Latest Articles

Success

The Grist presidential forum on climate and energy went off without a hitch and was a huge success. I’ll have much more to say about it tomorrow, but for now I just want to thank, again, all the groups that worked to bring it together, the wonder-working production crew at the venue, and the candidates […]

IPCC says debate over, further delay fatal, action not costly

In its definitive scientific synthesis report (PDF), the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) today issued its strongest call for immediate action to save humanity from the deadly consequences of unrestrained greenhouse gas emissions.

This report -- signed off by 130 nations including the U.S. and China -- slams the door on any argument for delay and makes clear we must under no circumstances listen to those who urge that we wait (who knows how long) to develop as yet non-existent technology [this means you President Bush, Newt Gingrich, Bjorn Lomborg]. As The New York Times put it:

Members of the panel said their review of the data led them to conclude as a group and individually that reductions in greenhouse gasses had to start immediately to avert a global climate disaster that could leave island states submerged and abandoned, African crop yields decreased by 50 percent, and cause over a 5 percent decrease in global gross domestic product.

... this summary was the first to acknowledge that the melting of the Greenland ice sheet from rising temperature [which would raise the oceans 23 feet] could result in sea-level rise over centuries rather than millennia.

Readers of this blog know the IPCC almost certainly underestimates the timing and severity of likely impacts because it ignores or downplays key amplifying feedbacks in the carbon cycle (see "Are scientists overestimating or underestimating climate change," especially Part II and Part III). Indeed, IPCC head Rajendra Pachauri -- a scientist and economist -- admitted as much:

He said that since the panel began its work five years ago, scientists have recorded "much stronger trends in climate change," like a recent melting of polar ice that had not been predicted. "That means you better start with intervention much earlier."

How much earlier? The normally understated Pachauri warns:

"If there's no action before 2012, that's too late. What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment."

In short: time's up! America, we better pick the right President in 2008.

To balance the bad news, the IPCC and its member governments agree on the good news -- action is affordable:

In which we attempt to calculate how much an organic feast would cost

There’s something about Thanksgiving that seems to prompt people to think about where their food comes from. Maybe it’s all the cornucopias and sheaves of wheat depicted in supermarket circulars, or maybe it’s the focus on the harvest. Visions of farmers bringing in the crops may lead people to think about how food gets to […]

From Condoms to ‘Cakes

Unfit to be tied Jimmy hats are one thing, but jimmy hair ties? Gross. It’s enough to make us want to pull our hair out — then take some ‘shrooms and clean up a beach. Oodles of fun Drawing a blank on how to bring your cartoons to life? Use your noodle to create a […]

Practice of composting animals raises red flags for greens

A growing number of states are allowing farmers to bury their deceased horses, cattle, and chickens and allow the remains to decay into compost. Environmentalists are leery of the practice, concerned that livestock pumped up with antibiotics and growth hormones might leach chemicals into groundwater as they decompose. Growth hormones in the water, growth hormones […]

Readers share instructions for tasty Thanksgiving treats

Try your hand at reader recipes. Photos: iStockphoto A couple of weeks ago, we asked you, dear readers, to send in your favorite Thanksgiving recipes. We got a smorgasbord of replies, from Dilly Dip to The Best Pressed Pie Crust In the World — and nary a hint of tryptophan in sight. We’ve collected your […]

Anticipation

I’m sitting here at the venue for tomorrow afternoon’s event: the Wadsworth Theater. It is … large. I think around 1500 people are going to be sitting in here tomorrow, judging me for the poor quality of my shoes and my neglected fitness regime. I hear from the organizers that press attention has gotten nuts. […]

Republican war on science, edition MMCCCVIII

Surprised?

Some government scientists have complained that officials at the Smithsonian's National Museum of Natural History took steps to downplay global warming in a 2006 exhibit on the Arctic to avoid a political backlash, according to documents obtained by The Washington Post.

The museum's director, Cristian Samper, ordered last-minute changes to the exhibit's script to add "scientific uncertainty" about climate change, according to internal documents and correspondence.

Scientists at other agencies collaborating on the project expressed in e-mails their belief that Smithsonian officials acted to avoid criticism from congressional appropriators and global-warming skeptics in the Bush administration. But Samper said in an interview last week that "there was no political pressure -- not from me, not from anyone."

Samper put the project on hold for six months in the fall of 2005 and ordered that the exhibition undergo further review by higher-level officials in other government agencies. Samper also asked for changes in the script and the sequence of the exhibit's panels to move the discussion of recent climate change further back in the presentation, records also show. The exhibit opened in April 2006 and closed in November of that year.

The Post obtained a hand-scrawled note by a curator on the project indicating there was "concern that scientific uncertainty hasn't come out enough." Edits to a "final script" show notations about where to add "the idea of scientific uncertainty about climate research."

Right. I guess we're supposed to believe that this had nothing to do with Dick Cheney's service, as part of his vice presidential duties, on the Smithsonian's board of regents. And nothing to do with the fact that six other regents are appointed by the President Pro-Tempore of the Senate -- at the time Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) -- and the Speaker of the House -- at the time Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.).

Nothing unusual here! At any rate, D.C. residents have other, better options if they want to learn about global warming from a museum exhibit.

IPCC synthesis report confirms global warming is a force to be reckoned with

And now, ladies and gents, the moment you’ve all been waiting for. The Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, with input from delegates of more than 140 countries, has synthesized three previous reports into one 70-page summary document and a 20-page summary of that summary, meant to be an “instant guide” to policymakers who […]

A review of The Host

What is an environmental movie? Is it a movie that uses the beauty of wilderness to make us fall in love with the earth, as for example Into the Wild, or Brokeback Mountain? Is it a movie that explicitly tackles an environmental issue, such as Erin Brockovich, or The China Syndrome?

Or is it a picture that exploits the power of raw film to open up an environmental theme -- such as the risk of radiation -- with sheer imagination, such as (the original) Godzilla?

It's a rhetorical question, but one with an inescapable answer: all of the above count as environmental movies, each in its own way, some better than others. And if this is true, as it surely is, than the best environmental movie of the year may turn out to be an unlikely candidate: the mesmerizing -- and funny -- Korean movie released internationally this year, The Host.

Though essentially a cheesy horror movie, it's phenomenally well-directed, and to date has been the best-reviewed foreign film of the year.