Uncategorized

CAFTA at midnight

Speaking of DeLay scumbaggery, it looks like the Republicans are going to hold a vote on CAFTA between midnight and 2am tonight. They're hoping that some of the moderate Republicans who oppose this legislative turd will stay home and that DeLay and his posse can bully the rest into supporting it.

You think this is how a majority behaves when it's proud of its legislation?

Jeff has a nice round-up of sources on why CAFTA is no good for the environment. It's also no good for free trade, or anything else really. The substantive stakes are not huge, but it's a great example of the bankrupt process by which the Republican majority passes legislation these days.

Update [2005-7-27 22:34:9 by Dave Roberts]: It just passed -- never mind arm-twisting moderate Republicans. Fifteen Democrats voted for this hunk of junk, and that put it over the top. The D.C. rot is bipartisan.

(See also Ezra.)

Delay sneaks $1.5 billion in direct subsidies to oil and gas companies in energy bill, after confere

Rep. Tom DeLay just inserted a $1.5 billion chunk of pork into the energy bill. For what, you ask? The oil and gas industry.

Worse, he snuck it in after the bill had left conference committee, so committee members had no chance to consider (or reject) it.

An enormous direct subsidy from taxpayers to one of the most profitable industries in the world, implemented in total contravention of the democratic process, by a Representative whose district stands directly to benefit. The mind really does boggle.

Rep. Henry Waxman just sent a letter (PDF) of complaint to Rep. Dennis Hastert. Some excerpts:

Coaxing residents to urban cores

The flight from the inner city (it may not be happening after all, but there are definitely new incentives for it now) has left urban planners looking for ways to coax residents back to urban cores. Free municipal wi-fi could be just what they need.

While its effect might not be as direct as some city planners might like, municipal wireless, as proposed in Philadelphia, is worth a shot. It also presents some interesting questions about free goods.

Somewhat tangential economic discussion below the fold.

Another voice from the global South criticizes the tone deafness of Western aid orgs

Forgive me for highlighting a piece that does not explicitly tackle environmental issues. But this Washington Post op-ed on foreign assistance, by former Eritrean finance minister Gebreselassie Yosief Tesfamichael, contains lessons for conservationists, if we choose to hear them.

How do per capita income and per capita pollution relate?

Tim Haab over at Environmental Economics writes about the relationship between environmental degradation and development. Haab mentions, of course, the Environmental Kuznet's Curve (EKC). The Wikipedia article is a little on the sparse side, and while I suppose I could do something about that, for now I'll just point to this summary.

In short, the EKC says that as per capita income rises, per capita pollution travels along a bell curve: first it goes up, but as people gain the disposable income necessary to value such things as clean air and water, it peaks and heads down. The idea has been around for a while, in blogosphere years anyway. It is not free of empirical shortcomings, and there's much debate about its legitimacy, as Haab mentions.

The EKC raises some normative questions: If people are just barely able to survive, is it reasonable to expect them to care about environmental degradation? In addition, is it actually necessary for developing nations to go through the environmentally destructive phase of development in order to reach the "other side of the curve"?

The relationship between development and environmental health that the EKC charts is seen by many politicians as a choice -- either the economy or the environment, as this comment points out. The Apollo Alliance and others have made it their focus to shift the dialogue away from such a dichotomy.

Japanese buyers buy up Patagonia’s eco-themed t-shirts

Patagonia Japan introduced a line of organic cotton t-shirts in January that sported messages on the front and back addressing environmental problems in various regions of the country. They donated $5 from the price of each shirt to Japanese environmental groups. The t-shirt line was completely sold out by the end of March.

I don't know a lot about the political climate in Japan with regard to environmental issues, so I can't tell if this is a great success story or not. Is this a triumph for environmental awareness or a triumph for the latest materialistic shopping fad? I guess I would argue it's positive either way, because some of the profits are going toward environmental and conservation goals, and it's raising awareness.

At the same time, however, I don't think that a similarly themed line of clothing would ever meet with such success in the U.S. (go ahead and prove me wrong if such a thing already exists). Wearing a shirt supporting the cleanup of a Superfund site or the protection of a wilderness area immediately labels you as a leftist enviro-lunatic in this country. Which may be fine for some of us, but we're not going to set any sales records ...

Let Down Your Giardia

Filtering water may not be the answer to most backcountry illnesses Went to the backwoods and ended up with a case of the runs? You probably blamed the water. But according to some medical and wilderness professionals, it is poor personal hygiene, not unsafe water, that usually bedevils the bowels of wilderness backpackers. Medical researcher […]

A really depressing paper about climate change.

A few days ago Roger Pielke Jr. pointed to a paper (PDF) by Tim Dyson of the London School of Economics called "On development, demography and climate change: The end of the world as we know it?" Pielke called it "refreshingly clear thinking on climate change." That's true, if by "refreshingly clear" he means "weep-silently-aplogize-to-your-children-and-throw-yourself-out-a-window depressing." Abandon hope, all ye who download PDF here.

Dyson's argument unfolds in several stages, but the brutal conclusion is simple: "In all likelihood, events are now set to run their course."

Here are the five main points made, quoted directly from the abstract:

Marketing clean energy

Here's a very brief but quite interesting interview with Elise Soukup from the clean-energy marketing nonprofit SmartPower.

Theory in practice

I'm still pondering a reply to Jerry Taylor's thoughtful comment -- seems like it requires something substantive, and I never have time for substance. Sigh.

But let me just throw out one quick observation.