Dear Daily Disaster Diary, Oct. 11 2024

 A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman, of the next generation.

- J.F. Clarke

The European Union at a Crossroads: A Critical Moment in a Multipolar World

The European Union (EU) is facing immense challenges. We are witnessing the emergence of a multipolar world order, a process that seems chaotic, often violent, and accompanied by a surge in military conflicts. 

Isolationism, nationalism, and protectionism are on the rise in many parts of the globe. This environment stands in stark contrast to the era in which the EU grew into an economic powerhouse—while remaining, politically and militarily, a dwarf.

In Europe, extreme forces from both the left and the right are gaining traction, reflecting a deep crisis of trust. 

Many voters question the socio-economic, political, and cultural models that have underpinned European societies. 

This distrust manifests itself in the escalating migration debate and the intensifying culture wars, which are being fought with increasing intransigence. 

As a result, some societies have become receptive to authoritarian governance. 

In Hungary, Slovakia, and Serbia, illiberal democracies have taken root, sacrificing the separation of powers and media freedom to the overwhelming dominance of the executive.

This crisis of confidence has also left European societies vulnerable to Russian disinformation, as well as Chinese and Islamist propaganda. 

However, a pressing question remains: how can 27 member states find common ground and, where necessary, make concessions in their foreign policy sovereignty? 

The chances of the EU making significant geopolitical strides under the current Commission are slim. It lacks both a cohesive leadership structure and the political legitimacy needed to drive such a transformation. 

The Commission is a paper giant, entirely dependent on the approval of member states for major decisions—often requiring unanimity.

It is time to rethink the structure of the EU. Perhaps it should be smaller (like in the good ol days), or all citizens across Europe should be given a direct voice. 

If a member state becomes "too autocratic," its participation should be subject to popular vote. 

New rules are needed, and Belgium offers a potential model. It starts with mandatory voting. 

A referendum on key issues such as migration, climate policy, the future of combustion engines, and military spending must be realized. 

We need multiple layers of checks and balances, along with greater transparency, to curb corruption (farewell, Mrs. von der Leyen). Bureaucratic processes should be simplified within 12 months.

Furthermore, climate scientists, historians, agricultural experts, and rotating independent citizens must have a seat at the table. 

As for the goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2050, such long-term targets should be off the table unless all decision-makers are under 20 years old—so they can be held accountable for their choices in 26 years.

The EU's future depends on a fundamental shift in how it operates, how it engages with its citizens, and how it confronts its internal and external challenges. 

Without radical change, its place in the new world order will be uncertain at best.

Sincerely,

Adapt or die!

Dear Daily Disaster Diary, Oct. 3rd 2024

 Today the world is the victim of propaganda because people are not intellectually competent. More than anything the United States needs effective citizens competent to do their own thinking.

- William Mather Lewis

Environmental Impact of Brown Coal And Uranium Mining In East Germany.

The Socialist Unity Party (SED) of the former German Democratic Republic (GDR) began its environmental policy with lofty ambitions. 

It promised not only to preserve the natural environment but to improve the societal foundations for both life and production. 

A series of laws were passed, and in 1971, a Ministry for Environmental Protection and Water Management was established. 

In the years prior, environmental protection had been enshrined as a "state goal" in the constitution—though the constitution itself was irrelevant in a regime where the party, not the state, held ultimate authority. 

The SED’s 1976 program boldly claimed to shape policy to "preserve nature as a source of life, wealth, health, and joy for the people, and to use it rationally, based on scientific foundations, for the secured and happy lives of future generations in a communist society."

Reality, however, told a darker story. The ecological balance sheet of the GDR was catastrophic. 

The country had the highest air pollution levels in Europe, with rampant sulfur dioxide and dust emissions. 

Countless bodies of water were polluted or dead, and waste management—both private and industrial—was uncontrolled for years, leaving nature as the ultimate victim. 

Although the population was kept in the dark, they could see, smell, and taste the dismal state of their environment. 

By February 1990, after the fall of the Berlin Wall, a report confirmed the worst: the GDR ranked first in Europe for sulfur dioxide emissions. Over 1.24 million people lacked access to drinking water that met basic standards. More than half of the nation's forested areas were damaged. 

Agricultural practices, driven by the pursuit of maximum yields, combined with the lack of waste management for livestock and emissions, led to widespread soil erosion, groundwater contamination, and surface water pollution.

For decades, the SED concealed these environmental atrocities, restricting the publication of environmental data as early as 1970. 

The "Statistical Annual Report for Environmental Protection and Water Management" became a classified document, accessible only to select government officials. 

By the 1980s, annual environmental reports were labeled "Top Secret," and just a handful of individuals saw them. The justification? The SED claimed that these environmental statistics could be used by class enemies to discredit the GDR. 

Thus, not only was the ecological crisis kept from the public, but it also became a secret even to the political actors of the state. 

Insiders later revealed what activists had long suspected: environmental data was systematically ignored, underplayed, or outright falsified.

By the 1970s, environmental decisions were entirely subservient to the regime’s economic and ideological priorities. 

The so-called "Mittag Office" became the authority on environmental matters, ensuring that economic growth and political goals superseded any environmental concerns. 

Even after the collapse of the regime, it became clear just how deeply the GDR’s environmental mismanagement had been buried. 

An official statement acknowledged, "The complicated ecological situation of the country is the result of years of neglect, stemming from past decisions to continue outdated production processes, ineffective increases in lignite use, and insufficient development of environmentally integrated technology."

Lignite, or brown coal, was the GDR’s primary energy source and the leading cause of its environmental devastation. 

The lack of filtration systems led to the emission of five million tons of sulfur dioxide and 2.2 million tons of dust annually. 

In comparison, West Germany, three to four times larger, emitted only a fifth of this amount. In 1988, sulfur dioxide emissions in the GDR were ten times higher than in West Germany, and carbon dioxide emissions were more than double. 

Bitterfeld, a city in the GDR, was dubbed the most polluted place in Europe. Its chemical plants spewed 40,000 tons of dust and 90,000 tons of sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere each year, alongside thousands of tons of other pollutants.

The environmental destruction extended to water sources as well. By 1990, only 20% of the GDR’s classified river sections were usable for drinking water production with standard purification methods. 

An astonishing 45% were no longer suitable for drinking water production at all. High levels of mercury, copper, lead, and other toxins were pumped into rivers like the Elbe, creating an ecological disaster zone. 

By the time the GDR disappeared from the map, more than half of its forests were damaged, and much of its water was undrinkable.

Environmental activists were ruthlessly suppressed. The Ministry of Justice pursued those who reported on environmental damage, often charging them with espionage or sabotage. 

Any critique of the regime’s environmental failings was treated as a threat to the state. Behind its endless propaganda about "the welfare of the people," the SED ran a system that proved to be a hollow, inhuman farce.

The GDR's environmental policies—and their catastrophic failure—offer a powerful lesson for humanity. 

Propaganda may paper over the truth for a time, but in the end, the environment does not bend to ideology. The GDR’s rulers sacrificed nature, and by extension, their citizens' health and future, on the altar of political expediency and economic inefficiency. 

