I haven't read the book -- who has time? Oh, but TV or a YouTube video -- well, that's another matter: This Sunday, February 10th at 8pm EST on the National Geographic Channel, "Six Degrees Could Change The World," which offers a hypothetical look at how the world might change, degree by degree, if we don't curtail our emissions:
Like the headline says. Wonder where he comes down on those coal plants.
Here’s the new TV ad from Friends of the Earth, telling Senate Democrats to “fix or ditch” the Lieberman-Warner climate bill:
“The [Lieberman-Warner] bill, as reported out of committee, would be the most historic incentive for nuclear in the history of the United States.” – an aide to Sen. Joe Lieberman
Frustrated by your iPod batteries dying while you’re on the treadmill? Keep an eye out for a new knee brace designed to harvest energy from a walker’s stride. From only one minute of movement, the …
Now that John McCain is the presumptive Republican nominee, the shape of the debate over climate change takes on different contours. Hillary and Obama are offering substantively similar climate plans, so there's no need to wait for the Democratic contest to be decided before we start gaming out a few scenarios. 1) Will climate change take on more or less prominence as an issue in the general election? Argument for less: with everyone preaching from the same book, the media sees no hay to make. This suits the candidates fine. McCain knows the topic alienates conservatives. Hillbama knows their policy position makes them look liberal and McCain look independent/centrist. Under different circumstances, the Dem could have tried to portray the Republican as reactionary, but no longer. Everyone changes the subject to war and the economy.
In light of recent studies showing that biofuel production ain’t good for the environment, 10 prominent ecologists and biologists have written to President Bush and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi asking that the U.S. reform its …
I am not saying the "unusually ferocious winter tornado system" that hit five southern states Wed. was caused by global warming. I am saying -- or rather NASA is saying -- we're probably going to have to get used to it: NASA scientists have developed a new climate model that indicates that the most violent severe storms and tornadoes may become more common as Earth's climate warms. So did John Kerry go too far on MSNBC when he said: [I] don't want to sort of leap into the larger meaning of, you know, inappropriately, but on the other hand, the weather service has told us we are going to have more and more intense storms," Kerry said. "And insurance companies are beginning to look at this issue and understand this is related to the intensity of storms that is related to the warming of the earth. And so it goes to global warming and larger issues that we're not paying attention to. The fact is the hurricanes are more intensive, the storms are more intensive and the rainfall is more intense at certain places at certain times and the weather patterns have changed. That sounds about right to me, though it wasn't the "weather service" really, it was NASA. The conservative Business & Media Institute said Kerry was using the tragedy, which killed over 50 people, "to advance global warming alarmism." But BMI embarrasingly undercuts its credibility by quoting one meteorologist from last year who obviously isn't very good at forecasting:
McCain's astonishing doubletalk on climate in the Florida GOP debate -- denying that a cap and trade system is a mandate -- made me start rethinking what a McCain presidency would mean for the fight to prevent catastrophic global warming. The more I researched McCain's views, the more I talked to others, the more I felt forced to change my previous view. Salon has just published my long analysis, which concludes that while he would be vastly superior to Bush on climate ... ... a President McCain would not be the climate leader that America and the world requires. He is a conservative who happens to be on the only intellectually defensible side of the climate change debate. But he is still a conservative, and the vast majority of the solutions to global warming are progressive in nature -- they require strong government action, including major federal efforts to spur clean technology. Of course, as I argue in my book, it is precisely because they know that the solutions to global warming are mostly progressive in nature that most conservatives are so close-minded on the subject. My basic argument is:
We've devised the world's shortest survey to find out what kind of actions our readers are taking. You know you want to.