Latest Articles

Tempest in a Tight Spot

Writer Terry Tempest Williams barred from speaking on Florida campus Renowned author and wilderness activist Terry Tempest Williams is touring the country to promote her new book, “The Open Space of Democracy.” Given the subject, it’s a rather pointed irony that the board of trustees of Florida Gulf Coast University voted 11 to 1 to […]

The story The New York Times didn’t cover

A look at U.S. mainstream media vs. foreign environmental coverage increasingly shows that Europe, Australia, and even India do a better job than we do.

A perfect example of the underreporting by the US press of extraordinarily important climate change news came on October 10th when The Guardian UK announced that, "An unexplained and unprecedented rise in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere two years running has raised fears that the world may be on the brink of runaway global warming."

Debate wars episode II: the empire strikes back

The second presidential debate was, by any measure, better than the first. Bush recovered from his twitchy, petulant performance of Sep. 30 and Kerry was, if anything, even more concise (lo, a miracle!) and direct. More importantly, the questions from audience members were better -- more substantive, less circumspect -- than anything asked by the "official" media-types refereeing the VP and first presidential debates.

However, Kerry flubbed one question that should have been a home run for him.  As you might guess, I'm talking about the environmental question.  Here's a policy area where, unlike many others, Kerry has a clear, consistent, and almost uniformly strong record.  Bush, on the other hand, is rated the worst environmental president ever by just about everybody -- including, increasingly, members of his own party, mid-level officials in his agencies, and conservationists from the traditionally right-leaning hook-and-bullet crowd.

But Bush dodged the bullet.

Mandatory Caps

When fruitloops attack

Steven Milloy, proprietor of junkscience.com, resident at the regulation-hatin' Cato Institute, and true-blue wingnut, has a hilarious article running on FoxNews.com.  Pay no attention to those who criticize Bush's environmental policies, he says, they are but "left-leaning environmental activists and their supporters in academia."  He lauds Bush for avoiding the "dance of death" that is the Kyoto Protocol, but saves his highest praise for the dysfunctional regulatory process the administration has produced.  "Short of dismantling the EPA in favor of a more rational approach to the environment -- the preferred solution," he says, "the president has done the next best thing by bollixing up the EPA rulemaking process."  Woot!

Marc Ross, rocker and activist, answers questions

With what environmental organization are you affiliated? I am president and executive director of Rock the Earth. What does your organization do? What, in a perfect world, would constitute “mission accomplished”? Rock the Earth is a relatively new environmental advocacy nonprofit organization based in Denver, Colo. It was created to work with the music community […]

Umbra on the mysteries of produce code numbers

Dear Umbra, I recently learned that the UPC numbers on produce indicate whether the item is conventionally grown (beginning with a 4), organically grown (beginning with a 9), or genetically modified (beginning with an 8). I like to buy organic, locally grown produce at my local health food store whenever possible, but recently at a […]

Pump it up

Thomas Friedman is back at The New York Times after a two-month hiatus. I don't always agree with his stands (and enjoyed the alternative voices that appeared in The Times during his absence), but find it heartening that his second op-ed upon returning has an environmental bent:

Of all the shortsighted policies of President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, none have [Editor's Note:  Grist editors would not have let slip this misuse of have] been worse than their opposition to energy conservation and a gasoline tax. If we had imposed a new gasoline tax after 9/11, demand would have been dampened and gas today would probably still be $2 a gallon. But instead of the extra dollar going to Saudi Arabia -- where it ends up with mullahs who build madrasas that preach intolerance -- that dollar would have gone to our own Treasury to pay down our own deficit and finance our own schools. In fact, the Bush energy policy should be called No Mullah Left Behind.

Interesting perspective -- and certainly not one we've heard from the Kerry campaign.

We’re More Partial to Vasco da Gama

Daily Grist takes break to lament Columbus Day Monday is Columbus Day, on which we celebrate the man who precipitated what may have been one of history’s most egregious and far-reaching periods of ecological destruction (not to mention genocide). Here at Grist, we’ll be too busy crying in our coffee to put out Daily Grist. […]

Like a Camel Through the Eye of the Tax Code

Congress moves to close SUV-friendly tax loophole It looks like Congress may soon close one of the U.S. tax code’s most egregious provisions (and that’s quite a distinction!). In 2003, lawmakers raised the business-equipment tax deduction to $100,000, clearing the way for a massive luxury SUV to be written off as a business expense — […]