How much is human life really worth when stripped of the very basics—clean air, water, and land? The ecological disaster that unfolded in the GDR should serve as a stark reminder: no amount of political rhetoric can reverse environmental destruction.

In an era where environmental degradation continues to threaten our planet, the GDR’s dark legacy must be a warning for us all. 

Lies may temporarily hide the cost of exploitation, but nature will ultimately have the final word. And when that happens, no amount of propaganda will be able to mask the damage done.

In Blog we trust.

Sincerely,

Adaptation-Guide

Famous last words, Sept.30th 2024

.....politics has become the conservative religion where a ridiculous statement repeated by an opinion network enough times can become accepted dogma worth killing over....

- Adaption -Guide

As we rearrange the deck chairs on our own Titanic, one glaring truth comes into focus: the tools we use to measure disaster often fall short of capturing the full scope of destruction. 

Take the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale, for example. This scale, which rates hurricanes from 1 to 5, is based solely on maximum sustained wind speeds. 

But anyone who's lived through a hurricane knows it's not just about the wind. Rainfall, storm surges, and tornadoes can be just as devastating—sometimes more so. 

Why do we continue to rely on an outdated measure that ignores so many factors? Maybe it’s time for a more comprehensive approach, unless you’re voting CONservative in the U.S., in which case, don’t worry—NOAA forecasts might be optional soon anyway.

This leads us to the bigger picture: human behavior and our relationship with energy. 

Our energy use is skyrocketing. This isn't a surprise. From the dawn of the Industrial Revolution to the present, human progress has always been powered by increasing energy consumption. 

Transportation, heavy industry, mass production, and the computing revolution have all required staggering amounts of energy, and the next waves of innovation—artificial intelligence and global travel—will only demand more.

But in the midst of all this, we finally have some good news. 

Today marks a historic moment: the UK has officially shut down its last coal-fired power station. 

Uniper's Ratcliffe-on-Soar plant in Nottinghamshire has been taken offline, ending a 142-year legacy of burning coal to generate electricity.

Consider the contrast: in 1990, coal made up 65% of the UK's energy mix. A decade ago, it was still 1%. Now, it's gone. What happened? 

The UK didn't simply wait for coal to phase itself out—it was actively driven out by high carbon prices that made it financially unsustainable, and by a concerted push towards gas and wind power. 

The UK is now the first G7 nation to completely exit coal-fired power generation.

Yes, the UK isn’t part of the EU, but it’s still a global leader in this energy transition, with its own currency, nuclear defense, and—of course—fish and chips. 

The country is moving forward, but let’s not romanticize it. 

Labour still has the Herculean tasks of fixing the healthcare system and cleaning up rivers and lakes. But the progress made in energy policy? 

That’s something to celebrate.

Sincerely and a bit jealous,

Adaptation - Guide

Dear Daily Disaster Diary, 28.September 2024

 The trouble with our times is that the future is not what it used to be.

- Paul Valery

... "and think of all these exaggerated measures in an attempt to stop global warming. We're moving billions, harassing drivers, ripping the heating systems out of houses to reduce global CO2 emissions from 0.17% to 0.10%. My dear friends, this has nothing to do with reason or balance anymore. This is a fanatical delusion we're being confronted with, and we urgently need a course correction..." - Herbert Kickl, FPÖ, speech from September 27, 2024.

Dear Austria,

You just experienced one of the worst floods in your history, and this is the best you get?

Is it possible to reconcile migration and flood protection in a political program? 

Even if the FPÖ’s election manifesto doesn’t mention the word "climate change," they could still talk about adaptive measures. 

So, what is it with right-wing extremists and their aversion to extreme weather?

" Let`s build Fortress Austria,” Kickl said last year. 

Well, at this point, anything that can stop the next flood is welcome!

Austria, handle your ballots with care. The National Socialists only needed 33.1 percent to dissolve Parliament and install a dictatorship! 

Austria, don’t copy Hungary, where Viktor Orbán has steadily succeeded in bringing the judiciary and media under his control.

China? An alternative? An authoritarian capitalism that survives only through the tools of a digital surveillance state. No, thanks. 

Or how about Putin's reactionary dictatorship, which thrives on a corrupt patronage system? We didn`t think so.

September 29 is no easy choice.

Sincerely,
Adaptationguide

Adapt or Die

Dear Daily Disaster Diary, Sept. 22nd 2024

 "While the wealthy drown their sorrows in champagne, the rest struggle to afford even the fumes of despair."

- Adaptation Guide

Global inequality has become one of the most pressing issues of our time, manifesting itself not only in wealth distribution but also in the destruction of the environment. 

A recent report highlights that the wealthiest 10% of the global population—approximately 800 million people—were responsible for nearly half of all greenhouse gas emissions in 2019. 

In stark contrast, the poorest 50%—four billion people—contributed only 12% of emissions. This gap in responsibility for environmental destruction is staggering, especially when we consider the situation in countries like Germany, where the richest 10% of households emit nearly six times more greenhouse gases than the poorest half combined. 

Inequality, it seems, isn't just an economic issue; it has a direct impact on environmental degradation.

Inequality is not merely a financial concern but a destructive force that exacerbates environmental collapse. 

While the rich enjoy immense wealth, that very wealth accelerates ecological devastation, threatening to undo itself in the long run. 

Meanwhile, poverty has its own cruel cycle: it makes people sick, and illness, in turn, deepens poverty. 

People living in poverty often cannot afford healthy food or a safe, clean living environment. Damp, mold-infested apartments in noisy, polluted areas with limited green spaces are often their only affordable option. 

This results in higher rates of anxiety, depression, and addiction among the poor, reinforcing the cycle of deprivation.

Inequality doesn’t stop at income or living conditions—it extends to health outcomes. Those in lower socioeconomic positions face a significantly higher risk of mental and physical illnesses. 

This reality underscores the deep societal divisions that have worsened over the past decades in many countries. 

Inequality exists not only along economic lines but also across gender and ethnic boundaries, further entrenching social hierarchies.

But the problem of inequality does not present itself in apocalyptic terms—its effects are creeping, gradual, and increasingly pervasive. 

Just like the climate crisis, it progresses slowly but accelerates over time. The longer inequality persists, the more entrenched its destructive effects become on both people and the planet.

So, what is to be done? 

Tackling inequality requires a multi-faceted approach. First, governments must adopt progressive taxation to redistribute wealth more fairly. This includes taxing wealth, not just income, to capture the immense riches held by the top 1%. 

Taxing carbon emissions at higher rates for the rich, who disproportionately contribute to environmental destruction, could also incentivize greener behavior.

Second, social safety nets must be reinforced. Affordable housing, universal healthcare, and access to quality education are crucial to breaking the cycle of poverty. 

Governments should focus on creating environments where everyone has an equal opportunity to thrive, regardless of their socioeconomic background.

Third, policies aimed at addressing inequality must also consider gender and ethnicity. These forms of inequality intersect with economic disparities, and addressing one without the other will only provide a partial solution.

Finally, global cooperation is essential. Inequality is a worldwide issue, and no nation can solve it alone. International institutions must work together to ensure fair trade, labor rights, and climate justice. 

