FedSearch
Gary · @empiricism
266 followers · 1428 posts · Server qoto.org
Open media

The NAP Satire News Podcast S01E01. anchor.fm/bongo8/episodes/NAP-

This is the Transcript & weblinks to references for the NAP Satire News Podcast S01E01
--------------------------

This podcast has been written and produced by the Empirical Perspective. The following narratives are based on the environmental sciences. For example, climatology, the science about human caused climate change and the science about air pollution. Also, this podcast has been produced as a satire of the blah blah blah and the general inaction of many politicians and their associated industries to mitigate human caused climate change.

Welcome to the NAP News - News About People - News about what people say, and don’t say - and what people do & don’t do. And News about what people say - when they don’t really mean what they say and don’t really do what they say they do.

In Breaking Climate News.

In this year's cop-out COP27 climate conference, many politicians, fossil fuel lobbyists & environmentalists - travelled by fossil fuel burning jets to the holiday resort of Sharm El Sheikh in Egypt, to talk about ways to not burn fossil fuels. The politicians and industry lobbyists have agreed once again to not, I repeat, not - save our societies from the ravages of climate change by not burning fossil fuels. According to scientists that study the climate and ecology in general, we need to stop emitting greenhouse gases into the atmosphere because those gases, for example carbon dioxide and methane, are causing global heating, on average, which is causing the climate to change.

Reference. The Science of Climate Change.
pressbooks.umn.edu/environment

A NAP News reporter asked a climate scientist what will happen if the fuel industries don’t stop selling fuels and cultures don’t stop burning fuels, to quote and parody-phrase, “If we don’t stop burning fossil fuels, and carbon-based fuel in general, sometime in the not too far away future we will be screwed. However, predicting when exactly we are screwed is a difficult assessment to make. Although every day we keep on burning fuels is another day closer to being screwed. Therefore, the clever cause of action would be to get very serious about not being screwed. However, context is everything, sometimes I do enjoy being screwed, but not by climate change”.

Reference for to be screwed or not be screwed? climate.nasa.gov/news/2943/stu

A NAP News reporter asked a psychologist to comment on the idea of the fuel industries deciding to not extract and sell more fossil fuel, and instead transitioning towards a renewable energy provider, to quote and parody-phrase, “Well, that is a possibility, although, it’s also possible that somewhere in outer space, on a planet with a lower gravity, pigs can fly”.

Reference of fuel industries corruption. “For nearly three decades, many of the world's largest fossil fuel companies have knowingly worked to deceive the public about the realities and risks of climate change” ucsusa.org/resources/climate-d

However, the good news is that at COP27 - the rich, quote, leaders, end quote - did agree a climate compensation package. Reimbursements that are to be paid after climate change has destroyed people’s homes and lives. Whilst the plan for a death insurance package was a welcome relief for the cultures that have been badly effected by climate change, the death assurance package also means that the fuel industries want to extract more coal, oil, gas and grow more biofuels such as wood fuel. And when they make more billions upon billions of profits by selling those fuels to cultures, the rich industries and rich governments say they will pay some of those profits as compensation - to the cultures that have been badly affected by the burning of those fossil fuels. So, business as usual but with an added, death insurance, twist. I don’t like that package – but it makes corrupt business-quote, sense - end quote.

Reference for death insurance package. “COP27 Reaches Breakthrough Agreement on New “Loss and Damage” Fund for Vulnerable Countries” unfccc.int/news/cop27-reaches-

When a NAP news reporter asked a wannabe environmental scientist to comment about the outcome of COP27 - the wannabe scientist said, to quote and parody-phrase - “Well, it’s of course a bit sad that the politicians and their fuel lobbyist best friends cannot agree to not pollute the air by not selling the fuels that make them rich. Although, I’m cautiously optimistic that they will manage to not agree again, for the 28th time, next year. So, next year at the COP28, the politicians and their fuel industry lobbyists best friends will fail to agree to protect families from the ravages of climate change by sometime in the closer, than last year, future. So, at least they’re consistent. However, my mummy and daddy say that some adults are greedy rotten eggs, and my younger sisters says that the fossil fuels industry is run by corrupt fools. And she oughter know because she’s nearly four years old! But my mummy and daddy say that if I prey to Jesus he will protect, but these are the same people that lied to me about Father friggin Christmas, so I just don’t know who to believe anymore. I can’t wait to be mature enough to be a scientists because then I will know for sure. , try to keep em real.

Reference for COP not being about stopping the burning of fuels. theconversation.com/cop27-flin

In more breaking news - the fuel industries and vehicle industries have agreed to honour the deaths of children who have died from air pollution; by donating .0000001% (made up for comic effect of an example of moral grandstanding) of their profits to the Children with asthma charity.

