Latest Articles

They are big — really, really big

In an interesting (albeit hopeless) op-ed called "Imagine a world where ExxonMobil gives back," Gar Alperovitz offers some interesting perspective on Exxon's recent profits:

In the quarter ended Dec. 31, the giant company made $10.7 billion -- the equivalent of more than $115 million for every one of its 92 days, nearly $5 million each hour, more than $80,000 every minute, nearly $1,350 each second.

ExxonMobil's overall 2005 revenues of $371 billion amounted to more than $1 billion a day! The total was larger than the entire economies of all but 16 of the 184 countries ranked by the World Bank. It was 40 percent greater than the gross national product of Indonesia, a member of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries with a population of 242 million.

More than a billion dollars a day. That's something else.

The whole thing's worth reading.

6,500,000,000

According to the World Population Clock, earth's (human) population will hit the 6.5 billion mark at exactly 7:16 p.m. EST this Saturday.

The Midas Crutch

EPA may replace ozone-depleting chemical with cancer-causing chemical Here’s a hypothetical: Say you were a nation that signed a pact to phase out ozone-depleting chemicals. Say you therefore needed an alternative to methyl bromide, an ozone-attacking pesticide used on strawberries and other crops. Would you phase in a highly toxic fumigant that probably causes cancer? […]

Going, Going, Oregon

Oregon’s sweeping property-rights law upheld by state Supreme Court Will Oregon’s famously tough urban-growth boundaries be breached in favor of McMansions and office parks? Seems so. After an expedited review, the state’s Supreme Court unanimously ruled on Tuesday that a controversial 2004 property-rights ballot measure is legal. Measure 37 allows landowners seeking to develop their […]

No More Bull in the China Shop

China orders corrupt environmental protection officials to go straight In the wake of several destructive and internationally embarrassing pollution disasters, China is ordering local environmental protection officials to start, um, protecting the environment. A government announcement on Tuesday warned officials to stop covering up accidents, turning a blind eye to polluting projects, and canceling penalties […]

Everything you ever wanted to know about … everything

So much material. So little time. So many complicated issues. So little expertise.

How about a big fat linky post!

Treehugger has a fantastic interview with Hunter Lovins, long-time champion of sustainability, now president of Natural Capitalism Solutions, Inc. She talks about her current international work, focusing on Afghanistan. I particularly like this exchange, which is relevant to our discussion of poverty earlier:

Do you believe that economic development can go hand in hand with sustainable development?

Yes, and this is a critical point. We know how to meet people's needs for energy, for water, for housing, for sanitation, and for transportation, with much more sustainable technologies than are traditionally brought by development agencies.

Most of what is called development around the world is really donor nation dollars hiring donor nation contractors to deliver last century's technologies, in such a way that the jobs and the economic benefit go right back to the originating donor country.

And when the dollars, the contractors, and the programs leave, the people in Afghanistan, or Africa, or wherever the so-called "development" is being done, are no better off than they were. If anything, they're worse off: perhaps building a massive coal plant for which they've taken foreign debt; or put in some piece of infrastructure that they don't really know how to run, that isn't creating local jobs, and isn't meeting local needs. And, everybody's wasted a lot of money and time. We can do a lot better than that.

Word.

See also Grist's interview with Lovins, and this survey about your rug preferences (really), which Lovins would very much like you to fill out.

-----

Speaking of fantastic interviews with Lovinses, don't miss Discover's short but action-packed interview with Amory Lovins. Just about everything the dude says is quote-worthy, but I think this is my favorite:

If I could do just one thing to solve our energy problems, I would allow energy to compete fairly at honest prices regardless of which kind it is, what technology it uses, how big it is, or who owns it. If we did that, we wouldn't have an oil problem, a climate problem, or a nuclear proliferation problem. Those are all artifacts of public policies that have distorted the market into buying things it wouldn't otherwise have bought because they were turkeys.

So much wisdom in so few words.

SCOTUS CWA cases

Judith Lewis has an excellent post on the Clean Water Act cases headed to the Supreme Court today, including some interesting comparisons of press coverage from various regions. The nut is: In places where wetlands have been disappearing, they want federal protection. In places where they haven't yet, property rights rule the day.

As usual, everyone is for "small government" until they need government help.

How poultry producers are ravaging the rural South

A person driving through the South might notice the chicken houses dotting the hills and flatlands. He might marvel at the larger ones, as long as a football field. He might react to their gagging stench for a moment, and then forget as he travels on. But those who live near the structures — stuffed […]

Hayward responds

I took a few shots a Steven Hayward's recent piece in the Weekly Standard here. As is his wont, he replied quite courteously by email, portions of which I've pasted below the fold:

What’s sustainable?

Related to the soon-to-be-revised index-card manifesto, I have a question, raised by some of the feedback I got:

My assumption is that sooner or later all personal vehicles -- and eventually all vehicles, period -- will be powered solely with electricity from renewable sources: wind, solar, hydrokinetic, biothermal.

Here's my basic reasoning: Humanity's energy reserves (fossil fuels) are finite. We need to start living within the earth's solar budget. Consider the following three alternatives (and pardon my utter lack of technical sophistication):