Developing nations need assistance in building resilient infrastructures that can support both economic growth and environmental sustainability.

Addressing inequality is not just a moral imperative—it’s a necessity for the survival of both society and the planet. 

If we fail to act, the slow collapse will only accelerate, leaving us with an increasingly fractured world, divided by wealth, race, and environmental ruin. The time for change is now, and it must be bold, comprehensive, and global. 

There is another challenge for our ADAPTATION-GUIDE -ACTION- PLAN 2025!

Your Weekly Navigator, Sept. 17 2024

 Humanity either makes, or breeds, or tolerates all its afflictions.

- H. G. Wells

How to Survive After Flooding: Essential Steps

After a flood, the immediate danger may subside, but the aftermath presents serious risks to health, safety, and infrastructure. Here's how to navigate and recover safely:

1. Assess the Damage

• Stay Informed: Continue monitoring news updates (e.g., SKY News UK, accuweather.com) and emergency apps for important announcements about road conditions, power outages, and water safety.
• Check Roads & Bridges: Be aware that chunks of roads or bridges may be missing. Avoid areas until they are declared safe.
• Inspect Your Home: Your belongings might be waterlogged, contaminated, or covered in mold. Handle everything cautiously.

2. Health & Safety Risks

• Contaminated Water: Floodwaters often carry sewage, chemicals, and other harmful substances. Assume that the water is unsafe until authorities declare otherwise.
• Electrical Hazards: Be cautious of fallen power lines and potential gas leaks. Appliances that got wet may short-circuit.
• Mold: Mold develops quickly in damp environments. It can cause respiratory issues, so clean and dry affected areas as soon as possible.
• Mudslides: Saturated hillsides can trigger mudslides, burying roads and structures. Avoid areas with visible signs of soil instability.

3. Water Safety & Purification

• Boil Water: If authorities issue a boiled-water alert, follow these steps:
  • Bring water to a rolling boil for 1 minute to kill bacteria, parasites, and viruses.
  • Let it cool before drinking. To improve the taste, pour it into a new container and let it sit, or add a pinch of salt per quart.
• Use Bleach: If boiling isn’t possible:
  • Add 6 drops of unscented bleach (sodium hypochlorite) to 1 gallon of water.
  • Let it sit for 30 minutes before drinking. This method is safe for human consumption and is used by municipalities to purify water.
• Chemical Purification Tablets: Use a chemical purification kit (e.g., backpacker tablets) to disinfect water. A single $10 package can treat up to 15 gallons.
  • This method is useful for mobility but doesn’t eliminate all contaminants like oil or lead.

4. Avoid Contaminated Water

• Even with purification, methods like boiling or bleach do not remove chemicals such as oil, gas, or heavy metals.
• Stick to bottled water or water from your home's system if there’s any indication of toxic contamination in the water supply.

5. Health Concerns in Shelters

• Close Quarters: Flooding often forces people into shelters where disease can spread quickly. Watch out for:
  • Dysentery
  • Cholera
  • Hepatitis A
• Hygiene: Be obsessive about hand washing or use hand sanitizer regularly to minimize the risk of illness.

6. Ongoing Flood Risks

• Waterlogged Ground: Any area previously flooded will be highly susceptible to flooding again with even a small amount of rain or runoff.
• Stay Vigilant: Avoid entering floodwaters and be aware of emergency workers operating in the area. Stay out of their way and heed their warnings.

7. Emergency Preparedness

• Sign Up for Alerts: Many cities offer text, email, or phone notifications for boil-water alerts and other safety updates.
• Stock Up on Essentials: Keep at least a gallon of bleach at home, and consider investing in water purification tablets or a portable filtration system in case of future emergencies.

By following these guidelines, you can help ensure your safety and health in the critical period after a flood, minimizing both immediate dangers and long-term impacts.

Dear Daily Disaster Diary, Sept. 12th 2024

 Victories that are easy are cheap. Those only are worth having which come as the result of hard fighting.

- Henry Ward Beecher

The recent debate in Pennsylvania, one of the nation’s most crucial swing states, offered Vice President Kamala Harris an opportunity to go beyond the expected political platitudes. 

Instead of simply acknowledging her support for fracking, she should have seized the moment to make an impassioned case for ending our dependence on fossil fuels. 

After all, the future of our planet hinges on transitioning toward clean energy, a reality Donald Trump and his enablers in the GOP have chosen to deny.

While Trump peddled his dangerous lies and false promises, Harris should have stood strong, advocating for the Biden administration’s bold vision—the very vision laid out in the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, designed to usher in a clean-energy future. 

Electric vehicles, renewable energy, infrastructure modernization—these aren’t just political talking points. They are the path forward for this country, for job creation, and for reversing the climate crisis Trump and his acolytes choose to ignore.

Likewise, when confronted with Trump's vicious and xenophobic lies about immigrants, Harris should have done more than simply defend. 

She should have reminded us all that, aside from Native Americans, this nation is immigrants. We are a tapestry of people from all walks of life, whose work, innovation, and culture have powered this country from its very founding. 

The constant scapegoating of immigrants to stoke fear and division is the same tired playbook that Trump and his cult followers cling to—but Harris should’ve forcefully exposed it for what it is: a desperate distraction.

To get to the heart of this, we need more than just words. Imagine using AI for real-time fact-checking during these debates—like subtitles flashing up each time Trump spins another of his 30,500 lies since taking office. 

How different would these debates look if there were a buzzer every time a candidate dodged a question? The truth is, debates shouldn’t just be performances. They should be moments of clarity, where voters see who has a plan for the future, and who is selling them a false past.

So, who lost that debate? Sure, the clueless cult leader peddling fear and denial. But Harris didn’t fully win, either. The audience lost out, too, because instead of a vision for progress, we got a defensive response, when we need leadership. 

Harris should be the voice of policy continuity, pushing for the real, necessary reforms that have been laid out but are far from complete.

Make no mistake—those reforms are vital to America’s future. And they’re also good for business. Clean energy, electric vehicles, and the independent power industry all stand to gain from a government that takes climate change seriously. 

The fossil fuel era is ending, and as a nation, we should be leading that transition, not getting left behind. But leadership requires more than just defending what’s already been done—it requires boldness, vision, and a willingness to take on the lies head-on.

So, Kamala, let’s hear how you’re going to get it done. 

You want to watch the planet die a slow death? Vote CONservative. You want to build a future worth living in? Vote Democrat—and push for the policies that will save lives and ensure a sustainable future for generations to come.

Dear Daily Disaster Diary, Sept. 9 2024

The trouble with our times is that the future is not what it used to be.

-  Paul Valery 

For those of you just waking up from a coma, let me break it to you: Trump did it. He and his army of lawyers have managed to push his court date beyond Election Day. 

The real question now is, how far will Trump go to stay out of jail? With nothing left to lose, the stakes are higher than ever. 

Would he burn America before facing justice?

YES.....

Remember, in both 2016 and 2020, Trump repeatedly claimed the election would be rigged against him. Back in 2016, it was just his ego on the line. Sure, he won the Electoral College, but that wasn’t enough. Trump’s vanity was so bruised that he insisted he hadn’t lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton. 

He even launched a pointless investigation to prove there was electoral fraud. Because in Trump’s world, he never loses—not an election, not a court case, nothing. 

And somehow, a free society continues to reward him for it.

But let’s not kid ourselves—this isn’t just a Trump problem. Many countries have handed power to leaders who followed the same playbook. 

Look at Italy’s late Silvio Berlusconi, who spent decades bouncing between election victories and courtrooms. Or Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu, who’s trying to crush Israel’s independent judiciary to avoid facing justice. 

Then there’s Venezuela’s president, who launched a campaign of repression against his own people, mirroring the tactics of his idol, Hugo Chávez.

These figures aren’t about ideology; they’re about survival. They build cults of personality, conflating their personal persecution with the broader victimhood of their supporters. 

That’s why, with each indictment, Trump’s support among Republicans only grows. The more he’s attacked, the more they believe he’s the only one who can save them.

Sure, it’s easy to blame Trump for misleading the public. But at the end of the day, it’s the voters who are at fault. 

They can’t seem to separate rhetoric from reality, facts from fantasy. 

It’s becoming clearer why the Founding Fathers initially only gave voting rights to property owners—they feared the masses wouldn’t be capable of making wise decisions. 

And honestly, looking at today’s landscape, who could blame them? Social media has turned into the primary “news” source, replacing facts with a flood of fake news.

Modern U.S. elections start with a roughly 50/50 split, but thanks to the quirks of the Electoral College, Trump only needs around 47% of the vote to be back in the White House. That’s his get-out-of-jail-free card—and it could be America’s funeral.

If you’re not worried yet, you should be. The future of the nation hangs in the balance, and it’s time to wake up, sorry get out of Dodge......

Sincerely,

A.G.

Dear Daily Disaster Diary, Sept. 4th 2024

 Common sense is the knack of seeing things as they are, and doing things as they ought to be done.

- Josh Billings

Dear Daily Disaster Diary,

Are you ready for the next COP/Circus show in Azerbaijan? The rallying cry, "The 1.5-degree limit must be upheld!" has echoed from climate activists for years. 

This goal, enshrined in the Paris Agreement, represents the world's ambition to limit global temperature rise. The "1.5 degrees" has become shorthand for preventing the worst impacts of climate change. 

Beyond this threshold, we face devastating floods, storms, extreme heatwaves, rampant hunger, and the spread of diseases. However, the 1.5-degree slogan inadequately conveys these dangers. 

It offers a single number to describe climate change and assumes a level of understanding about climate dynamics that most people lack. A 1.5-degree increase in Norway is far different from 1.5 degrees in Namibia. 

In short, this number fails to communicate the vastness of the problem and obscures how rapidly our window of opportunity is closing. 

We need a more tangible, less abstract target for climate action that people can rally around. Sea level rise would be just that; we should set a firm upper limit on its increase. 

This is a far more visible indicator of climate change than any temperature metric. It paints a vivid picture: abandoned cities, eroded coastlines, contaminated drinking water, sewage backups, destroyed habitats, and skyrocketing insurance claims. 

The limit would be around half a meter (19,68 inches), roughly corresponding to the 1.5-degree target. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) estimates that even if temperatures stay at or below 1.5 degrees, global sea levels will rise between 30(11,81 inch) and 70(27,55 inch) centimeters by 2100. 

If emissions remain unchecked, we could see up to two meters (78,74 inch) of rise. 

This increase will intensify the risk of storm surges, push water further inland, and inundate communities that have never experienced flooding before. 

Roads will become impassable, power and sewage plants will be submerged, communication systems will fail, and healthcare systems will collapse. 

Over 10% of the global population lives in low-lying coastal areas vulnerable to sea-level rise. Major global cities like Miami, Mumbai, New York, Shanghai, and Tokyo are at high risk. 

In the United States, a study found that nearly half of coastal communities have failed to make any preparations. The result? Higher costs for taxpayers. 

Retrofitting with levees, new bridges, or other flood control systems is typically far more expensive than building resilient infrastructure in the first place. A clear upper limit on sea-level rise would help the public visualize the looming losses. 

Rising seas provide stark images of the threat: before-and-after photos of coastal erosion, flooding during fair weather, economic damages in coastal areas, or maps showing the expanding reach of storm surges—including the encroachment of the sea into inhabited areas. 

Around the globe, nations have failed to adequately account for the long-term risks of climate change. This failure has led to behaviors that ignore the dangers of a higher waterline, such as continuing to develop flood-prone areas. 

An official limit would encourage more informed decisions by identifying coastal infrastructure as immediately at risk. 

Nations should take the lead in pushing for a cap on sea-level rise. Not least, adopting such a limit at this year’s climate conference would emphasize that the existential threat to small island states and thousands of coastal communities is being taken seriously.

We live in hope.

Sincerely,

A.G.

Dear Daily Disaster Diary, September 3rd, 2024

 The world hates change, yet it is the only thing that has brought progress.

- Charles F. Kettering

We might not be spiraling into chaos overnight, but let’s not kid ourselves—the risks of climate change are undeniably growing. 

Yes, the science is clear, but now there's something else creeping into the picture: a deep sense of overwhelm that only worsens as crisis after crisis hits. 

Sure, it's tempting to sugarcoat things with uplifting stories about climate action. And yes, that's important—because hysteria paralyzes. But let's be real: nice stories alone won't cut it.

What we really need is a combination of new mindsets, financial support distributed fairly, and, most crucially, a collective will. Right now, we’re witnessing an epic battle between different factions—those clinging to outdated notions of security and those pushing for urgent transformation. 

And guess what? This tug-of-war keeps getting bogged down by narrow-minded focus on their respective “clients” or interests.

Here’s the deal: Climate protection isn’t just a chore—it’s an opportunity, both technologically and economically. And yes, success stories and positive examples can help open people’s eyes. 

But let’s not fool ourselves. The harsh realities of the climate crisis won’t just disappear with a smile and a wave. Every single opportunity that brings us closer to stability needs to be seized.

Here’s a concrete win: In January 2016, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania saw the closure of the Shenango Coke Works Facility—one of the largest coal processing plants. The result? 

An immediate drop in air pollutants like sulfur dioxide and arsenic. And here’s the kicker—a significant reduction in hospitalizations for cardiovascular diseases followed. 

A study in Environmental Health Research found that from 2016 to 2018, hospital stays due to heart disease dropped compared to the three years prior. Right after the plant closed, emergency visits for other causes saw no significant change.

Now, while these results don’t prove causality, there’s a strong statistical link between the plant’s closure and the improved health of the surrounding community. That’s not just a story—that’s a call to action!

So, let's stop dithering and start making bold moves. The bitter truth of this crisis is here, and we can’t ignore it. 

Every step towards the stability we crave counts. Let’s get it done!

Your Weekly Navigator,

 The improvement of understanding is for two ends: first, our own increase of knowledge; secondly, to enable us to deliver that knowledge to others.