Reference. The corruption is making climate mitigation difficult greeneconomycoalition.org/news

When asked by a NAP reporter, why the industries have donated a miniscule fraction of their annual profits to the Children with asthma charity; the industry’s spokesperson said, to quote and parody-phrase, “I’m paid to say that the industry has decided that it's important to focus on the news - that paints the industry in a good light. News that shows the public - that the polluting industries really care, I mean, really really care - from the bottom of our black oily hearts, we really do - about the people that have developed diseases because of our products. And, in some cases - killed at a younger age.

Reference. “Landmark ruling says air pollution contributed to death of 9-year-old” newscientist.com/article/22631

Which is rather unfortunate. But! Hey ho! Its only business! Of course, no business in its right mind, and let me tell you the fossil fuel industry is very right minded - wants to kill its customers – because this isn’t good for-business! But the fuel industries are more than willing to sacrifice many people to sustain their rich status quo empire. However, I am not paid to say that, so I will never say that on record. Hang on! Wait a minute – are you still recording? Well, even if you are, you do know we can afford all the corrupt, erm, I mean best - lawyers and politician’s that are also part of the fuel industries protection racket”.

When asked to comment on the medical evidence that shows that air pollution also causes brain damage – the industry spokesman looked a bit lost & confused (possibly the early onsets of dementia - but quickly remembered what he had been told to say, to quote and parody-phrase, "that's not a proven science! and our fuels and vehicles are 30% healthier than they used to be!".

Reference “Accumulating data suggest that air pollution increases the risk of internalizing psychopathology, including anxiety and depressive disorders. Moreover, the link between air pollution and poor mental health may relate to neurostructural and neurofunctional changes.” doi.org/10.1016/j.neuro.2022.1

However, A NAP News reporter asked an environmental psychologist to comment on the fuel industries 30% healthier claim, to quote and parody-phrase, “The science of the Toxicologic pathology of air pollution, clearly demonstrates that using the word “health” to describe air pollution is greenwash and something that only dumb, or corrupt, people would say. Furthermore, even if a combustion engine, or for example a woodstove, did emit 30% less air pollution, if 31% more people were buying those products that would make air pollution worse”.

Reference. All the fuel industries (& some governments) use various forms of misinformation and disinformation to sell their fuels. For example, The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra – UK government) uses conflicting and misleading information to promote the sale of wood fuels such as “fresh wood”, “Ecostove”. DEFRA also states “These [woodstoves] have been rigorously tested and demonstrate low smoke emissions”. uk-air.defra.gov.uk/assets/doc

However, that’s greenwash (misleading information. And they know it!). The correct information is that all woodstoves are harmful for health. “When wood is burned, even in newer certified wood stoves, it creates localized particulate pollution hot spots and releases surprisingly high levels of harmful toxins such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), benzene and dioxins into our environment. Wood smoke shares many of the same toxic chemical compounds as tobacco smoke, but evidence suggests it may be even more harmful.” woodsmokepollution.org/

When the NAP news reporter asked the fuel industry to prove their 30% less air pollution claim - the industry's spokes-person produced a document that showed the results of laboratory tests that were carried out at the Dieselgate testing facility by the industry's own employees. The fuel industry spokesperson went on to say “ This proves that we are serious about selling more wood fuel to the public. Our air polluting consumers – the ecologically ignorant, greenwashed (by who I won’t say), &, or, those that can’t afford the cost of electricity to heat their homes. Hey Ho - it’s off to an ecological catastrophe they go. But I work for, and have shares in the fuel industries so, what do I really know?”

Reference. The Volkswagen emissions scandal, sometimes known as Dieselgate or Emissionsgate. For example, selling cars using “clean diesel” lies. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswag

When a NAP News reporter asked the fuel industry spokesperson to comment on the environmental psychologist’s statement, the spokesperson said, “we are considering dealing with the air pollution problem by printing the prefix, "Eco", on all our diesel vehicles and woodstoves. This proves that we are deadly serious about selling more fuels to consumers. When we print the word “Eco” on fuel products or call them green, more of the public believe that our fuel products are somehow better. However, the public are not ignorant, so we are also considering colouring in the “Eco” word in the colour green. Also, we may offer the public a free car wash with every bag of wood fuel they purchase. Don’t put this on record, but say what you want about the public, they have a sense for a buy one, get one free deal, especially when there is a cost-of-living crisis. A crisis in which my industry and my political buddies are having to think up more excuses to explain to the public why we are getting richer, whilst they pay more for our fuels. The public don’t have the time, nor the inclination in their busy air polluting lives, to put two and two together, because that will equal an awful truth. The truth is that, duh!, the fuel industries are not really trying to deal with air pollution therefore climate change, quite the opposite, we are simply trying to stay rich by selling more fuels. So, we simply sell the public a happy narrative and greenwash them instead”.

When a NAP reporter then asked the fuel industries spokesperson to comment about those people that are struggling due to the price rises in fuels, the fuel industry spokesperson said, “due to the complexities of the economy, complexities that we clearly explain to the public that they can’t possibly comprehend, we had no choice but to put the fuel prices up because the fuel industry has no problem making a killing out of other peoples suffering”.

