The Arctic Council (AC) and NATO aims conflict with no climate change mitigation
Given the new report on NATO expansion in Finland and Sweden, we see calls for all signatories to abandon the Council while Russia heads it (for the next year and a half).
I checked the Arctic Council WWF website that had an article about the great work that was going on but the article was pulled (Giving 404 error) and no image saved (or it was removed) from the Wayback Machine archives.
Given the huge issues (wildfires, Fossil fuel extraction, radioactive materials dumped on sea bed, Cod migration towards Russia etc) that abound with this sensitive area, it comes as some surprise that Cold War rhetoric and associated PR management has left Climate Change on the back burner.
President Putin has denied man made climate change ( https://bellona.org/news/arctic/2017-04-trump-like-friend-of-putin-tells-him-climate-change-isnt-man-made ) and the other AC countries acted as a rebuff for sensible Climate policies against Fossil Fuel lobbyists and politicians that have little understanding of the science and potential impacts of warming, floods and increased wind speeds etc.
No media or scientist is drawing attention to this because of effective attacks causing self censorship or because of political pressure. There has not been any figures for CO2 budget for the Ukraine war for instance (8 years and the recent months since the latest development). Same could be said for any other ongoing wars (Saudi, Turkey etc etc).
Just what are our priorities?
Have a great Climate Change Friday and follow @gretathunberg and friends
Posted by Shaun McGee
Posted to nuclear-news.net
posted on 20th May 2022
1 Comment »
Leave a Reply
-
Archives
- February 2023 (94)
- January 2023 (388)
- December 2022 (277)
- November 2022 (336)
- October 2022 (363)
- September 2022 (259)
- August 2022 (367)
- July 2022 (368)
- June 2022 (277)
- May 2022 (375)
- April 2022 (378)
- March 2022 (405)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
Some on the left who say, “Well, at least Trump wouldn’t flirt with nuclear war over Ukraine,” are doubtless wrong. My guess is, if Trump still resided in the white house, he would have nuked somebody by now, given his remarks, early in the war, that the U.S. should bomb Russia with planes camouflaged as Chinese. If that so-called plan wouldn’t result in an exchange of nuclear missiles, I don’t know what would.