Congress debates whether 'clean coal' is awesome or supercool


Witness as the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee discusses clean coal: how awesome is it? Should we give it a gazillion dollars, or alternatively, a fajillion? Tough questions! Note: 9:32 [Carl] Bauer [director, National …

Renewable energy in the House

Do your part

It's game time for renewable energy in the House. First up is the federal renewable portfolio standard. HR 969, known as the Udall-Platts Amendment, would require utilities nationwide to increase the amount of renewables in their portfolio to 20 percent by 2020. It will be voted on in the House on Friday. Take action here.

Global warring

Are we a nation permanently at war?

In his interview with Grist, Dennis Kucinich urged us all to recognize the connection between global warming and global warring. In that spirit, I thought I’d pass along an astute observation from Glenn Greenwald, who …

Green Jobs Act of 2007

Pelosi’s plan to save the polar bears — and poor kids, too …

There has been a lot of discussion about the energy package that is set to pass the U.S. House this week. But the media so far has missed one of the most interesting and innovative proposals that will be voted on: the Green Jobs Act of 2007. This ground-breaking legislation will make $120 million a year available across the country to begin training workers (and would-be workers) for jobs in the clean-energy sector. When the bill becomes law, 35,000 people a year will benefit from cutting-edge, vocational education in fields that could literally save the Earth.

Prez race '08: Jolie v. Pitt

Brangelina argue over politics

Ever wonder what Brangelina fight about? Turns out it’s Barack Obama. From a super credible news source: An insider close to the Pitt family said: “They got into a huge fight about politics (Brad supports …

For now, local politics is the way to effect ag-policy change

Over the past few years, grassroots support has swelled for new federal farm policies — ones that promote healthy, sustainably grown food, not the interests of a few agribusiness firms. Udder madness. Photo: iStockphoto The …

Dingell argues for a carbon tax

In a prominent op-ed

Today in the Washington Post, Rep. John Dingell has an op-ed arguing on behalf of a carbon tax: I apparently created a mini-storm last month when I observed publicly for at least the sixth time …

Todd Willens and the Everglades

Pombo’s old hack buddy, still at it

At the behest of the U.S. delegation, the U.N. World Heritage Committee is taking Everglades National Park off its list of endangered sites, against the advice of the committee’s science advisors and the advice of …

Where enviros can make a real difference

Learn to look down the ballot — waaaaaay down

Here's a story that's all too common: Right-wing dominated court; likes to pat itself on the back for being a "strict constructionalist" court that, regardless of its own justices' preferences, follows the commands of the legislature expressed in the plain words of the statutes. No "judge-made law" here, just the power of the people expressed through their elected representatives. Except not. Michigan's Environmental Policy Act gave "any person" the right to sue over environmental damages, allowing people to act as citizen attorneys-general because, as the pols in the 1970s recognized, elected AGs and appointed state bureaucrats often aren't actually all that interested in confronting contribution-wielding polluters. So, this year, the Michigan Supreme Court GOP majority took off its strict constructionalist hat and donned its liberal interpretation hat to decide that, well, "any person" doesn't mean what you might think it means.