Latest Articles

Holmstead resigns

Jeff Holmstead, head of the Bush administration's EPA air department and all around promoter of the "Clear Skies" initiative, just announced his plans to leave the agency at the end of August. Next steps for him? Traveling the world with his family for a year. Best decision the guy ever made ...

Umbra on micro-wind

Dear Umbra, Are there any worthwhile resources or models that would enable me to generate my own electricity in a cost-effective way, using wind power? This is on a one-household basis. Matt PinesToronto, Canada Dearest Matt, In jargon-land, you are interested in micro-wind. Little did you know! Because you are a blessed Canadian, you have […]

The Offal Truth

Promising clean-energy company may have to leave U.S. to succeed Certain folks take it as quasi-religious doctrine that strong green regulation is bad for economic growth. Tell it to Philadelphia’s Changing World Technologies, a burgeoning clean-energy company that may have to leave the U.S. precisely because of lax environmental laws. Every day, CWT turns 270 […]

Urbana Renewal

Illinois commission votes to expand state’s clean energy sources The Illinois Commerce Commission has approved a sustainable-energy initiative designed to increase the state’s reliance on renewables, especially wind power. The plan is voluntary, but if it is fully embraced by all of the state’s utilities Illinois could see 8 percent of its electricity produced via […]

Brussels Pouts

European Union commissioners duke it out over green legislation Today’s meeting of the E.U.’s European Commission is a make-or-break moment for the union’s sustainable-development policies, according to eco-advocates. Since taking office last November, commission president José Manuel Barroso has delayed initiatives on pesticides, the marine environment, air quality, and more, saying they might prevent the […]

Why Does He Hate Toads?

SCOTUS nominee John G. Roberts not a green’s first pick President Bush’s new Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr. has a distinguished conservative pedigree: He clerked for conservative Supreme Court Justice William Rehnquist and was deputy White House counsel during the Reagan administration. With only two years under his belt as a federal judge, […]

A walk on the slippery rocks

"Philosophy," you scoff. "What is it good for?"

Not much, really. But I studied it for a long time and still enjoy seeing it pop up here and there. I was happy, for instance, to see my favorite philosopher make it to (a distant) No. 2 on the BBC poll of best philosophers evar, and also to see him given a 9 out of 10 on Sartwell's rather more idiosyncratic ranking.

"Generally speaking," ol' Dave Hume said, "the errors in religion are dangerous; those in philosophy only ridiculous." So true.

Just to pretend this post is about the environment, here are a few quotes about nature from philosophers.

Most incorrect:

Nature does nothing uselessly. -- Aristotle

Most correct but misunderstood:

The goal of life is living in agreement with nature. -- Zeno

And finally, back to my boy Hume:

It is a great mortification to the vanity of man, that his utmost art and industry can never equal the meanest of nature's productions, either for beauty or value.

Got any favorite quotes about nature? Leave them in comments.

Could it work?

Biopolitical anticipated this post with his comment -- in fact, my post on the gas tax started off on the topic of road privatization but then, well, veered off course.

I like the idea of road privatization on the surface. The road system is similar to the mail system in that when it was instituted, there wasn't really a private company that had the necessary capital to take on such a project themselves. Now, however, we have FedEx and other shipping companies that do have that capital for shipping, and which would undoubtedly have branched into mail delivery were it not for the government monopoly. Why not the same for roads?

There are a few considerations here:

Notes on the new Supreme Court nominee.

Ha. Well, that whole post was sure pointless.

Bush has nominated John G. Roberts to the Supreme Court. More later.

Update [2005-7-19 22:18:50 by Dave Roberts]: Well, I've read around a bit, and there doesn't seem to be much exciting to say about Roberts. He is by all accounts an extremely good lawyer, intelligent and thoughtful. He's known for his level, collegial temperament and ability to find consensus. Ideologically, he's extremely conservative, in the Scalia and Thomas mold, but not doctrinaire. His confirmation is inevitable, and while I'm sure Dems will kick up a little dust, they won't go to the mat over this guy. Says law school professor Robert Gordon:

All the indications are that he will become another vote to expand presidential power in national-security affairs, to limit the federal government's authority to regulate business and the environment and protect civil rights, to make it harder for women, minorities, labor and the disabled to pursue practical remedies in the courts, and to favor a larger role for religion in public life and as object of public subsidy. He is most likely to do this incrementally, case-by-case, rather than by sweeping new doctrines.

On the right, they seem not thrilled but certainly not disappointed. For a range of conservative opinion, visit redstate.org, the best conservative blog going.

Libertarians seem oddly silent on the subject of subsidies that benefit the oil and gas industries.

Warning: This post is just as wonky and boring as the title makes it sound.

This essay by Jerry Taylor and Peter VanDoren of the Cato Institute perfectly captures a real confusion I have about libertarians.

They discuss the two versions of the energy bill -- House and Senate -- and say pretty much what you'd expect libertarians to say: Every provision that has government giving money to a market actor, taking money from a market actor, or restricting the behavior of a market actor is bad, bad, bad.

Okay, fine. But what's the motivation?

Here are the two possible versions of libertarianism: