Latest Articles

A letter from a dozen green groups to Congress

Yesterday, a letter opposing the energy bill was sent to Congress, signed by the following environmental groups: Alaska Wilderness League, American Rivers, Defenders of Wildlife, Earthjustice, Friends of the Earth, National Audubon Society, National Environmental Trust, Natural Resources Defense Council, Public Citizen, Sierra Club, The Wilderness Society, U.S. PIRG, and Union of Concerned Scientists.

The full text of the letter is below the break.

In Garbage Land, Elizabeth Royte talks dirty

Garbage Land: On the Secret Trail of Trash by Elizabeth Royte, Little Brown and Co., 320 pgs., 2005. Our soda man delivers. He comes bounding up the steps, easily cradling an ancient-looking wooden crate under one arm. The contents are 24 seven-ounce bottles of cola and birch beer, for which we hand him $7, and […]

Beach Blanket Politico

Green activist Donna Frye leading in race for mayor of San Diego San Diego may soon get a jolt of green in City Hall. Veteran surfer chick and longtime environmental activist Donna Frye (D) took 43 percent of the vote in the city’s mayoral election on Tuesday, far ahead of the 27 percent earned by […]

Thrill Spill Cult

Water should keep pouring over Northwest dams to aid salmon, court says Salmon will continue to find a watery way over several Northwest dams. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals this week voted to uphold a federal judge’s June order for the feds to aid migrating salmon by spilling water over five dams in […]

Dirty Financing: Havana Nights

Environmental groups unanimous in distaste for energy bill Yesterday, a letter signed by reps from more than a dozen environmental organizations was sent to Congress with a strong message about the energy bill that recently emerged from conference committee: it stinks. It does nothing to wean the U.S. from its dependence on foreign oil. It […]

Dirty Financing

Dirty-energy tax breaks total over $8.5 billion in energy bill Highly profitable dirty-power industries may be treated to even fatter bottom lines thanks to the energy bill that emerged this week from congressional conference committee. It would dedicate more than $8.5 billion in tax breaks over the next 10 years to oil, natural gas, coal, […]

Gas-Muzzler

EPA holds back negative report on U.S. auto fuel efficiency According to a report not released Wednesday by the U.S. EPA, loopholes in U.S. fuel-economy standards let automakers produce cars and trucks much less fuel-efficient than models 20 years ago. On Tuesday, the same day the long-debated energy bill emerged from congressional negotiations, EPA opted […]

Energy bill is (surprise!) also a budget hole

The CBO sent this letter [PDF] to Joe Barton, Chairman of the Energy Committee, to let him know that yes, indeed, the energy bill will be putting a hole in the budget. The CBO estimates that the bill will reduce revenues by over $2 billion a year in 2008 and by a total of $12 billion over the period from 2005-2015.

However, I don't know that the CBO included this lovely addition from one Tom Delay. That story isn't really getting too much press this morning -- the Boston Globe is probably the most widely circulated paper running a story.

A debate over environmental priorities never gets at the real point

J.H. Adler points us to a debate in the pages of Foreign Policy between Bjørn Lomborg and Carl Pope. Since I read the whole thing, here's the highlight reel, so you don't have to:

Pope: "The global environmental dilemma teems with both risks and opportunities."

Lomborg: "Yes, we have problems. But we have solved many more. Yes, we can solve those that remain, but not all at once. We need priorities."

P: "True, we need priorities. ... Having priorities doesn't always mean Sophie's choice."

L: "I'm glad you agree that we need priorities. But I worry that your commitment is rhetorical."

P: "No, Bjørn, Sophie's choice is avoidable."

L: "... You insist that there are no real trade-offs between the environment and prosperity. ... It is not that environmental projects are not worthwhile. ... Often, there are other, better projects that must come first."

P: "... You keep posing artificial choices... It is simply not the case that the world -- or the United States -- does only one thing at a time."

L: "Advocacy groups understandably want to focus on headline-grabbing issues ... But when we emphasize some problems, we get less focus on others."

P: "Bjørn, you ignorant slut ... "

Okay, that last one was an embellishment.

CAFTA at midnight

Speaking of DeLay scumbaggery, it looks like the Republicans are going to hold a vote on CAFTA between midnight and 2am tonight. They're hoping that some of the moderate Republicans who oppose this legislative turd will stay home and that DeLay and his posse can bully the rest into supporting it.

You think this is how a majority behaves when it's proud of its legislation?

Jeff has a nice round-up of sources on why CAFTA is no good for the environment. It's also no good for free trade, or anything else really. The substantive stakes are not huge, but it's a great example of the bankrupt process by which the Republican majority passes legislation these days.

Update [2005-7-27 22:34:9 by Dave Roberts]: It just passed -- never mind arm-twisting moderate Republicans. Fifteen Democrats voted for this hunk of junk, and that put it over the top. The D.C. rot is bipartisan.

(See also Ezra.)