Tag Archives: thursday

Alberta wildfire was the costliest natural disaster in Canadian history

Fort McMurray residents look over the damage as wildfire evacuees trickle back to their homes. REUTERS/Topher Seguin

Alberta wildfire was the costliest natural disaster in Canadian history

By on Jul 7, 2016Share

The wildfire that ripped through Alberta, Canada’s Fort McMurray area in June devastated homes, boreal forests, and tar sands oil production. Now that the dust has settled, another scary aspect of the fire has emerged: the cost.

All told, the Fort McMurray wildfire cost $3.6 billion in Canadian currency (that’s $2.8 billion USD), the Insurance Bureau of Canada announced on Thursday, making it the costliest natural disaster in Canadian history.

According to the bureau, the costs broke down as follows: 27,000 personal-property claims with an average claim of $81,000 each; 12,000 auto claims averaging $15,000; and more than 5,000 business claims which averaged over $250,000 (including the cost of work closures).

That’s more than double the expense of the previous most-costly-natural-disaster-in-Canadian-history, a 2013 flood in southern Alberta that cost $1.7 billion in insurance claims.

These billion-dollar disasters will be less “natural” in the future, with climate change fueling longer and more ferocious wildfire seasons.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

Originally posted here:  

Alberta wildfire was the costliest natural disaster in Canadian history

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Alberta wildfire was the costliest natural disaster in Canadian history

Ozone hole not so holey anymore

Sometimes shrinkage is a good thing

Ozone hole not so holey anymore

By on Jul 1, 2016Share

Here’s something we don’t get to say very often here at Grist dot org: Good news, humans!

Remember the hole in the ozone layer? Well, three decades after countries started banning the chemicals destroying it, the ozone layer is on the mend, according to a study published Thursday in the journal Science.

While a full recovery isn’t expected until mid-century, researchers found that the seasonal hole in the ozone layer over Antarctica is shrinking. The hole, which was discovered in 1984, was caused by chemicals known as chlorofluorocarbons, or CFCs, that at the time were found in household goods like hairspray and air conditioners.

The ozone layer, part of the Earth’s stratosphere between six and 30 miles above the planet’s surface, absorbs ultraviolet rays from the sun, and protects us, its thankless inhabitants, from harmful radiation. In fact, life on Earth wouldn’t be possible without the ozone layer.

“Think of [the ozone layer] like a patient with a disease,” said Susan Solomon, MIT chemist and the study’s lead author. “First, it was getting worse. Then it stopped — it was stable but still in bad shape.”

Now, it looks like it’s actually getting better. Congratulations, Earthlings! You’ll survive another day after all.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

Read the article: 

Ozone hole not so holey anymore

Posted in alo, Anchor, eco-friendly, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Ozone hole not so holey anymore

The Supreme Court Abortion Ruling Could Soon Take Down Laws in These 8 States

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In a press call on Thursday, Planned Parenthood announced a campaign to work toward the repeal of abortion restrictions in eight states across the country, in light of the Supreme Court’s historic ruling in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt.

The ruling, announced on Monday, found that two types of abortion clinic restrictions in Texas—a law requiring abortion providers to have local hospital admitting privileges and a rule requiring clinics to meet the strict infrastructure standards of outpatient surgery centers—were unconstitutional because they caused an undue burden on abortion access.

Planned Parenthood announced on Thursday that it was planning to seek repeals of Texas-style restrictions in seven other states: Missouri, Virginia, Florida, Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee. Planned Parenthood also announced that they would begin work toward repealing abortion restrictions in Texas beyond those struck down this week by the Supreme Court.

Missouri and Tennessee each have both of the Texas-style restrictions on the books: an admitting-privileges law and facility infrastructure requirements. In Missouri, the admitting-privileges law led to the closure of an abortion clinic in Columbia, leaving the state with just one clinic. In Tennessee, both laws are being challenged in the courts. The rest of the states on Planned Parenthood’s list each have laws requiring structural standards comparable to those of surgical centers, though the law specifics vary by state.