- John Locke

Turbulence and Climate Change: What You Need to Know

Overview: Recently, long-haul flights have increasingly encountered turbulence, sometimes leading to emergency situations. Studies suggest that climate change plays a significant role in this trend. Turbulence, particularly Clear Air Turbulence (CAT), is becoming more common, which poses challenges for airlines and passengers alike.

What is Clear Air Turbulence (CAT)?

• Definition: CAT occurs in clear skies without any visible warning signs like clouds or storms. It can suddenly jolt an aircraft, causing discomfort or even injuries.
• Recent Incidents:
  • May 26: A Qatar Airways Boeing 787 Dreamliner experienced severe turbulence over Turkey, injuring 12 passengers.
  • March: Lufthansa Flight LH 469 encountered turbulence so severe that the Airbus A330-300 had to make an emergency landing in Washington. Seven passengers were hospitalized.

Impact of Climate Change on Turbulence:

• Jet Stream Changes: Climate change is causing the jet streams—fast-flowing air currents in the atmosphere—to shift and become more unstable. This increases the likelihood of aircraft encountering turbulence, particularly over the North Atlantic.
• Increased Turbulence Hours: Studies show a 17% increase in turbulence over the North Atlantic from 1979 to 2020. This rise correlates with climate change as jet streams meander more due to altered weather patterns.
• Economic Impact: Airlines face increasing costs due to turbulence, with estimates ranging from $150 million to $500 million annually in the U.S. alone. Additional turbulence-related delays and wear on aircraft further drive up these costs.

Measuring Turbulence:

• EDR (Eddy Dissipation Rate): This unit measures the intensity of turbulence. As climate change progresses, scientists expect to use EDR more frequently to quantify turbulence events.

Tips for Passengers:

• Always Wear Your Seatbelt: Even when the seatbelt sign is off, it’s advisable to keep your seatbelt fastened during the flight. Just as you would wear a seatbelt in a car for safety, it’s crucial on a plane, too.
• Check Turbulence Forecasts: Websites like turbli.com offer turbulence forecasts up to 36 hours before your flight, allowing you to be more prepared.
• Choose Daytime Flights: If possible, opt for daytime flights. Night flights can be more stressful due to fatigue, making turbulence feel worse.

Easing Your Mind:

• Turbulence is Normal: Turbulence is a natural part of flying, similar to waves in the ocean. Modern aircraft are designed to withstand even severe turbulence, so your plane is safe.
• Rare Severe Turbulence: Although turbulence might feel intense, severe incidents that cause significant injuries are rare.

Solutions for Airlines:

• Turbulence-forecasting Technology: Airlines can use advanced forecasting tools, like those developed by the University of Reading, to avoid turbulence and choose smoother flight paths. This not only improves passenger comfort but also reduces fuel consumption and carbon emissions.

Conclusion: While turbulence may be becoming more common due to climate change, there are ways to minimize its impact. Passengers can take simple precautions, like wearing seatbelts, while airlines can adopt new technologies to avoid rough air. Remember, turbulence is a normal part of flying, and with proper measures, it’s nothing to fear.

Dear Daily Disaster Diary,

 "At this point, only Putin can save us by threatening the West with nuclear strikes if they don’t go net zero soon! They jumped for every other threat..."

- ADAPTATION-GUIDE







Ten years ago, President Obama embarked on a monumental task: convincing Americans that climate change wasn't just another distant problem but a looming catastrophe that required immediate action. 

He might as well have been trying to convince a cat to take a bath.

In 2014, a Pew Research Center survey revealed that only 40% of Americans saw climate change as a major threat. Compare that to more than 70% of Japanese citizens who got it. Even Europeans were far more concerned, with majorities in countries like Italy, Spain, France, and Germany acknowledging the risks. 

Meanwhile, Americans were more worried about Islamic extremism, financial instability, and—of course—nuclear threats from Iran and North Korea. But the environment? Meh, it barely registered.

Fast forward to 2024, and not much has changed. Despite overwhelming evidence that our planet is heating up faster than a teenager’s TikTok feed, Americans remain stubbornly indifferent. 

Climate change is still not at the top of the list of concerns. Why? Is it ignorance? Is it denial? Or is it something more deeply rooted in our biology?

Enter the book "Minding the Climate: How Neuroscience Can Help Solve Our Environmental Crisis," which sheds light on this very issue. It turns out that our brains are hardwired for short-term survival, not long-term planning. 

Our ancestors didn’t need to worry about rising sea levels; they were too busy not getting eaten by saber-toothed tigers. So, our decision-making evolved around immediate, tangible rewards. Hunt, gather, eat, repeat.

Now, let's talk climate change—something so complex and distant that it’s like asking our brains to solve a Rubik’s cube while juggling flaming swords. 

We can’t see CO2 levels rising in the atmosphere. We can't feel the planet warming (until it's too late). And when we drive our gas-guzzling SUVs or fly off on a jet for a vacation, the rewards are immediate and visible—comfort, convenience, and maybe a few Instagram-worthy photos. 

But the consequences? Invisible, far-off, and seemingly unrelated to our daily lives.

The real kicker is that the very things causing climate change—fossil fuels—are also deeply embedded in our economic and social systems. They’ve made life easier, and they’ve made some people incredibly wealthy. Trying to convince those in power to dismantle the very system that’s filled their coffers? Good luck with that.

Education isn’t helping either. While climate science is more accessible than ever, putting a price tag on education has created a society more focused on short-term financial gains than long-term sustainability. And don’t even get me started on book banning—because, apparently, knowledge is dangerous now.

The media, CEOs, shareholders, and conservative politicians haven’t exactly been cheerleaders for climate action. Instead of training our brains for the necessary change, they’ve been busy sowing doubt, protecting profits, and deflecting responsibility.

So here we are, 2024, with a planet in crisis and a public still mostly indifferent. As Vice President Harris and Governor Walz step into leadership roles, they face a Herculean task. They must somehow rewire our collective brain to prioritize the future of our planet over the comforts of today.

But let’s be honest—until we figure out how to make the fight against climate change as rewarding as scrolling through social media or buying the latest gadget, we’re in for a rough ride.

Good luck, Harris and Walz. You’re going to need it.

Happy Labor Day

Famous Last Words, August 2024

 Man makes a great fuss about this planet which is only a ball-bearing in the hub of the universe.

- Christopher Morley

BERNIE: THE PODCAST EPISODE 9 - BILL MCKIBBEN

The Earth Has Already Used Up Its Resources for 2024: What Does This Mean?

According to the Global Footprint Network, Earth reached its ecological limits for 2024 on August 1st. This date marks what is known as Earth Overshoot Day, the day when humanity has consumed all the natural resources that the planet can renew in a year. 

From now on, we are essentially living on credit. The planet’s ecosystems can no longer keep up with the consumption that occurred in the first seven months of the year. This means that humanity is living as if it had 1.7 Earths at its disposal. Disturbingly, this day is a day earlier than last year’s.

The Global Footprint Network calculates Earth Overshoot Day every year. According to their analysis, it takes a full year for nature to regenerate the resources that humanity consumes from January 1st to August 1st. The calculation compares two key figures: the available productive land and the land needed to sustain current consumption levels, which includes the area required to absorb carbon dioxide emissions through new forests. 

