Latest Articles

Sign up for Grist’s telephone survey

Here it is, the chance you've been waiting for: Tell us what Grist means to you, and where you think we should go from here. Sign up to take part in a telephone survey.

It's like writing a letter to Santa and telling him what you really want this year -- except on the phone, and you can rest assured that we won't give you any coal, no matter how bad you've been.

Just in case you need another reason to oppose ag subsidies

They waste money, trash the environment, wreck trade relations, and oh, devastate small farmers.

Pitfalls of emissions trading

More and more, I'm thinking a carbon tax and putting new energy technologies freely into the public domain is the way to go, especially after reading stuff like this.

Newer and cheekier!

With sincere respect to my colleagues across the Atlantic (this is all a matter of opinion, after all), I'm dismayed by some of the choices on their list of most important environmental books. Hoary tomes like The Lorax, an analysis of the impact of pesticides on the environment that's nearly a half-century old (I shake in my boots to criticize La Carson thus) ... if the list were of books that had a big impact in their time, or books that will bolster the sentiments of the already-sympathetic, then it would be enough.

But the "small is beautiful," "earth as organism," "pursue simplicity" approach to eco-reform reflected in most of these choices has not proven a big winner in Western mass culture. Right or wrong, converting Western mass culture is the task at hand today, if we're going to solve the problems addressed by these authors over the decades.

What are the books that speak to more recent science, contemporary events, and our evolving understanding of the intersections of environment with economy, culture, and human rights?

Here are some titles I'd consider:

‘Climate is always changing’–That doesn’t mean it isn’t different today

(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide)

Objection: Climate has always changed. Why are we worried now, and why does it have to be humans' fault?

Answer: Yes, climate has varied in the past, for many different reasons, some better understood than others. Present-day climate change is well understood, and different. Noting that something happened before without humans does not demonstrate that humans are not causing it today.

A little holiday guilt for ya

Just in time for your holiday flight back to whence you came, a little news about the environmental effects of your holiday airline travel that will make you feel almost as guilty as your relatives will. Much like your family tree (OK, maybe just mine), your trip will inevitably generate trash.

‘The null hypothesis says warming is natural’–An inappropriate test, and one that would fail anyway

(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide)

Objection: Natural variability is the null hypothesis; there must be compelling evidence of an anthropogenic CO2 warming effect before we take it seriously.

Answer: The null hypothesis is a statistical test, and might be a reasonable approach if we were looking only for statistical correlation between increasing CO2 and increasing temperature. But we're not -- there are known mechanisms involved whose effects can be predicted and measured. These effects are the result of simple laws of physics, even if their interactions are quite complex.

Rev. Joel Hunter speaks out on broadening the evangelical agenda

In July, Rev. Joel Hunter was named president-elect of the Christian Coalition of America, the legendary political advocacy organization founded by Pat Robertson. Rev. Joel Hunter.Last month, just before he was to formally take office, he abruptly stepped down after a meeting with the coalition’s board of directors. According to Hunter, it became clear that […]

Namely, biofuels

I happened to disagree with a very reasonable critique I found on Gristmill last week, and want to use an article called "Stuck in the Middle with Fuel" (a great title by the way) by Eliza Barclay as a foil. It is a perfectly good article. I am using it as an example of traditional journalism only because it was timely and handy. Getting a piece past a battery of editors is one hurdle; having it pass muster on the comments field of the blogosphere is another thing altogether.

Keeping with tradition, Eliza must feign neutrality. She begins her narrative by painting a picture in the reader's mind, subtly suggesting that biofuels will rid third world countries of smoke belching diesel trucks:

Occasionally these rural taxis are new vehicles, but most are rickety, rusted, and running on antiquated engines and exhaust-spewing diesel.

Next, she must obtain interviews from experts:

Social and environmental entrepreneurs have a lot to teach big business

Solutions to sustainability challenges come in various forms, colors, and strengths. Some are compliance-driven and done grudgingly. Some are citizenship-led and done at a slight distance from an organization’s core business. And some are truly innovative and entrepreneurial. Now this third category is on the verge of taking off like a rocket, involving new breeds […]