Reference. “The world is ablaze and the oil industry just posted record profits. It’s us or them”. theguardian.com/commentisfree/

This has been a NAP News podcast - News About People. News about what people say, and don’t say - and what people do & don’t do. And News about what people say - when they don’t really mean what they say and don’t really do what they say they do. This NAP News podcast has been about the Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah of politician’s, industry leaders and too many people in general. But, hey ho! Its only our future they’re jeopardizing.

Reference. Corporate ecocide, “The evidence set out in this chapter indicates that we have a problem that cannot simplistically be dismissed as the fault of a few “rogue” or “bad apple” corporations. In each of the examples discussed here – fossil fuels, tobacco, asbestos, synthetic chemicals and the car industry – all of the corporate executives who were in charge of making deadly products knew exactly what they were doing. They were fully aware of the consequences, but did it anyway.” doi.org/10.7765/9781526151063.

The NAP News podcast is produced by the Empirical Perspective. The podcast is copy lefted with a Creative Commons, Attribution, NonCommercial, No derivatives license. Which means that the podcast is free to download and share with others - if you credit the author - but the podcast cannot be changed in any way or used commercially.

Finally, if you are concerned about climate change and air pollution, then you’re in good company. A good place to find information about air pollution is the World Health Organizations website. Also, air pollution masks can provide some protection against traffic fumes and woodsmoke pollution. Though of course, nothing beats living in places where the air smells fresh and is clean. If I was you, I’d do what I do, and promote clean air technologies such as renewable energy technology, heat pumps for the home, cycling, electric public transport, etc. All the methods that can put the fuel industries out of business. And not a moment too soon.

Thanks for listening and keep looking up.

More Science \ medical references and further reading.

500 Scientists sign letter regarding the unsustainable use of forests for bioenergy \ woodfuel (2021). dropbox.com/s/hdmmcnd0d1d2lq5/

Berndes, G., Abt, B., Asikainen, A., Cowie, A., Dale, V., Egnell, G., ... & Yeh, S. (2016). Forest biomass, carbon neutrality and climate change mitigation. From science to policy. nbsapforum.net/sites/default/f

Booth, M. S., Mackey, B.,
Young, V. (2020). It’s time to stop pretending burning forest biomass is carbon neutral. GCB Bioenergy, 12(12), 1036-1037. doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12716

Edwards, R. (2004). The problem of tobacco smoking. doi.org/10.1136/bmj.328.7433.2
Calderon-Garciduenas, L., Azzarelli, B., Acuna, H., Garcia, R., Gambling, T. M., Osnaya, N., ... & Rewcastle, B. (2002). Air pollution and brain damage. Toxicologic pathology. doi.org/10.1080%2F019262302529

UK’s DEFRA use greenwash to say bonfires are a “nuisance”, but…..(2019). Department of Environment and Rural Affairs. Open fires and wood-burning stoves – a practical guide uk-air.defra.gov.uk/assets/doc [DOA:2022]

Erlandsson, L., Lindgren, R., Nääv, Å., Krais, A. M., Strandberg, B., Lundh, T., ... & Malmqvist, E. (2020). Exposure to wood smoke particles leads to inflammation, disrupted proliferation and damage to cellular structures in a human first trimester trophoblast cell line. Environmental Pollution, doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2020.

Extinction rebellion global (2021) "This is an emergency" rebellion.global/

Hajabbasi, M. A., Jalalian, A., & Karimzadeh, H. R. (1997). Deforestation effects on soil physical and chemical properties, Lordegan, Iran. Plant and soil. doi.org/10.1023/A:100424370220

Homeowners alliance (2022) promotes the use of Wood-burning stoves: What do the new rules mean for your fireplace? hoa.org.uk/2021/11/wood-burnin

Johnson, E. (2009). Goodbye to carbon neutral: Getting biomass footprints right. Environmental impact assessment review. doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2008.11

Newbury, J., Stewart, R., Fisher, H., Beevers, S., Dajnak, D., Broadbent, M., . . . Bakolis, I. (2021). Association between air pollution exposure and mental health service use among individuals with first presentations of psychotic and mood disorders: Retrospective cohort study. The British Journal of Psychiatry. doi.org/10.1192/bjp.2021.119

Orozco-Levi, M., Garcia-Aymerich, J., Villar, J., Ramirez-Sarmiento, A., Anto, J. M., & Gea, J. (2006). Wood smoke exposure and risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. European Respiratory Journal. doi.org/10.1183/09031936.06.00

Pintos, J., Franco, E. L., Kowalski, L. P., Oliveira, B. V., & Curado, M. P. (1998). Use of wood stoves and risk of cancers of the upper aero-digestive tract: a case-control study. International Journal of Epidemiology. doi.org/10.1093/ije/27.6.936

Additional reading Doctors & Scientists against wood smoke pollution (2022) woodsmokepollution.org/

#corruption #globalheating #podcast #economics #WoodFuel #politics #LuvYaScience #comedy #satire #science #climate #climatechange #airpollution #fossilfuels #cop27

Last updated 2 years ago
Original post