Gristmill

Mission statements

I promise I won't point to everything Mark Schmitt writes (though that would be no small public service), but I do want to draw attention to this follow-up to the issues covered in this post. It seems both Yglesias and I misunderstood Schmitt in a subtle but telling way.

A no-nukes argument with no waste

OMFG. This essay from Tom Paine's Patrick C. Doherty just made my day. It's a concise, effective argument against nuclear power that isn't based on nuclear waste.

Don't get me wrong -- nuclear waste is nasty. Nasty and more-or-less permanent. It's a compelling reason to be leery of nuclear power. But I'm not sure it's enough. The argument of the industry, taken up by some prominent enviros recently, is that we need a non-CO2-producing energy source, a big one, now, and nuclear is the large-scale source that's available. If you're convinced that nuclear power is viable, that it's a large untapped source of non-polluting energy, the problem of what to do with waste isn't all that compelling. Many people's intuitive reaction is: We're smart. We'll figure something out.

So Doherty doesn't even mention waste. He has two parallel arguments.

The week in sustainable _________

Oops, it wouldn't be a Monday unless I linked to Sustainability Sundays over on WorldChanging, which this week included the week in sustainable vehicles from Mike Millikin and a guest shot from Joel Makower.

The essay from Makower is a reprint from his own blog. It's a business primer on Kyoto, and I highly recommend it. It covers many of the issues touched on in Emily Gertz's third dispatch from Verdopolis -- including the business case for action on climate, greenhouse gas reporting, carbon trading, carbon offsets, and carbon neutrality -- in a somewhat more systematic way, with plentiful links to other resources.

Editorials

A couple of big papers weigh in on Bush admin. environmental malfeasance. First, the Washington Post calls the zombie-esque, won't-stay-dead "Clear [cough] Skies" bill, in gentle editorialese, "flawed." They point out that a compromise bill would be easy to hash out, and they blame both parties equally for not doing so. This is fashionable in Beltway media parlance, this "pox on both their houses" high-mindedness, though it makes one wonder if D.C. scribblers have been paying attention for the last four years.

The L.A. Times bashes the Bushies for ignoring the mercury problem. They are, as is their wont, less circumspect than the Post. Discussing an upcoming U.N. meeting on mercury, they drop this juicy 'graph:

Documents submitted by the U.S. government, meanwhile, present no specific goals or steps, reject the idea of a treaty, call vaguely for voluntary partnerships, and offer to teach others about "best practices." That's a curious phrase coming from the nation just criticized by its own Environmental Protection Agency inspector general for violating scientific procedures in order to come up with an industry-friendly regulation of coal plants, probably the biggest source of mercury emissions in this country.

Indeed.

Of course, we all know that because these papers oppose administration policies, they are liberal, and because they are liberal they are biased, and because they are biased there's no need to listen to what they say about administration policies. Handy!

It’s too late to stop climate change

"At the core of the global warming dilemma is a fact neither side of the debate likes to talk about: It is already too late to prevent global warming and the climate change it sets off," writes environmental author and advocate Mark Hertsgaard in the San Francisco Chronicle.

A valentine

In keeping with the holiday, let me send a valentine out to my one true media love, Knight Ridder environmental correspondent Seth Borenstein, whose lucid, straightforward, BS-free prose -- a virtual miracle in the world of environmental reporting -- are on display in this story on the uncertain effects of Kyoto.

Just plain “green” for me, thanks

Thomas Friedman is doing a public service by pushing his "geo-green" shtick. Any time someone outside the mainstream environmental community, particularly someone as high-profile as Friedman, pushes sensible energy policy, it becomes harder for its industry and administration opponents to dismiss. Frankly, if Paris Hilton wanted to come out and argue that alternative energy improves your sex life, I would praise her to the rafters. Whatever gets the job done.

It is worth, however, keeping our expectations realistic.

A whale of a debate

The longtime Northwest controversy (discussed by the Seattle Post-Intelligencer) over the Makah tribe's whaling is rooted, like so many contemporary Indian issues in the Northwest, in the treaties of 1855, now 150 years old.

I side with the Makah. The five or fewer gray whales they intend to hunt each year are from a now healthy population numbering in the tens of thousands. Aside from sentimentalism about marine mammals, I can't see a single compelling reason to effectively abrogate the Makah's treaty rights by denying their application to resume the hunt.

The notion that recognizing the Makah's right to hunt whales will create a precedent for a widespread return to commercial whaling seems preposterous. The Makah are the only group in North American with an explicit right to whale in their treaty. And they have a 1,500 year history of whaling responsibly.

It seems to me that the Makah whaling issue is controversial primarily because it is a wedge: It separates advocates for sustainability from animal rights activists.

What do you think about Makah whaling? I'm curious where Gristmill readers stand.

Revisiting Red Hill Valley

And you haven't even had time to read the post on this from Friday. But several alert readers in Canada have, and they sent along a few updates. Supporters have filed a multi-part petition (number 82), now languishing at the federal level, that addresses damage the highway project will cause, including to the federally endangered spiny softshell turtle. To raise awareness of the issues, the more artistically inclined have released a CD called "Keepers of the Sacred Fire," which features 15 local artists, and a documentary too. And late last week, eight members of Hamilton Friends of Canada traveled to Toronto to apologize to the federal government for that whole "our city is suing the country" thing.

The bulldozers may be hard at work, but this battle isn't over.