Latest Articles

Climate change is about equality among nations and fundamental human rights

((equity_include)) This is a guest essay by Dr. Wolfgang Sachs, author and research director at the Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment, and Energy. Sachs (together with Timan Santarius et al) has just published a collection of essays called Fair Future: Resource Conflicts, Security, and Global Justice. This is part of a series on climate equity. […]

Reports bring various doomy and gloomy predictions

Indeed, the depressing reports come fast and furious. German-based Energy Watch Group says the world has already reached peak oil, and predicts that production will now fall by 7 percent a year. The Worldwatch Institute suggests that 21 cities that will have populations of 8 million or more by 2015 are highly vulnerable to havoc […]

A morning meeting with the mayor of Dubuque

I wish I could tell you I wrote this from atop a log raft while floating down the Mighty Mississippi, but sadly the wifi access out there ain’t so mighty. Instead, I’m sitting at a table inside the Grand Harbor Resort and Conference Center complex, which is part of the $188 million riverfront development project […]

Umbra on Halloween

Dear Umbra, We really enjoy the community aspect of trick-or-treating but we don’t want to give out candy to the little ones, or toxic plastic Chinese toys. Two hundred kids come to our house every Halloween. How do we keep it green, safe, and economical? Jodi McMillian Charleston, W.Va. Dearest Jodi, Two hundred children? How […]

Your chance to get in on the hydrogen action

Treehugger reports on a public bet I have made with Greg Blencoe, CEO of Hydrogen Discoveries:

Greg Blencoe wins if hydrogen fuel cell vehicles hit 1% of new sales of the typically-defined car and light truck market in the U.S. during 2015 or any year before. Joseph Romm wins if it is 2016 or any year after.

At stake is $1000, plus a certain amount of pride (if I lose, I must be photographed wearing a t-shirt saying "I was wrong about hydrogen.")

I am certainly prepared to make that bet with pretty much anyone -- though I might have to reconsider in the (very) unlikely event I get too many takers. Reasons why you shouldn't take the bet are below:

An audio story about ag subsidies

This little radio story, from NPR's Weekend Edition Sunday, tells the story of a sprawling ranch in Texas. It was the single largest recipient of federal farm subsidies between 1999 and 2005 -- receiving some $8.3 million, not for cattle, but for cotton. Ken Cook, president of the Environmental Working Group says this:

It's the exact opposite of what most taxpayers have in mind when they think of how their farm subsidy money is supporting agriculture.

The farm is so big and so profitable, apparently, that it only applies for subsidies because "other cotton growers do," and because "the federal subsidy program provides the framework for the whole cotton growing industry."

Ironically, while King Ranch is virtually forced to accept Washington's cotton money, it can't get any federal support for the conservation acreage that is now its most rapidly growing sector. It's too big, says the Farm bill, to qualify for that type of funding.

Bush courts anglers, Georgia declares state of emergency over drought, and more

Read the articles mentioned at the end of the podcast: Coming in From the Coal How’s My Drying? Call 1-800-F-U-Species Angling for Love in All the Wrong Places Transmission: Impossible How Green Was Myanmar’s Valley? Read the articles mentioned at the end of the podcast: Paul on the Record Ghoul, Interrupted Jet vs. Vette

World’s oceans sequestering less CO2 than expected

The world’s oceans appear to be sequestering far less carbon dioxide than one would hope, says a new study. CO2 soakage by the north Atlantic Ocean has lessened dramatically in the last decade. “The speed and size of the change show that we cannot take for granted the ocean sink for the carbon dioxide,” says […]

How can we get people voting green?

OK, can we agree? Tom Friedman should never write about anything else but green. As daft as he is on some other subjects, every time he writes about green he hits all the right notes. To wit: "It is so much more important to change your leaders than change your light bulbs." Now, you might […]

Facing big obstacles, environmental movement can’t afford division

I'm excited that Environmental Defense is now saying publicly, in response to criticism from Matt Stoller and me, that it "has not endorsed" the Lieberman-Warner bill and that it "will work to strengthen the bill, particularly to achieve the deeper long-term emissions reductions scientists tell us we need to avoid a climate catastrophe."

That's great, but I must note it's a sentiment that was distinctly lacking from the statement ED put out in response to the bill, which mainly offered a passionate defense, or the fund-raising letter it sent out to activists (thanks Roger Smith for posting this). True, it did include one line that said, "This bill is a good start in that direction [of 80 percent emissions deductions], and we will continue to work in that direction." But the clear implication was that they would push for those commitments through some future legislative mechanism.

In contrast, almost every other major environmental group gave the bill qualified praise, but also clearly stated that the bill should be improved to get the maximum possible greenhouse-gas reductions (I do wish Environmental Defense had acknowledged this difference a little more explicitly in its post rather than just doing selective quoting -- let's try to be fair here!). That's the right strategy, and I'm psyched that Environmental Defense is now on board.