Latest Articles

The energy of crowds

My first reaction to this story was, well, if you suck energy out of people’s movements, the people themselves will just need more energy, in the form of food, which is energy-intensive to make, so you’re really not getting any net gain. Conservation of energy and all that. But then I remembered that Americans are, […]

Two, Four, Six, Eight, Why Do We Procrastinate?

Big Auto to host fuel-economy rallies in Midwestern cities Revved up over fuel-economy rules, Detroit’s Big Three automakers and the United Auto Workers will hold rallies in Chicago and St. Louis this week and next. The demonstrations are a reaction against the U.S. Senate energy bill, passed in June, which would raise fuel economy for […]

Evian Is Just Evil Misspelled

Hatin’ on plastic water bottles is all the rage Forget SUVs and Styrofoam: hip-to-the-times green folk are directing their ire at plastic water bottles. In the last few months, the energy-intensiveness of bottled water — 1.5 million barrels of oil go into making the bottles for the U.S. market each year, and oodles more to […]

Um, If It’s Not Too Much Trouble?

EPA suggests wishy-washy compromise in Indiana BP permit mess Officials from the U.S. EPA have stepped in to quell the furor over a controversial permit the state of Indiana granted to a BP refinery. The permit will allow BP to discharge more ammonia and sludge into Lake Michigan — at legal limits, but increased over […]

Lead, Swallow, or Get Out of the Play

Mattel adds to recall of millions of lead-painted toys In yet another blow to Big Toy, Mattel Inc. yesterday recalled some 9 million China-made playthings. While most were sets containing potentially swallowable magnets, the toymaker also pulled 253,000 lead-painted die-cast cars. Earlier this month, Mattel pulled an additional 1.5 million toys thought to be colored […]

We still heart Rocky Anderson

Rocky Anderson is in the news again, reminding us why we all love him. Now he’s taking on idling autos, calling for city-owned vehicles and personal vehicles on city business to limit their idling to five minutes, except in emergency situations. Fifty percent of air pollution in Utah comes from cars and trucks, and Rocky […]

Umbra on organic pork

Dear Umbra, Commercial pork production is a nasty, polluting operation and inhumane to the animals. What makes organic pork different? Simply what they are fed, or does it involve more humane and less polluting production operations? Related, I have been purchasing free-range, organic chicken for several years now. However, recently the free-range, organic chicken breasts […]

You know what they say about enviros with big feet …

Each of these pairs of shoes represents a different (real) woman in a new feature at Marie Claire: "Whose Carbon Footprint Is the Smallest?" See if you can guess: THE URBAN HIPSTER “I eat out way too much. I drink bottled water. I do the club scene a lot. Am I busted?” –Nikea, 29, public […]

High CO2 crops could be low on nutrition

One of the silver linings of climate change, some have argued, is that high carbon dioxide levels will mean increased crop yields, which will, in turn, be good for combating global hunger (the logic, I suppose, being that if we're frying fifty years from now, at least we won't be hot and hungry). But some underpublicized studies, reported this month in Nature, cast a long shadow on this sunny assertion. (Sorry! It looks like the the article is subscription only, so I'll be as descriptive as possible.)

In the 1980s, Bruce Kimball, a soil physicist with the USDA in Arizona, began conducting scientific experiments simulating a high-CO2 environment (using a system called "free air carbon dioxide enrichment," or FACE). He found that crop yields were elevated -- plants imbibing large quantities of CO2 had more starch and more sugar in their leaves than those on a normal carbon diet. But because they also took up less nitrogen from the soil, they made less protein.

But key Senators are making noise about rocking the boat

When Mark Udall (D-Colo.) proposed shaving two-thirds of a cent from just one of the subsidies that go to cotton farmers, Bob Etheridge (D-N.C.) said, "it is absolutely unfair, once we have reached this very delicate balance within the bill, to reach in and single out one commodity."

That amendment -- to cut less than a penny from cotton subsidies and use the savings to protect more than 200,000 acres from sprawl and development -- failed by a vote of 175-251. So what was that very delicate balance that the House of Representatives preserved?