Uncategorized
All Stories
-
Cut and Run
Easy efficiency steps could slash global power demand, report says Thoreau said the preservation of the world was in wildness, but it might be in light bulbs. A new report […]
-
Two stark takes from ground zero of our Gulf misadventure
John McGrath recently argued persuasively here that the Iraq War deserves to be taken more seriously by environmentalists.
No one bothers to deny it's an oil war anymore; the time has come to take it seriously as such. It's important to know what precisely is happening on the ground in Iraq, and to try to get a handle on the labyrinthine politics now at play.
To that end, here are two blunt recent reports.
-
Hockey stick study bolstered
Nice story over at Newscientist.com about a new study by David C. Lund, Jean Lynch-Stieglitz, and William B. Curry in Nature that undercuts the "where's the little ice age?" argument against Mann's Hockey Stick graph:
-
Students worldwide weigh in
Google recently partnered with Global SchoolNet to invite teachers and students to use Google software in a project to brainstorm strategies for combating global warming. Children of all ages from more than 80 schools around the world participated. Here are their top 5 ideas:
-
Why I’m disappointed with yesterday’s Supreme Court hearings
I was quite disappointed to see "uncertainty" front-and-center in the arguments yesterday by the EPA lawyer before the Supreme Court:
... now is not the time to exercise such authority, in light of the substantial scientific uncertainty surrounding global climate change and the ongoing studies designed to address those uncertainties.
I thought I'd detected a shift by those opposed to action away from this argument and toward economic and fairness arguments. I guess when your back's against the wall, you go with what you know.
The argument that there is too much uncertainty to act is a value decision, not a scientific one. Consider this example: the odds of dying in a skydiving accident are about 100,000 to one. You and I can agree on this statistic, but disagree on its implications. I can say, "that's too risky," while you might disagree and argue, "I'm jumping -- you can't live your life avoiding risk."
-
One dime a month is all it takes
Just this morning I had to rip up the zillionth letter I've gotten from some anonymous agency somewhere out in Arizona urging me to reconsolidate my student loan (something I did years ago.) I tossed it into the recycling bin without further ado.
Now a start-up company called Greendimes promises to put an end to this incessant barrage of junkmail. For $3 a month, or a dime a day, the staff at GD will do the legwork to get you off of mailing lists and other pesky databases that flood your postbox with unnecessary paper. And each month they will plant a tree on your behalf through collaboration with Trees for the Future.
-
-
A nice bit of TV
ABC World News is running a three-part series on organic food that concludes tonight. It's worth viewing, if only to see the messages the "mainstream" is getting.
-
The justices speak
David highlights a few of the difficult and interesting questions facing the Court in Massachusetts v. EPA, which as you all probably know was argued this morning.
I wanted to provide a few thoughts about the argument, gleaned from my seat in the courtroom's last row, reading the transcript (PDF), and watching a fantastic panel at the Georgetown Law School discussing the argument. (You can see a webcast of the panel here.)
The justices were very engaged this morning. A quick review of the transcript indicates that the court broke into the arguments of the Deputy Solicitor General Gregory Garre (for EPA) and Assistant Attorney General James Milkey (for Massachusetts) more than 50 times each.
Below, I try to identify some highlights for each of the three major issues before the court. For ease, I'll refer to the advocates as the United States and Massachusetts.
