera, a horticulture expert from Colorado State University. She recorded this essential video during one of Colorado's stunning heat waves. Her tips are basic, about how we plant, ensuring enough water, and the big lesson for me: get your shade cloth ready. If you want to keep your cool-weather plants like peas and lettuce producing, we will have to shade them.

Watch the video with Carol Omera on You tube here.

So let's get to Florida, where it's hot, hot, hot - and humid too. Sumter County Extension Agent Brooke Moffis tells us how we can keep ourselves safe from heat stroke, while keeping summer plants alive. Yep, it involves broad-brimmed hats, being sensible about when you are out there, and learning the signs of heat stroke (one of which is impairment of judgement...) Then Brooke talks about plants that will still produce in high heat, like Okra.

My thanks to the University of Florida for that audio. Watch it here.

This has been Radio Ecoshock. Don't miss our Soundcloud page, and all our past programs as free mp3 files at ecoshock.org.

The theme song this week was "96 degrees in the Shade" by the band Third World. The song is about the Jamaican hero Paul Bogle, who was hanged in 1865 after demanding civil rights for all.

I'm Alex Smith. Thank you for listening, and caring about our world.