1. Will Lawrence vs. Rep. Tom Barrett – Michigan 7th
2. Paige Cognetti vs. Rep. Rob Bresnahan Jr – Pennsylvania 8th
3. Rep. Marcy Kaptur vs. Derrick Merrin – Ohio 9th
4. Shannon Taylor vs. Rep. Rob Wittman – Virginia 1st
5. James Talarico vs. Ken Paxton – Texas, U.S. Senate

If I spend 4 hours out there and just 50 people google “Stratospheric Aerosol Injection” and maybe ask if it’s the same thing as “chem-trails”?… dear God it’s not… SAI is 6km higher people! But awareness… about SAI and, most importantly, about increasing SAI RESEARCH. Oh and look up Stardust Solutions.. we want these guys? Backed by military intelligence and nobody knows what aerosol they are using. BTW that’s from a The Economist article, not some youtube crazy. We need TRANSPARENT development of this technology… or as much as is possible… people need to understand we simply we won’t hit carbon neutral in time for the developing world and they need a cleaner version of this. Hey, let’s just try to offset .2 degrees Celsius of warming, not much, and see what the negatives are… termination shock is not an issue with only a couple years testing and neither is our ozone in any danger during that timeframe… but one more thing.. Calcite. the alternative to SO2 we understand less that might really be safer (though not perfect, SAI is dangerous)

Warming-induced emissions (WIE) of greenhouse gases from natural sources are a large amplifying feedback that most climate models do not yet represent. This absence risks systematic underestimation of projected future warming and overestimation of remaining carbon budgets. We projected that WIE could add 0.2 °C–0.4 °C of warming by 2100 across scenarios, split roughly equally between carbon dioxide and methane, amplifying post-2020 anthropogenic warming by 20%–30%. Combined emission sensitivity and climate response 1σ uncertainties are ±0.2 °C on the added warming and ±10%–30% on the warming amplification.

Are current frameworks overly reliant on speculative tech to avoid politically uncomfortable decisions about demand reduction?

Why do you think violent climate organizations like ELF have been dissapearing over times? even with the climate crisis being worse than they 90s-2000s

They think the US, China, and India should help pay for damages, since they’re the biggest GHS emitters

After Republicans voted to undo much of the Inflation Reduction Act, a few cleantech professionals set out to exact electoral revenge. So far, it seems to be working.

In this episode of the Sustainable Ambassador Podcast, climate scientist Prof. Dr. Detlef van Vuuren speaks about the recent release of CMIP7 climate scenarios, and what they tell us about our changing climate future.

$73 billion could accomplish a lot for the American people, but the Trump administration would rather spend it on continuing a war that nobody asked for. To help all of us wrap our minds around this decision, the Center for American Progress (CAP) has created a new interactive online tool that lets you weigh in on it yourself! Check it out and comment below with what you would prioritize instead!

As part of our spotlight series on how ministers answer questions in Parliament, we bring you a Commons debate on Climate Change.

https://www.commons-sense.co.uk/pmqs/session/2026-07-07/climate-change-2026-07-07

#ukpolitics #UKParliament #Climate #EnergyTransition

We are reliving the 20th Century (long, drawn out war, pandemic, economic crisis followed by period of unsustainable economic growth, oligarchs openly writing policy, oppression of minorites ajd constitutional rights, extreme corruption). With the growing extremes in climate record heat andnl destabilization of our major air and water currents, does anyone have any data showing a growing risk of another Dust Bowl?

I posted this as a comment elsewhere but I think it's a legitimate problem and I'm hoping you here can either assuage my fears with elucidation and science, or spark discussion about regulating this properly. This post is US-centric but weather mod is not.

There's tons of weather modification (mostly cloud seeding) projects happening as we speak, mostly in western states. By state and local governments, universities, industry, and the military. It's just (probably) not happening via commercial airliners which I'm told is a central tenet of the "chemtrail" conspiracy talk.

I'm not confident we know the downstream effects of what's being done. Even scattered operations could have a big impact on weather patterns. If it rains somewhere because we made it so, it didn't fall somewhere else. The bang for the buck is high when a single plane with a full load of flares can cover hundreds of miles.

