Uncategorized

Five developing nations a presence at the G8 summit

Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa -- some of the world's most dynamically growing developing nations and up-and-coming greenhouse gas emitters -- have been invited to attend this week's G8 summit as informal participants. I've been digging through the international press this morning, looking for perspectives on Gleneagles absent in much of the Western news media.

India's New Kerala reports (via the Indo-Asian News Service) that Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh arrived in London today. Singh will ask the G8 nations to transfer green energy technologies to the developing nations, removing "non-tariff barriers," i.e. international protections for intellectual property rights to these technologies, as The Indian Express explains with a tad more clarity. Singh wants relaxed international IPR protections on clean energy technologies, to make them more affordable for the developing nations to use in place of dirty energy.

Below the fold, more G8 perspectives from the presses of China, Mexico, and South Africa.

The Barton letter

One of the controversies I missed while I was gone was a threatening letter (PDF) sent by Rep. Joe Barton (R-Tx.), chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, to the heads of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the National Science Foundation, along with three respected climate scientists who produced the fabled "hockey stick" study. (For background on the hockey stick controversy, see here.)

Chris Mooney led the brigade, as he tends to on these matters. He reported the letter on his blog. Everyone and their cousin then linked to his blog. Tim Lambert rounds up blogospheric reaction here and here. Over at Prometheus, Kevin Vranes had some insightful thoughts on what he found reasonable and unreasonable about the letter. Mooney also has a couple of follow-ups (the latter on a challenge to Barton from Rep. Henry Waxman), and Michael Dumiak has more good stuff at ScienceG8 (a new science blog tracking developments at the Gleneagle G8 meeting -- check it out).

I don't have much to add to what's been said. This is just yet another case of a modern-day movement Republican taking a perfectly legitimate process -- in this case, Congressional inquiry into the use of public research funds -- and using it as a political bludgeon. It hardly registers any more.

Update [2005-7-6 8:27:41 by Dave Roberts]: Oh, good grief. I forgot the most important link: Mooney's American Prospect column, which summarizes the whole brouhaha.

Update [2005-7-6 10:7:31 by Dave Roberts]: See also this ES&T summary.

There are worse things than hypocrisy

A reader sent along a link to this George Monbiot piece with the somewhat accusatory question:

In a recent column, George Monbiot excoriates environmental superstars for not walking the talk. So what about the Grist luminaries? How do you live in reality?

One often sees this sort of thing, and ... well, I wish one wouldn't.

At least once a week we get a letter from some fruitcake saying: "You [or some celebrity or writer] can't support [some environmental change or policy] until you give up your car, grow your own food, and live by candlelight." Otherwise -- gasp -- hypocrisy!

This is, in fact, a favorite right-wing talking point on the environment -- it's all part of the modern-day conservative attempt to reduce everything to "personal responsibility," thereby freeing the centers of financial and political power from any structural restraints. When well-meaning greens echo the line, they do themselves a disservice.

Let me be clear: Of course there's nothing wrong with living an environmentally exemplary life. It would be better to live that way than to not. It would be better to devote oneself to charity, too, or go to Africa and work on poverty relief. For any given individual, he or she could be living a more virtuous life.

But that's more or less a distraction.

Gaylord Nelson, R.I.P.

Gaylord Nelson, co-founder of Earth Day, former state senator, governor, and U.S. senator from Wisconsin, and recipient of a 1995 Presidential Medal of Freedom for his environmental work, died on Sunday at the age of 89. His own words are a fitting epitaph:

The ultimate test of man's conscience may be his willingness to sacrifice something today for future generations whose words of thanks will not be heard.

Nelson passed the test with flying colors. Let's all hope we can do the same.

Just a Little bit

Though she wrote a substantially similar story for us a few weeks ago (cause she hearts us the most), I would be remiss if I did not point out that our very own Amanda Griscom Little has a feature story in The New York Times Magazine on Destiny U.S.A., the "green mall" that's going to save America, etc. etc.

(Gristmillers expressed their mixed feelings about Destiny here.)

BLM’s Erick Campbell on creative editing

You may recall a story from last week about a BLM environmental impact statement on public-lands grazing that was, uh, "edited" in a way that made it much more sympathetic to the practice.

Well, one of the guys who wrote the original report -- recently retired BLM scientist Erick Campbell -- shared his thoughts on the matter in a guest post over on the Al Franken Show blog. It's a pretty close analysis of the original report and how it was changed, but the conclusion is not complicated:

In my 30 years with the federal government, this is without question the most heavy handed and disingenuous administration I have witnessed.

Endangered Species Act: Still endangered

Let's unbury this story from its grave in the holiday weekend press.

Yesterday, The New York Times reported on a leaked draft of legislation that would effectively gut the Endangered Species Act. The proposed law was prepared by the Republican staff of the House Resources Committee, led by Rep. Richard W. Pombo (R-Calif.), who's long opposed the ESA.

The Times' Felicity Barringer writes:

The draft legislation was given to The New York Times by a lawmaker opposed to its provisions, who requested anonymity because the legislation had not yet been introduced. It has been circulating among interest groups focused on the issue, which tends to pit environmental groups against a loose coalition of Western ranchers, farmers and business interests. Most lobbyists believe that the committee's legislation will provide the framework for rewriting and reauthorizing the act.

Coincidentally, The Christian Science Monitor ran an in-depth look at the ESA on June 28. Although the article doesn't include the jounalistic drama of "leaked draft legislation," it's a good overview of the politics swirling around the ESA, which are even more complicated than Western governors vs. Beltway green groups now that religious groups are take a stake in species conservation:

"You can expect to hear from many people of faith as they witness with passion and resolve about the importance of protecting endangered species," Dorothy Boorse told a recent congressional committee. Dr. Boorse teaches biology at Gordon College in Wenham, Mass., and is an evangelical Christian active with the Noah Alliance, a coalition of religious groups that support species protections.

The power of ideas, or rather, the lack thereof

In The New Republic, Jonathan Chait has one of the best essays on politics I've read this year. Sadly, it's a cover story, available only to TNR subscribers.

(Bugmenot will give you a working name and password, but that's ethically questionable, so of course I'd never advocate it.)

Chait is responding to the notion, which has become conventional wisdom lately, that Republicans are ascendant because they are the "party of new ideas" and the Dems are on the rocks because they're bereft of new ideas.

It is flattering to elected officials, campaign consultants, policy wonks, and political junkies to think that ideas and policy proposals are the driving forces in American political life. But it's wrong. Campaign tactics, candidates' personal charisma, and outside circumstances are what drive elections.

I'll put some juicy excerpts below the fold, but if you're interested in politics, it really is worth doing whatever you can -- even subscribing to TNR -- to read the piece.

Gas saver

I return today from a week spent reuniting with family at a state park in Middle Tennessee, where I was raised (the state, I mean, not the state park). I didn't spot any hybrids, but this scrappy, rusting gem -- sitting in a patch of grass off the highway, next to a sunken old garage I believe doubles as a used car dealership and quite possibly a residence -- shows that even in rural America, they know the value of fuel efficiency.

Happy Independence Day, y'all.

A local ponders the implications of the EPA’s approval of a large gold mine in Alaska

On Wednesday, the EPA granted Coeur Alaska the final wastewater discharge pollution permit it needed to begin building its Kensington gold mine near Alaska's capital city, Juneau.

For background, see:

Planet Ark

Juneau Empire (more complete, but free registration required)

An unfortunate rule change in 2002 that redefined Kensington's particular type of mine-tailings as "fill" allowed the permit to move forward. Coeur Alaska plans to dump its tailings into a nearby freshwater lake.