United States

Climate change justice is contentious

As this round of the IPCC unfolds, developing countries are scurrying to relieve themselves of any major responsibility for historic emissions and, consequently, aggressive mitigation policies.

For example, China has requested inserting language that formally recognizes the percentage of emissions for which developed countries are responsible -- 95 percent from the pre-industrial era until 1950, and 77 percent from 1950 to the start of the millennium.

The responsibility era

The editors of The New Republic make a simple point that can’t be made often enough: The conservative notion that reducing GHG emissions in the U.S. is pointless unless China and India do the same is a moral grotesquery. We created the problem. Ethically and geopolitically, we are responsible for leading the way to a […]

Following U.S. consumerism through the fields of China and Brazil

In what surely counts as one of the greatest feats in the history of global trade, the United States has essentially outsourced its manufacturing base to China in little more than a decade. It all starts with shuttered factories. Photo: iStockphoto But in doing so, the U.S. has helped unleash new trends in global agriculture […]

This time, it’s personal

(Continued from parts I and II.)

Last but not least (actually, what quite literally hits closest to home!):

North America

Canucks 1, US 0

Turns out that springing forward a month early didn’t save any electricity at all in the U.S. From Reuters: But other than forcing millions of drowsy American workers and school children into the dark, wintry weather three weeks early, the move appears to have had little impact on power usage. “We haven’t seen any measurable […]

Is it a communications failure?

Recent news articles have pointed out that we in the U.S. do not consider global warming a critical threat. Some bloggers have argued that this is the result of a communications failure (e.g., here or here or here).

The decision whether to worry about a looming issue is a value judgment, not a scientific one. You and I could agree entirely on the science of climate change, but disagree about whether it's something for our society to address.

For example, one argument against us worrying about climate change is that our descendants will be much richer than we are, so they will be better able to address whatever climate change occurs -- thus, we should leave the problem for them. At its heart, this is a moral choice.

Anika Rahman, women’s- and reproductive-rights advocate, answers questions

Anika Rahman. What work do you do? What’s your job title? I’m the president of Americans for UNFPA. UNFPA, or the United Nations Population Fund, is essentially the United Nations’ women’s health agency. It provides women’s health care and promotes the rights of women all over the world. Working in 140 countries, it is the […]

China got troubles

DR: Bush’s token response to global warming is to argue for clean coal and nuclear power. To the extent he’s involved in any international discussion, it’s the Pacific pact, a trade deal with these emerging markets for old coal and nuclear technology. TT: Bush jumps in a long list of presidents of both parties who […]

Every one destined to be 100% correct

Last week I reviewed the top ten green stories of 2006. But looking back is easy. What’s going to happen in 2007? I have no clue. But being wrong carries no penalty in U.S. punditry, so I’m going to make a few predictions anyway. Twenty, to be specific. In 2007: Al Gore will a) win […]