This complex calculation method has faced criticism, with some questioning its accuracy and transparency.

For instance, the Cologne Institute for Economic Research noted in 2021 that combining renewable resources and emissions in the calculation is problematic, as they are not easily comparable. 

The issue of global warming is not primarily about land overuse; it’s mainly about the overproduction of carbon dioxide. This makes the required land area in the calculation appear larger than it might actually be, which should be clarified, according to the institute.

Even environmental organizations like the WWF have criticized the focus on land use. The Earth Overshoot Day for Germany alone fell on May 2nd this year—two days earlier than last year. 

If everyone on the planet lived and consumed like the average German, the world would have exhausted its annual budget for sustainable resources and environmentally friendly emissions by that date. In this case, humanity would need three Earths to sustain itself. 

But it's not just Germany that's struggling; many other countries are too. For example, Qatar and Luxembourg reached their Earth Overshoot Day in February, while Canada, the United States, and Belgium hit theirs in March.

If everyone lived like the average person in China, we would need 2.4 Earths. For the United States, it would be a staggering 5.1 Earths. On the other hand, countries like Jamaica (November 12th), Iraq (November 15th), and Ecuador (November 24th) manage to stretch their resources further.

Historically, humanity's resource consumption was more sustainable. In 1961, we were only using 0.73 Earths, meaning there were still reserves. 

However, since the first official Earth Overshoot Day on December 29th, 1970, the date has steadily moved earlier each year. In the last decade, it has settled around similar dates, except for one anomaly: the COVID-19 pandemic year of 2020. 

Compared to 2019, when Earth Overshoot Day fell on July 29th, it moved to August 22nd in 2020. This shift was due to reduced wood consumption and lower carbon emissions during the lockdowns. However, this effect was short-lived, and by 2021, Earth Overshoot Day returned to July 29th.

According to the WWF, Earth Overshoot Day could be pushed back by seven days if half of the global meat consumption were replaced with plant-based alternatives. 

A staggering 13 days could be gained if we reduced food waste by 50%. These simple changes could buy the Earth some much-needed time, yet the clock continues to tick earlier each year.

The question remains: Will we heed the warning signs or continue down this unsustainable path?

Dear Daily Disaster Diary,

 It is the test of a good religion whether you can joke about it.

- Gilbert K. Chesterton

Title: The West's Immigration Challenge: A Crisis of Assimilation

Dear Daily Disaster Diary,

Western political leaders have failed to recognize that advanced economies in open societies lack the socio-economic and socio-cultural mechanisms to absorb a large number of poorly educated men from developing countries or war-torn regions. 

These migrants often come from backgrounds that do not share the same institutions, culture, or moral values as the West. 

It's irresponsible to assume that all who immigrate to the West will fully adapt to our way of life simply because they arrive here voluntarily.

This assumption might have held true during the 19th and early 20th centuries when large numbers of Europeans fled wars and economic stagnation to settle overseas. 

Within one or two generations, they were fully assimilated. Similar patterns can be observed, albeit more slowly, among immigrants from Asia, Latin America, and parts of Africa. 

However, it has become increasingly clear that Muslim immigrants, in particular, face significant challenges in adapting to Western societies.

Even when they achieve economic success, as often seen in America, they still confront insurmountable cultural differences between Islam and the West. 

While many Muslims succeed in reconciling their faith with their new environment, this is a complex and demanding process. 

Unfortunately, a growing number of Muslims in America, Britain, France, and Germany are turning to Islamism instead.

This is what the guide says: 

If you break the law, there are consequences. Rwanda was never the answer. But what about Ukraine? They need people to clear mines, weave camouflage nets, and remove tons of debris. Prisons could house delinquents who assemble drones.

Your Weekly Navigator

 In skating over thin ice our safety is in our speed.

- Ralph Waldo Emerson

How Safe is Germany?

This is a question that resonates not only abroad but increasingly among Germans themselves, as reports of knife violence, often resulting in serious injuries and fatalities, become disturbingly routine. 

A growing sense of insecurity grips the nation, evidenced by a survey from the Federal Criminal Police Office (Bundeskriminalamt, BKA), which reveals that more than half of the population feels uneasy using public transportation at night. Two-thirds of women actively avoid certain areas. Yet, the political sphere remains silent on the existence of so-called "No-Go Areas."

The statistics are grim. Violent crimes, especially group assaults and knife attacks, are on the rise. 

Migrants are overrepresented in these incidents—a fact that is often glossed over in public discourse. 

According to the BKA, cases of "dangerous and serious bodily injury" involving a knife have surged by 9.7% in the past year, totaling 8,951 cases in 2022, up from 8,160 in 2021 and 7,071 in 2020. Overall, violent crime, which includes murder, manslaughter, robbery, aggravated assault, and rape, has reached its highest level in 15 years, with 214,099 cases recorded in the past year—an 8.6% increase compared to the previous year. The primary driver is the rise in "dangerous and serious bodily injury" cases, which increased by 6.8% to 154,541 cases—the highest number ever recorded.

This alarming trend is the outcome of a failed internal security policy, compounded by a uniquely European ideological confusion. Former Chancellor Angela Merkel turned a blind eye to the consequences of the refugee crisis, the climate crisis, and the euro crisis—but let's not digress. 

The anticipated correction of past mistakes never materialized with the change in power. Germany’s domestic intelligence agency views any ethnically or culturally defined concept of "people" as inherently racist, despite the fact that the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) once campaigned with the slogan "Children instead of Indians" (Kinder statt Inder) and ran a campaign against dual citizenship that excluded non-Germans. 

What were once positions of the CDU, constitutionally valid at the time, have now become the platform of the Alternative for Germany (AfD) and are deemed unconstitutional.

The ideological battle between the left and right misses the point: the German people are weary of these debates. They don't want to be labeled as anti-Muslim or racist for perceiving a risk in the influx of migrants from different cultural backgrounds. 

At the same time, they have no appetite for the blood-and-soil rhetoric of far-right figures like Björn Höcke. People are fed up with political games that fail to improve their daily lives. 

They want to live in safety, to walk through a market square, attend a festival, or traverse a dark park without fear. Yet, in Germany, the simplest demands have always proven to be the most difficult to fulfill.

The Navigator said:

"Thousands of unemployed Germans could be retrained as security personnel, but where is the political will to implement such practical solutions"? 

Instead, the focus remains on ideological purity, while ordinary citizens are left to navigate a world where safety feels increasingly elusive. 

Germany, once a beacon of stability, now finds itself grappling with a reality that is anything but secure.

YOUR WEEKLY NAVIGATOR August, 2024

 Education is the period during which you are being instructed by somebody you do not know, about something you do not want to know.

- Gilbert K. Chesterton

When Mr. Orange met Mr. White at the pub, Mr. Orange mused, “Rising sea levels, caused by melting glaciers, might at least give us the benefit of more oceanfront property.” Mr. White, meanwhile, countered, “It’s wrong to vilify the oil and gas industry, which is crucial to our economy. Sure, we’ll have to move on from fossil fuels eventually, but only because they’ll run out—not because we’re forced to.”