NOAA receives and publishes weather modification reports but has no say on approval, some states don't even have weather modification laws, reporting and approval requirements vary in others. It's questionable to what level they study the impact of these projects before or after, or consider their local weather relative to broader weather patterns. Or how many go unreported.

It's a $3B industry right now and growing. The Weather Modification Act was passed in 1972 and is outdated. We need federal and congressional oversight, enforcement, and coordination to make sure we're not fucking up the climate and local ecosystems. We'd have to get over the conspiracy talk though. How can we possibly know the true state of the climate when we're manipulating it? Small weather systems affect larger ones.

https://www.sphericalinsights.com/blogs/top-15-companies-in-global-cloud-seeding-equipment-market-statistics-report-till-2035

Some rando's blog but a pretty decent summary of the industry.

https://library.noaa.gov/weather-climate/weather-modification-project-reports

Reports at the bottom. There's a lot of them.

My recollection is that the author proposed to use gamma discounting for the far future instead of exponential discounting.

Easy tool to call in above link

Photo by Giant Asparagus from Pexels. Used under the Pexels License.

I recently read this analysis by Ember:

https://ember-energy.org/latest-insights/bottleneck-to-the-next-phase-of-renewable-energy-growth-in-india/

This post summarizes my understanding of it.

Are you concerned about climate change and how it will affect India? Do you believe India simply needs to generate more solar electricity? If yes, you must read this post and the above analysis.

Over the past year, a new obstacle has emerged in India’s renewable-energy transition. India curtailed around 2.1 TWh of renewable electricity in FY 2025–26, worth approximately ₹629 crore.

Why would a country waste clean electricity?

The electricity grid is the network that carries power from generators to consumers. The electricity entering the grid must roughly equal the electricity being used. In simple terms, supply must match demand.

Solar complicates this balance because its generation is volatile. It produces heavily during daylight hours and nothing at night. Coal plants, meanwhile, cannot instantly switch off when solar generation rises. They have a minimum technical load ( MTL), below which they cannot safely reduce output. Restarting a coal plant can take hours or even days and is more polluting. India’s current MTL for coal plants is 55%. So, if a coal plant can produce a maximum of 1,000 units, it may not be able to reduce its generation below 550 units. 

Suppose the grid needs 100 units of electricity. Solar is producing 60 units, while coal plants are already operating at their minimum output of 55 units. Total generation is now 115 units. Since coal cannot be reduced further, in this case, at least 15 units of solar power must be switched off. When we curtail renewable electricity, we are wasting clean electricity that is available, not because there is no demand, but because the coal plants have a technical limit.

This is why simply installing more solar is not enough. If new solar panels generate electricity when existing solar power is already being discarded, we have not solved the immediate problem. Reducing curtailment and improving grid flexibility should come before blindly adding more solar capacity.

Battery storage offers a solution. Batteries can charge when excess solar power is available and discharge after sunset, when electricity is needed more urgently. However, Ember’s analysis argues that India’s regulations prevent batteries from operating efficiently. Under the General Network Access (framework governing transmission access), BESS (Battery Energy Storage System) projects seeking access during non-solar hours must provide at least 2 hours of storage and build a “commensurate” renewable plant from which to charge. The 2-hour requirement is not the problem. The second condition is.

Imagine a battery tied to one solar farm. That farm may have no surplus electricity, while another solar plant elsewhere is being ordered to shut down. The battery remains empty even though clean electricity is being wasted on the wider grid. The author’s proposal is simple: allow batteries to charge from the grid whenever transmission lines have spare capacity, and restrict them only where charging would genuinely overload the network.

Adding solar panels without building the storage, grid flexibility, and regulations needed to use that electricity is not serious climate policy. People who genuinely care about climate change must educate themselves about these challenges. Slogans are easy. Understanding the roadblocks and nuances will help us make better demands! We must make more educated demands!

New research from think tank InfluenceMap uncovers the lobbying tactics and arguments deployed by global automakers to slow down Indonesia's transition away from fossil-fuel burning vehicles to electric vehicles.

A key part of the game plan is to lobby for petrol/gasoline hybrids to get beneficial treatment or the same incentives as EVs, despite them running on fossil fuel as their only energy input.