Articles by David Roberts

A set of principles we can all agree on

The following is a guest essay from Bill Becker, Organizer for the National Leadership Summits for a Sustainable America in Golden, Colo.

-----

What would happen if all of the people concerned about the federal government's lack of leadership on climate change began to sing from the same song sheet? Would the chorus grow so loud that the administration would finally hear it? Would this year's congressional candidates join in?

These are not unimportant questions. While the Bush administration's lackluster leadership on global warming has produced a silver lining -- the hundreds of grassroots organizations, local governments, and businesses rising to fill the leadership void -- it also has produced fragmented effort and the impression among the American people that perhaps global warming isn't so serious after all. And while local action is essential, some of us have concluded that stabilizing the climate is so large a job with so urgent a timetable that the nation's response cannot be sufficient without the feds.

Last June, 40 leaders committed to climate action gathered in Wisconsin and asked the song-sheet questions. Their answer is a document called the "Wingspread Principles on the U.S. Response to Global Warming" -- 12 short statements, calm and reasoned, on what the underpinnings should be for serious national climate policy.

"Great nations rise to great challenges," the document begins. "Today, no challenge is more critical than global climate change. It reaches to the core of humanity's relationship with the Earth. It tests our capacity to make intelligent changes in our economy, policies, and behaviors in the interest of all people and all generations."

The document, named after the conference center where the leaders met, includes these statements:

How much science can money buy?

A final bit of superb reporting from Paul D. Thacker at Environmental Science & Technology before he heads to a new job.

It's about conflicts of interest in the science publishing world:

As environmental journals publish more controversial papers on topics such as human health and global warming, they are beginning to face a serious issue that medical journals have long been dealing with -- conflict of interest. Although disclosure policies are standard in the medical community, publishers of environmental research have been slow to adopt such guidelines.

There are some truly eye-opening case studies in the piece. It's a little unsettling that the scientific process is as much subject to big-money gaming as politics. Perhaps science is becoming a continuation of politics by other means. Or is it the other way around?

This one is a must-read.

That’s a lot

British business titan Richard Branson has pledged $3 billion in the fight against climate change. He made the announcement on the second day of Bill Clinton's Global Initiative conference.

Carbon must be made expensive

From the minority desk at the Senate Environment Committee: