Latest Articles

Pretty Pleas

At Davos, Blair pushes U.S. for climate-change action Addressing the annual World Economic Forum powwow in Davos, Switzerland, yesterday, British Prime Minister Tony Blair had what observers called unusually sharp words for the Bush administration, saying the U.S. should join the global battle against climate change if it seeks global cooperation in its battle against […]

Mississippi

Is it me, or is the transition between the first two paragraphs of this NYT story rather jarring?

PORT GIBSON, Miss., Jan. 20 - Facing the possibility that a utility company would try to build a new nuclear reactor here, the City of Port Gibson and surrounding Claiborne County moved swiftly last month to protect the interests of their residents.

"We're willing to do whatever it takes to do to make this happen," said Amelda J. Arnold, the city's mayor. Last month, city aldermen voted unanimously to urge the Entergy Corporation, which already operates one reactor here, to build a second. The County Board of Supervisors did the same.

Yet another reason to move to Mississippi!

Who Will Screensave Us Now?

Big climate-modeling experiment predicts disaster A worldwide, collaborative climate-modeling study has produced its first results, and the news is not good. More than 95,000 volunteers from 150 countries participated in the study by downloading a program, run as a screensaver, which created slightly different climate simulations on each computer and sent them back to researchers. […]

Chlorific

Chlorine factories a major source of mercury pollution, report says A new study suggests that the chlorine industry may be releasing dangerously high amounts of mercury into the environment, more even than the coal-fired power plants usually pinpointed as major emitters. Although most chlorine plants use a production process that does not involve mercury, there […]

Arctic Power

I can't believe how many mind-boggling things are packed into this short story on Arctic Power, the lobbying group devoted to getting oil companies access to ANWR.

Let us begin.

Shared space

Speaking of cool trends, here's one that's even cooler but, sadly, less likely to make it to our shores. Cities in Denmark, Scandinavia, and possibly in the near future, Britain [* see update] are dealing with traffic through what might be called creative chaos: They're removing signs, lights, and guardrails to create open public spaces, where cars and pedestrians mix freely, ungoverned by any rules. Sound crazy? Consider the results from Dutch towns where the approach has been tried:

Drivers start to behave in a very different way amid the new uncertainty, moving slowly, making eye contact with pedestrians, and becoming aware of much more than whether the lights have gone red. Or so the theory goes.

Evidence from Dutch towns is impressive. Safety records have improved, local officials report, and accidents, when they do happen are far less serious, because of the slow speeds.

Yet overall cross-town speeds are no slower than before, because intersections are far more fluid and snarl-ups are rare.

"We have fewer accidents and the accidents which do happen are less severe," says Koop Kerkstra, a senior official in the northern Dutch town of Drachten. "We see a better flowing of traffic than when everything was regulated. With the new infrastructure, they can flow through Drachten in much less time."

Why should environmentalists care? (I hope someday never to have to write that question again.) Consider first of all that cars idling in traffic jams are a major source of smog, and cars driving too fast are a major source of CO2, and this kind of approach addresses both those issues.

But more importantly, this approach creates shared spaces that encourage social interaction with neighbors, walking, and sense of a community and responsibility. (Remember all those?) It increases the quality of life of city-dwellers, and as every enviro should know, city-dwellers on average use less energy than their suburban counterparts. We need to get people into livable cities and out of their cars.

This would be, to say the least, a hard sell in the U.S., for a variety of cultural and geographical reasons. But still, why aren't enviros trumpeting this kind of stuff from the rooftops? Instead of telling people what's wrong with the way they live their lives, how about selling them on a different and better life? Rather than something to fear, give them something to want.

Update [2005-1-29 14:42:23 by Dave Roberts]: Gristmill contributor Geoff Dabelko, who's married to a Dane, writes to note that the list "Denmark, Scandinavia, and maybe Britain" is rather incoherent, as Denmark, along with Sweden and Norway, is part of Scandinavia. And of course the Dutch towns cited in the story are in the Netherlands, not Denmark. I apologize for passing along the confusion of the CSM reporter and for knowing deplorably little about geography.

Political pragmatism

Via Marshall Wittman, aka the Bull Moose, an NYT op-ed by Paul Starr:

Social Security, progressive taxation, affordable health care, the constitutional basis for environmental and labor regulation, separation of church and state -- these issues and more hang in the balance.

Under these circumstances, liberal Democrats ought to ask themselves a big question: are they better off as the dominant force in an ideologically pure minority party, or as one of several influences in an ideologically varied party that can win at the polls?

Perhaps environmentalists should ask themselves the same question. What do you think? Let me know in comments.

Local food

Here's a great AP story about colleges buying more food from local farmers. Students love it because it tastes better. School officials love it because it adds to the "quality of life" that attracts applicants. Cafeteria workers love it because they get to cook and prepare food again instead of just ripping open packages. Farmers with small- and medium-sized farms love it because it helps them stay above water. And environmentalists love it because it encourages the organic food industry and results in fewer miles of polluting transportation of food.

Consider what's holding this back from spreading and becoming common practice, not only for schools and other institutions but for the average consumer. It is not desire, I suspect -- even the totally eco-unconscious prefer better-tasting food. What's lacking is technology: The ability to closely track exactly what farmer has what and when, what consumer wants it and when, where they both are, and the most efficient way for them to connect. This kind of technology is being developed in bits and pieces all around us.

Enviros can help by publicizing and celebrating trends like this.

Bush team pushes Clear Skies, but disagreement over CO2 could stymie the bill

Barely a week into the president’s second term, the emboldened Bush team — even whilst juggling plans for a Social Security overhaul and major new expenditures on the Iraq venture — has signaled that it’s bound and determined to pass its Clear Skies Act, the first major amendment to the Clean Air Act since 1990. […]

Umbra on reusable recycling bags

Dear Umbra, I am the cofounder and current president of the Recycling Club at R.L. Paschal High School in Fort Worth, Texas. We have started collecting cell phones and plan to donate them to Verizon, since they refurbish and recycle or sell them. With the money they make, they buy new ones with airtime for […]