Read this article: 

The Supreme Court Abortion Ruling Could Soon Take Down Laws in These 8 States

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Supreme Court Abortion Ruling Could Soon Take Down Laws in These 8 States

Supreme Court Deals Blow to Obama Immigration Program

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The Supreme Court dealt a major blow to President Barack Obama’s effort to shield undocumented immigrants from deportation, upholding a lower court’s rejection of that program by deadlocking in a 4-4 split on Thursday. Read the full decision here:

DV.load(“https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2894930-US-v-Texas.js”,
width: 630,
height: 400,
sidebar: false,
text: false,
pdf: false,
container: “#DV-viewer-2894930-US-v-Texas”
);

Jump to original – 

Supreme Court Deals Blow to Obama Immigration Program

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Supreme Court Deals Blow to Obama Immigration Program

The Supreme Court Just Shot Down a Big Challenge to Affirmative Action. Read the Decision Here.

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The Supreme Court delivered a major victory for affirmative action on Thursday, rejecting a challenge to a University of Texas admissions system that uses race as a factor to ensure diversity for a portion of its student body. The case, Fisher v. University of Texas, concerns the school’s use of a “holistic” system for 25 percent of its class—the rest of the class as admitted purely on the basis of high school grades—that includes race among other factors. A white applicant who was rejected by the school challenged the system.

On Thursday, the Supreme Court sided with the university in a 4-3 decision. Read the full ruling here:

DV.load(“https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2894830-Fisher.js”,
width: 630,
height: 400,
sidebar: false,
text: false,
pdf: false,
container: “#DV-viewer-2894830-Fisher”
);

Read more about the man who brought this case to the Supreme Court and statements by the late Justice Antonin Scalia earlier in the case suggesting that black students belong at “slower” colleges.

Jump to original:

The Supreme Court Just Shot Down a Big Challenge to Affirmative Action. Read the Decision Here.

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Supreme Court Just Shot Down a Big Challenge to Affirmative Action. Read the Decision Here.

Sadiq Khan Makes an Impassioned Call to Reject Brexit

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In the final stretch leading up to Thursday’s landmark referendum that will decide Britain’s fate as a member of the European Union, London mayor Sadiq Khan on Tuesday made a rousing speech urging voters to reject Brexit—a campaign he condemned as “project hate” against immigrants.

Khan’s sharp rhetoric was a part of BBC’s Great Debate on Tuesday, in which leading members of both sides in the campaign to determine Britain’s future in the EU made last-minute appeals to voters about whether or not Britain should retain its membership. Pro-Brexit leader and former London mayor Boris Johnson also participated in the televised debate, where he continued his calls for Britain to leave and “take back control” of its economy and its destiny. Johnson also said that if Britain were to vote in favor Britain’s departure on Thursday, it could mark the beginning of a new “independence day” for the country.

Khan and Scottish Tory Leader Ruth Davidson slammed Johnson for spreading “lies” about the cost of EU membership and using Turkey’s potential membership to fuel fears concerning terrorism and Britain’s security. They argued that contrary to those who want to leave the EU, the cost of membership does not outweigh its benefits.

Johnson, along with the the far-right political party United Kingdom Independence Party, have been criticized for employing scare-mongering tactics to convince Britons to withdraw its EU membership. UKIP leader Nigel Farage insists that his party is not racist.

More:  

Sadiq Khan Makes an Impassioned Call to Reject Brexit

Posted in alo, Brita, FF, GE, Landmark, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Sadiq Khan Makes an Impassioned Call to Reject Brexit

Brexit Now Looking Like It Will Probably Fail

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Peter Eavis says that Brexit is likely to lose and Britain will remain part of the EU:

Asking people to predict a result of an election has, over time, provided more accurate forecasts than asking people their voting intentions, according to a study by Justin Wolfers, a University of Michigan economist and an Upshot contributor, and David Rothschild, of the Microsoft Research and Statistics Center.

When Survation asked, “Regardless of how you plan to vote, what do you think the result will be?” just shy of 40 percent of people said the “remain” camp would win. Only 26 percent said that “leave” would prevail.

