Latest Articles

Wind power 101

Discussion of environment and energy issues is coming so fast and furious these days that I could spend all day simply reading it -- which would make me a less-than-useful blogger. So I'll try to pick a few good bits to share.

Jerome a Paris, who writes at dKos and its sister site, European Tribune, is the kind of writer I'd be if I'd studied something useful in school, with numbers and facts and such, rather than philosophy. I highly recommend two recent posts: one is a brief, cogent summary of wind power, listing its benefits and drawbacks; the second is an exhaustive, detailed rebuttal of wind-power skeptics.

Everything you've ever wanted to know about wind power but were afraid to ask.

(via EnergyBulletin, of course)

Environmentally friendly drag racing

When is that plug-in hybrid going to get here? And where is that cellulosic biofuel technology?

I admit to having paranoid thoughts lately. Paranoia, as anyone who has eaten one too many "special" brownies knows, can be an unpleasant mental state (especially when combined with the giggles).

Could it be true that oil companies are buying off researchers?

Americans and Climate Change: Problem summary

"Americans and Climate Change: Closing the Gap Between Science and Action" (PDF) is a report synthesizing the insights of 110 leading thinkers on how to educate and motivate the American public on the subject of global warming. Background on the report here. I'll be posting a series of excerpts (citations have been removed; see original report). If you'd like to be involved in implementing the report's recommendations, or learn more, visit the Yale Project on Climate Change website.

Below the fold is an executive summary of the problems conference participants identified.

An innovative Alabama CSA shows the way forward.

When Wal-Mart announced plans to become the world's biggest purveyor of organically grown food last week, the polite applause from the enviro gallery grated on my ears. (Here's a spirited recent debate on Gristmill.) Even the New York Times editorial page could see through this move. While some greens cooed at at Wal-Mart's magnamity, the Grey Lady unleashed an appropriately cynical analysis:

There is no chance that Wal-Mart will be buying from small, local organic farmers. Instead, its market influence will speed up the rate at which organic farming comes to resemble conventional farming in scale, mechanization, processing and transportation. For many people, this is the very antithesis of what organic should be.... For "Wal-Mart" and "organic" to make sense in the same sentence, the company will have to commit itself to protecting the Agriculture Department standard that gives "organic" meaning.

I have no doubt that Wal-Mart's greenie admirers will hold the company's feet to the fire on that one. But the USDA's organic standards are already being drained of meaning. Rather than chide Goliath to behave nicely, enviros should consider helping David get his shit together. Check out what they're getting up to over in Birmingham, Ala.

Melinda Kramer, advocate for grassroots women activists, answers questions

Melinda Kramer. Photo: Caitlin Sislin. With what environmental organization are you affiliated? I am cofounder and codirector of Women’s Global Green Action Network, an international organization that unites and empowers grassroots women advocates, entrepreneurs, and community leaders around the world who are working in the areas of environmental, economic, and social justice. How does your […]

He Who Pays the Piper Calls the Tuna

California loses suit to make tuna companies issue mercury warnings California law requires products containing chemicals that could cause reproductive harm or cancer to have warning labels, but a state Superior Court judge has ruled that the law does not apply to mercury-licious canned tuna. Mercury has been shown to slow neurological development, thus the […]

Army Corps of Darkness

Army Corps of Engineers has screwed up more than NOLA levees The Army Corps of Engineers spends hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on ill-designed, ineffective, and environmentally disastrous projects — and that’s not the enviros talking. Harsh critiques of the Corps — whose work includes draining wetlands and mucking about with rivers — have […]

Arctic Tock …

Arctic ice may be gone in one to three decades If you’ve been planning a trip to the Arctic, better buy your tickets now, because it’s a-meltin’ fast. (Perhaps you’ve heard?) A record low amount of ocean froze over this winter — a reduction of over 115,000 square miles of sea ice from last year. […]

Americans and Climate Change: Intro and executive summary

We've talked a great deal on this site about how best to "frame" global warming. How can we shrink the gap between what science tells us about the dangers of climate change and the relative disengagement of the American public? How can we get the public fired up and thus spur more aggressive policy responses?

That's the subject of "Americans and Climate Change," a new report from the Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies, based on a conference held late last year. The 200-page report can be ordered in book form or downloaded for free as a PDF (uh, PDF). (It's written by Associate Dean Daniel Abbasi, based on notes from the conference.)

Now, normally, a post like this would end here. I would recommend the report and move on.

But let's face it. None of you are going to pay $20 to order a conference report. None of you are going to read a 200-page PDF.

And here's the thing: I actually read this one. The whole thing. And it's extraordinary: lucid, insightful, and practical. So I don't want to let it pass by. (Incidentally, thanks to the NYT's Andy Revkin for recommending it.)

I contacted the folks at Yale, and they've agreed to let me reprint some or all of the report (depending on how it goes), in small chunks that are easier to read than, say, a 200-page PDF.

I hope it starts some discussion. And I hope it isn't, as my wife tactlessly suggests, the dorkiest, wonkiest thing anyone's ever done, ever.

Below you'll find the beginning of the Executive Summary, which frames the rest of the report.

Attribution 101

The Wall Street Journal editorial page is responsible for a great deal of the FUD that still surrounds global warming. But their news operation is top notch.

Case in point: Here's an excellent, plain-language explanation for how climate scientists attribute warming to human activity, from Sharon Begley. Bookmark it and send the link to friends who've been reading too many WSJ editorials.

(via Deltoid)