Your money, your choice. You don’t need an electric car, a Bible, or a membership to some overpriced golf course to make a difference. Use your wallet to fight back!

Here at A.G. headquarters, we like to say, “Adapt or die,” but when it comes to heat, we can’t stress it enough. 

Many cities have bylaws requiring landlords to maintain a minimum temperature of 21°C during winter, but there’s no equivalent rule for setting a maximum temperature in the summer. 

We’re advocating for programs that subsidize medical expenses for low-income residents, including the purchase of air conditioning units or fans.

If you want older adults with compromised health, who live alone without air conditioning, to survive, then take action: call the city, contact the Community Housing Corp., ring the Environmental Law Association, knock on the door of an Advocacy Centre for tenants, and wake up your local politicians. 

It might not happen this year, but our A.G.A.P. 2025 (Adaptation-Guide-Action-Plan) will settle this agenda once everyone’s well-being is secured next year.

Just remember: in five years, we’ll look back and say, “We miss the cool summer of 2024!”

And in other news: Tropical Storm Ernesto is expected to regain hurricane status as it continues moving offshore along the East Coast this Sunday, posing a significant risk of dangerous conditions at beaches.

Life-threatening surf and rip currents are likely in the Bahamas, Bermuda, and along the Atlantic’s western shores for the next few days, forecasters say. 

Or, as Mr. Orange would put it: "Cowabunga, Surf’s up!"

Stay safe!

Yours truly,
The Navigator

---

End of the Week Digest: Stay informed, take action, and remember, adaptation is the key to thriving in this ever-changing world.

Q & Adaptation-Guide answer:

Nothing in education is so astonishing as the amount of ignorance it accumulates in the form of inert facts.

 - Henry Brooks Adams 

 I think that from the beginning, those with education knew that Frau von der Leyen would not stand behind  the "Green Deal". Am I wrong?

A.G.:Ursula von der Leyen and the "Green Deal"

Ursula von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, presented the European Green Deal as one of her main priorities when she took office in December 2019. The Green Deal aims to make Europe climate neutral by 2050 (Uschi von der Leyen would be between 90 and 100 years old by then!) and includes a series of measures and initiatives to promote sustainability and environmental protection.

Skepticism and Criticism

There are various reasons why some people might be skeptical about von der Leyen's commitment to the Green Deal:

• Political and Economic Interests: Critics might argue that political and economic interests take precedence over climate goals. In the past, there have been instances where economic considerations have weakened environmental measures.

• Implementation and Progress: The implementation of the Green Deal requires significant changes in many areas, including energy, agriculture, transportation, and industry. Progress can be hindered by bureaucratic hurdles, national interests, and resistance from interest groups.

• Lobbying and Influence: The influence of lobbying groups, particularly from the fossil fuel industry, could undermine the effectiveness and commitment to the Green Deal.

In 2019, a "Green Wave" swept across Europe, capturing the imagination and support of people from all walks of life. 

There was a palpable sense of urgency and possibility, with a collective push towards a more sustainable and environmentally friendly future. 

However, the arrival of the COVID-19 pandemic, coupled with skyrocketing living costs and geopolitical upheavals such as Putin's invasion of Ukraine, has significantly dampened this enthusiasm.

And the E.U. President tried to strike a balance between "Right" and "Left." The EU has already made tweaks to the Green Deal, with more to follow. 

Von der Leyen herself now wants to initiate a "Clean Industrial Deal" to help reduce the relatively high European energy costs. Moreover, the debate over the "combustion engine ban," the regulation that only CO2-neutral fuel vehicles will be allowed from 2035 onwards, is not over yet.

Who voted for this woman? Everyone who was aware that the German is the "greenest" Commission President they could get. 

What a disgrace! 

Humans will have to adapt and evolve or become extinct. And while the European People's Party has time until 2050, we will act now!

Here are some practical steps we can take to conserve energy and make a tangible difference:

1. Stop Idling Engines: Reducing unnecessary idling can significantly cut down on fuel consumption and emissions.
2. Tax Luxury Gas-Guzzling SUVs: Implementing higher taxes on inefficient vehicles can incentivize the adoption of greener alternatives.
3. Ban Diesel Cars: Phasing out diesel vehicles can reduce air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.
4. Curtail Private Jet Use: Limiting the use of private jets, which are disproportionately harmful to the environment, can have a positive impact.
5. Promote Trains: Encouraging train travel over short-haul flights can reduce carbon footprints.
6. Combine Errands to Save Gas: Simple lifestyle changes, like combining errands, can lead to substantial fuel savings.
7. Wash Clothes and Dishes in Cold Water: Using cold water for washing is a small change that can lead to significant energy savings.

 Famous last words...

July, 2024

He who destroys a good book, kills reason itself.

- John Milton in his anti-censorship pamphlet.

Zigzagging Through July: A Modern Odyssey of Catastrophes and Oversights

As we navigate the treacherous waters of July, it's as if we're aboard a Titanic of calamities, careening through waves of unprecedented disasters and technological blunders. 

Our world has turned into an Olympic arena of extremes—hotter, bigger, earlier for wildfires; faster, higher, and wetter for floods. 

Every month sets new records, each one more staggering than the last.

Wildfire and Weather Woes

Consider Hurricane Beryl. This beast of a storm has set a new benchmark, becoming the earliest Category 4 Atlantic hurricane on record, surpassing Hurricane Dennis from July 8, 2005. 

Meanwhile, July 22, 2023, has etched itself into history as the hottest day ever recorded, with an average global temperature of 17.16°C (62.88°F). 

Edmonton, Canada, has been smothered under a blanket of smoke, prompting city officials to activate extreme weather responses for both poor air quality and unbearable heat. Residents flocked to recreation centers, libraries, and indoor pools, where N95 masks were distributed to those in need.

The Unseen Threat: Emerging Variants

Amid these environmental crises, a new invisible enemy lurks. The KP.2 and KP.3 COVID-19 variants are spreading insidiously, with symptoms that include sneezing, congestion, headaches, sore muscles, nausea, and sheer exhaustion. 

Despite this, a visit to several German hospitals revealed a startling sight: not a single doctor wore a protective mask. It's as if they've missed the memo about the ongoing threat. 

The advice remains unchanged: masks, social distancing, hygiene, and boosting your immune system are critical. These precautions will be our reality for years to come.

The Digital Achilles' Heel

In an era where digital dependence is the norm, a recent fiasco underscores the need for caution. 

CrowdStrike Holdings Inc., a cybersecurity giant, sent out a routine update intended to enhance features and fix bugs. 

Instead, it unleashed a global IT catastrophe due to a defect in the update for Microsoft Windows users. 

Hospitals, banks, insurers, airlines, grocers, emergency service providers and countless others were thrown into chaos...

This incident is a stark reminder of why pilots insist on hard copies of essential protocols. When it comes to health and wealth, there's no room for error.

A Call for Preparedness and Prudence

As we brace ourselves against the barrage of climate extremes, viral threats, and digital vulnerabilities, the message is clear: preparedness and prudence are paramount. 

The world may be spiraling through a series of records and mishaps, but our response can make all the difference. 