The betting markets agree:

The betting odds for the EU referendum changed direction over the weekend and now firmly favour a Remain vote with just three days to go….Ladbrokes has given just a 27% chance of a Vote Leave while William Hill has it as 28.5%. Ladbrokes added that 95% of betting on was a Remain vote on Monday.

My sense—though I’d prefer actual data if anyone has collected it—is that secession votes usually follow a pattern: the leavers get an upward bump a few weeks before voting day, but stayers get a bump in the few days before voting day. A fair number of people flirt with the idea of leaving, but then get scared at the last minute and decide to vote for the status quo instead. Basically, in any secession referendum, I figure that Leave needs to be polling at 55 percent or higher to have a realistic chance of winning.

As of today, the polls are still tied, so my guess is that Brexit will fail on Thursday. If I’m right that about 5 percent of the leavers will get cold feet and change their minds, the final tally will be something like 53-47 percent in favor of remaining in the EU. We’ll find out in a couple of days.

Read article here:

Brexit Now Looking Like It Will Probably Fail

Posted in Brita, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Brexit Now Looking Like It Will Probably Fail

Here’s the Best News We’ve Gotten All Year

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

No joke. This may be boring as hell, but it really and truly is great news:

Federal Reserve officials strongly signaled they will toughen big-bank capital requirements even more than they have since the 2008 crisis, a move that will add to the pressure on the largest U.S. banks to consider shrinking. Fed governors Daniel Tarullo and Jerome Powell, in separate public comments on Thursday, said the Fed would require eight of the largest U.S. banks to maintain more equity to pass the central bank’s annual “stress tests.”

“Effectively, this will be a significant increase in capital,” Mr. Tarullo said on Bloomberg television….Mr. Powell said at a banking conference that the Fed’s move would make big banks “fully internalize the risk” they pose to the economy.

“I have not reached any conclusion that a particular bank needs to be broken up or anything like that,” he said. The point is to “raise capital requirements to the point at which it becomes a question that banks have to ask themselves.”

Bernie Sanders has campaigned heavily on the idea of breaking up big banks. But that shouldn’t be our goal. Our goal should be to make banks safer and to reduce the likelihood that they need to be bailed out in the future. That’s what higher capital requirements do: they force banks to carry a bigger buffer against losses, which makes them less likely to fail in any future downturn.

As it happens, new regulations put in place since the financial meltdown of 2008 have already increased capital requirements, but big banks still have an unfair advantage in the market: their funding costs are lower because investors figure they’ll be bailed out if they ever implode in the future. To make up for this, big banks should, as Tarullo said, “fully internalize the risk” they pose to the economy. In other words, if big banks have an automatic advantage simply because taxpayers have little choice but to rescue them in case they fail, they should be required to pay higher insurance premiums against failure. That’s essentially what higher capital requirements do.

This is fair. However, higher capital requirements also make big banks less profitable, which in turn gives them a strong incentive to downsize all on their own. And that’s how it should be. There’s no reason for the Fed or anyone else to pick and choose banks to break up. We just need to make sure they’re reasonably safe and are operating on a level playing field. If we do this, we’re providing an organic incentive to downsize. The banks themselves get to decide whether and how to do it.

The only bad news here is that the Fed is unlikely to raise capital requirements enough to suit me. Nonetheless, this is very much another step in the right direction.

See original: 

Here’s the Best News We’ve Gotten All Year

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, organic, Safer, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Here’s the Best News We’ve Gotten All Year

Donald Trump Once Said His Wife Shouldn’t Work Because She Should Prepare Dinner

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Should you forget for any brief moment during your upcoming Memorial Day weekend that Donald Trump has a serious problem with women, here is a 1994 clip of the presidential hopeful explaining why he didn’t approve of his then wife Marla Maples joining the workforce.

“I have days where I think it’s great,” Trump said in the newly unearthed interview. “And then I have days where if I come home and—you know, I don’t want to sound too much like a chauvinist—but when I come home and dinner’s not ready, I’ll go through the roof, okay?”

