Latest Articles

Sheet Happens … Faster

Greenland melting faster than five years ago, study says We hate to give you bad news without some good, so here goes. The bad news from a study published this week in Science is that, by comparing satellite data from 2002-2005 to earlier data, researchers have determined that Greenland’s ice sheet is melting about three […]

Fuel cells take a blow

Via Engineer-Poet, the European Fuel Cell Forum -- who you'd expect to be pro-fuel cell -- has dealt a major blow to the idea of fuel cell cars powered by hydrogen. Noting that hydrogen will, under any reasonable assumption, continue to be less efficient and more costly than electricity, the EFCF has decided to abandon the most prominent form of automotive fuel cell, the proton exchange membrane. They have not, however, abandoned fuel cells altogether:

Finding hope in the world today

Worried about global warming? The acidification of our oceans? D4 (the highest-known level) droughts in the U.S. today? The idea that palm oil biodiesel might be worse than fossil fuels? A Republican plan to rewrite the Official Secrets Act to make talking to the press about government foul-ups a crime?

Well, you have reason to worry. But not to despair, as environmental writer and hero Barry Lopez points out in a terrific interview with Christian Miller in the latest issue of the Georgia Review:

Dolphin sports speedo in Sarasota Bay

I would be derelict in my oceans blogging duties were I not to mention "Scrappy" -- the 10-year-old dolphin that was recently spotted in a speedo. I wish I had a picture to accompany this post, but I guess you'll just have to use your imagination.

It's the type of story any morning show would be happy to report on, but the truth is the speedo hindered Scrappy's ability to hunt food and avoid predators. After at least 28 days of swimming in the suit, a team of volunteers, biologists, and veterinarians freed the underweight dolphin and found multiple shark bites and wounds on the creature. Don't worry: Scrappy is expected to make a full recovery.

But you have to ask yourself what motivates people to rally and fight for the life of one dolphin, when so many others are needlessly killed every day. Such is the wonder of human nature.

A controversial New Orleans landfill is set to close, but eco-disaster still looms

 The logistics of cleaning up New Orleans in the wake of Hurricane Katrina are almost beyond comprehension. Louisiana’s Department of Environmental Quality says some 15,000 houses are slated to be torn down, and demolition is the likely fate of 80,000 more. As a result, DEQ estimates, the city will ultimately truck off and dispose of […]

Which of these four is not like the other?

Far be it from me to criticize content on our very own site, but this piece makes no sense to me.

For one thing, the four cited cases -- Pat Robertson accepting global warming, Frank Luntz accepting global warming, Wal-Mart greening its operations, and the Sierra Club endorsing Lincoln Chafee -- have very little in common, politically, economically, or culturally. There's no reason a position on one would imply a position on another.

For another, just who are these reactionary, progress-inhibiting progressives? It's telling that not a single person or statement is cited.

For another, how is it possible that environmentalists are both losing miserably and failing to acknowledge their many victories? Which is it?

The whole thing reads like a bank-shot defense of the Sierra Club's endorsement of Chafee. But if Renstrom and Perkowitz want to defend that, they should defend it directly, as Carl Pope does here and here. I don't agree with it, but it's worth discussing.

Simply lumping those who oppose the endorsement in with some vaguely defined set of anti-progress progressives doesn't do much to advance that discussion.

Supreme Court CO2 case

Gack! I'm so far behind on blogging I don't know where to begin.

Here's something: A while back I was casting about for good commentary on the upcoming Supreme Court CO2 case. This piece on Seed isn't great, but it does have some insight, like so:

A victory for the environmentalists would give the federal government the power to regulate CO2 emissions -- and the power to decide how strictly or loosely to do so. On the other hand, an EPA victory hands this power back to the states, including the petitioners -- who would then have the authority to set their own standards. Paradoxically, a ruling against the petitioners might ultimately result in the major emissions restrictions they seek.

In depth on damn dams

If you liked yesterday's Daily Grist story on the Sardar Sarovar dam in India, check out two books from astute observers of global dam protests and the power of emerging non-state networks of activists. Both Sanjeev Khagram (University of Washington) and Ken Conca (University of Maryland) are academics, but they write in clear, comprehensible prose for those who are willing to work a little.

Good news/bad news

First, the good news:

The United States is supporting joint efforts by the governments of Malaysia, Indonesia, and Brunei Darussalam to establish the "Heart of Borneo" conservation plan, an initiative intended to protect biodiversity by preserving 220,000 square kilometers of equatorial rainforest on the island of Borneo...

Now for the punch line:

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice announced July 28 that the U.S. government would donate $100,000 to help advance the project.

Why won’t America’s environmentalists accept positive developments?

There are winners, there are losers, and there are people who just don’t get it. If you’ve been paying attention, you know that in spite of the best efforts of tens of thousands of dedicated environmentalists and the spending of literally hundreds of millions of philanthropic dollars, the environment has been losing. Hey greens, open […]