Whether it’s ensuring proper use of masks and maintaining hygiene or demanding robust backup plans for digital systems, we must stay vigilant.

Pro-Life in every sense, we advocate for safeguarding both our health and our infrastructure. 

Let this be a call to action: in the face of relentless challenges, our resilience and foresight will be our greatest assets.

 We cannot be separated in interest or divided in purpose. We stand together until the end.

- Woodrow Wilson

Dear Disaster Diary,

Reason #575 not to vote Republican in November 2024: 

History takes us back to the revised North American Free Trade Agreement unveiled under Trump in 2019.

Let's take a moment to appreciate the spectacle of the White House's proclamation: "The Biggest and best trade deal in the history of the world." This grandiose declaration, much like many from the Trump era, falls spectacularly short upon closer examination. 

In reality, the updated agreement is more akin to a slight reshuffling of deck chairs on the Titanic than a monumental achievement in international trade.

Yes, there are some changes for the better. Mexico has agreed to adopt stronger protections for labor unions—though, given the administration's track record on workers' rights domestically, one might question the sincerity of this victory lap. 

Canada will now allow the sale of more American dairy products, which is wonderful news for the lactose-tolerant among us. However, these minor improvements are overshadowed by significant drawbacks that make it difficult to celebrate this "accomplishment."

For instance, the new restrictions on auto imports are poised to raise the price of new vehicles. In an economy where many families are already struggling to make ends meet, the prospect of more expensive cars is hardly a welcome development. 

It's a classic case of winning the battle but losing the war, as higher costs for consumers negate any supposed benefits of the deal.

Even more egregious is the glaring omission of any commitment to address climate change. At a time when the world is grappling with the escalating impacts of a warming planet, the absence of environmental considerations in this trade agreement is nothing short of irresponsible. It’s a stark reminder of the administration’s indifference towards the most pressing global crisis of our time.

The irony, of course, is that this deal may indeed represent the best possible outcome under Trump's leadership—a low bar if ever there was one. It is, after all, a presidency marked by bombast over substance, where lofty claims often crumble under the weight of scrutiny. 

The USMCA, as it is now called, stands as a testament to the administration's penchant for overselling and underdelivering.

In the grand scheme of things, this "minor deal" might do more harm than good. It exemplifies how the Trump presidency, with its superficial fixes and neglect of critical issues, continues to ill-serve the American people. 

As we approach November 2024, let us remember that the legacy of this administration is built on such hollow triumphs and misplaced priorities.

Yours scathingly, 

Disaster Diary

Dear Disaster Diary, 

Where everything is bad it must be good to know the worst.

- Francis H. Bradley

An Ode to the 4th of July

On this day of freedom and reflection,
We face the shadows of our own creation.
The problems we're facing as a nation right now are structural,
Demanding radical solutions, truths fundamental.

One party delves deeper into a universe,
Of delusion, disinformation, a curse.
Human beings, still hunter-gatherers at heart,
Struggle to foresee, to play the long-term part.

Our brains, wired for immediate threats,
Fail to see the cave collapsing in regrets.
The world unready to slow climate’s pace,
Nor to live with the changes we must face.

Cities warming at twice the global rate,
Air conditioning helps, but fuels the state.
Imagine a power outage, heat wave severe,
A catastrophe that’s ever so near.

Trees, nature's gift, cool and store carbon,
Scrub air, nurture life, and help us harden.
Yet each year, cities lose 36 million strong,
Despite efforts to plant and right the wrong.

Preparing for the last disaster we’ve known,
Leaves us unprepared for the next storm blown.
The lessons from the extreme weather parade,
Show the U.S. unready, foundations decayed.

Electric grids, sewers, forests in need,
Of fortification, revamp, and clear heed.
But there's a limit to how much we can adapt,
If emissions aren’t cut, resilience entraps.

Heat waves, floods, droughts, wildfires in extreme,
Make adaptation alone a fading dream.
On this day of freedom, let’s pledge anew,
To face reality, and truth pursue.

For if we’re to honor this land so grand,
We must act now, with a united hand.
Let this be our anthem, a call to unite,
For the future we cherish, for the battles we fight.

 Dear Disaster Diary,

Fate is the friend of the good, the guide of the wise, the tyrant of the foolish, the enemy of the bad.

- William Rounseville Alger

.......oh, Canada......🎂

Reassessing the Economic Effects of Climate Change

Introduction

In recent years, the conversation around climate change and its economic impacts has evolved significantly. Initially, economist William Nordhaus's 1992 work laid the foundation for understanding how climate change would affect the global economy. He estimated that for every degree of global warming, the world economy would shrink by 1 to 3 percent. This view, while concerning, suggested manageable challenges. However, a new paper from the U.S. National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) is challenging this established perspective.

A New Perspective on Climate Change

Harvard University's Adrien Bilal and Northwestern University's Diego Kanzig have released a groundbreaking study, "The Macroeconomic Impact of Climate Change: Global vs. Local Temperature." This research indicates that the economic effects of climate change might be much more severe than previously thought. They argue that extreme weather events, such as storms and droughts, which are becoming more frequent due to climate change, play a significant role in economic damage. These events do not respect national borders and are closely linked to global temperature changes.

Key Findings

Bilal and Kanzig's study highlights several critical points:

1. Underestimation of Damage: Previous studies focused mainly on how rising temperatures directly affect productivity. However, the new research shows that extreme weather also depletes capital, leading to greater economic losses.

2. Significant Economic Impact: The study estimates that by the end of this century, the world economy could be 31 percent poorer due to climate change. Additionally, they argue that the world economy would be 37 percent larger today if global warming had not occurred since 1960.

3. Slowing Global Growth: The global growth rate has been slowing, especially in Western countries. This trend might be partially attributed to the economic effects of climate change.

4. Future Economic Challenges: The number and severity of extreme weather events and zoonotic pandemics (diseases transmitted from animals to humans) have been rising. These trends are likely to continue, leading to higher costs for repairing infrastructure and increased social and healthcare expenses.

Implications for Canada and the World

The study suggests that the economic impact of climate change will be felt globally, with no country exempt. Rich countries, including Canada, will not escape unscathed. In fact, developed nations have more infrastructure that can be damaged by extreme weather, and their older populations are more vulnerable to its effects.

Carbon Tax and the Social Cost of Carbon

One of the significant takeaways from the study is the need to reassess the carbon tax. Canada's current carbon tax is $80 per tonne, but previous estimates of the social cost of carbon ranged from $100 to $200. Bilal and Kanzig argue that the true cost should be much higher, potentially over $1000 per tonne. They suggest that failing to pay this cost now will lead to much higher expenses in the future, likening it to the perpetual economic strain of a domestic war.

Conclusion

In summary, the new research from the NBER presents a stark warning about the economic effects of climate change. The findings suggest that climate change will significantly reduce global economic output, with severe implications for all countries, including Canada. This study emphasizes the importance of taking immediate and substantial action to combat climate change, highlighting that the costs of inaction will be far greater in the long run. 

As we celebrate Canada Day, it's crucial to reflect on these findings and consider the steps needed to protect our future economic well-being.