The clip comes courtesy of the Daily Show‘s “Tales from the Trump Archive” series, in which host Trevor Noah brings to light such unsavory moments from the real estate magnate’s past. Also on Thursday, NBC resurfaced another vintage interview where Trump called pregnancy an “inconvenience” to businesses. Anyone sensing a pattern?

Link to original: 

Donald Trump Once Said His Wife Shouldn’t Work Because She Should Prepare Dinner

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Donald Trump Once Said His Wife Shouldn’t Work Because She Should Prepare Dinner

Trump will outline his “thoughts” on energy policy. Here’s what he could say.

Trump will outline his “thoughts” on energy policy. Here’s what he could say.

By and on May 25, 2016Share

Presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump will speak at the Williston Basin Petroleum conference in Bismarck, N.D., on Thursday, where he’ll emit puffs of carbon dioxide allegedly on the topic of energy policy. In preparation for the speech, Trump has been chatting with energy adviser Rep. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) and he’s presumably studying up on OPEC and energy regulations, too.

We’ve collected some of the real estate developer’s past comments on climate and energy to give you some idea of what to expect to hear on Thursday:

On the basic science of climate change: “I am not a great believer in man-made climate change,” Trump told the Washington Post editorial board in March. “If you look, they had global cooling in the 1920s and now they have global warming, although now they don’t know if they have global warming.”

A panel of scientists ranked all of the then-presidential candidates’ public remarks on climate for the Associated Press last November. Trump got 15 points — out of 100.

On climate vs. weather: When it was “really cold outside” last October, Trump tweeted that we “could use a big fat dose of global warming!”

On the kind of climate change he is worried about: “I think our biggest form of climate change we should worry about is nuclear weapons.” Interpretation: unclear.

On negotiating with OPEC: “We need one thing: brainpower,” Trump said in an interview with CNN in 2011. Oil prices “will go down if you say it properly,” he added. He also wouldn’t have minded strolling into Libya that year: “I would take the oil,” he said.

On coal: “I want clean coal, and we’re going to have clean coal and we’re going to have plenty of it,” Trump said earlier this month. “We’re going to have great, clean coal. We’re going to have an amazing mining business.”

“The miners of West Virginia and Pennsylvania, which was so great to me last week, Ohio and all over are going to start to work again, believe me,” he said.

(Trump endorser and coal executive Bob Murray disagrees).

On gas prices: “I will cap gas prices at $1 per gallon,” Trump told reporters in South Carolina in February. “Plus, I will take all of ISIS’s oil. I bet gas prices will be 50 cents in much of the country under my presidency.”

On liquefied natural gas:What’s LNG?

On the Environmental Protection Agency: “We’re going to get rid of so many different things,” Trump said in a February debate. “Environmental protection — we waste all of this money. We’re going to bring that back to the states.” But only if he can figure out what the EPA is. Trump said he would eliminate some agency called “Department of Environmental. I mean, the DEP is killing us environmentally, it’s just killing our businesses.”

On clean energy:

On clean energy when campaigning in clean energy-heavy states: Trump told an Iowa voter that he’s OK with wind subsidies. “It’s an amazing thing when you think — you know, where they can, out of nowhere, out of the wind, they make energy.”

On the Paris climate accord signed by 175 countries: “One of the dumbest things I’ve ever heard in politics — in the history of politics as I know it.”

On his hair: “You have showers where I can’t wash my hair properly, it’s a disaster!” Thanks to the EPA, Trump told a crowd in December, showerheads “have restrictors put in. The problem is you stay under the shower for five times as long.”

On his hair and the ozone layer: “Wait a minute — so if I take hairspray and if I spray it in my apartment, which is all sealed, you’re telling me that affects the ozone layer?’” Trump asked a Charleston audience in May. “I say, no way, folks. No way!”

This post was originally published May 3, 2016. It has been edited and updated. 

Share

Get Grist in your inbox

Original article:  

Trump will outline his “thoughts” on energy policy. Here’s what he could say.

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, Prepara, solar, solar panels, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Trump will outline his “thoughts” on energy policy. Here’s what he could say.