Uncategorized

China loans money to developing countries with no environmental strings

Tired of all those environmental conditions on loans from Western countries and the World Bank? If you are a country in Asia with plentiful natural resources, you are in luck. China is there for you with lots of aid, especially if it is for infrastructure like bridges that will make getting those natural resources to China easier.

Today's piece in the New York Times gives a sense of China's new profile in foreign assistance, and as the piece says:

Just because GDP doesn’t track happiness is no reason to reject economic growth

It's inarguably true that while GDP has grown exponentially for the past half-century, human happiness has remained relatively flat. All the same, as an economist it baffles me when these two facts are put forth as evidence that capitalism, markets, and economic growth are one big mirage, with only minor links to human welfare.

It won’t happen through fear

Funny. I wrote this post last night and held onto it to post it later today -- and then John went and scooped me, saying many of the very things I had to say. Oh well. Consider this an addendum to his post.

-----

Ibon at peakoil.net voices his worst fear:

Find out

See for yourself:

Or: Fear and Environmentalism: Open mike night!

A post at The Oil Drum had this to say:

The power of peak oil as an external force, a geologically driven catalyst, to act as a wedge to force sustainability and conservation on a world hell bent on exponential growth and energy consumption is what caught my imagination and gave me a sense of hope several years ago when I first investigated this issue.

I've got more to say under the fold.

A subtle presidential bid?

Al Gore -- who's giving a major climate-policy speech today (more later) -- is writing another book, to be released in May: The Assault on Reason.

Two things are notable about this:

• It's a blessing that somebody other than low-level pundits is finally going to publicly acknowledge the increasing air of emotivism, unreality, and illogic that characterizes our national political conversation.
• As Ezra notes, this is extremely well timed to keep Gore in the public eye, just in case, you know, he decides to ... youknowwhat.

Japan eradicates dolphins as form of ‘pest control’

Every year environmental and animal welfare groups join forces to boo and hiss at (and work to oppose) Japan during the International Whaling Commission meeting. In 1986 the IWC instituted a moratorium on commercial whaling, and ever since Japan has been fighting to overturn it. This year, Japan and its allies came dangerously close to inhaling the sweet smell of success.

In the 20 years since the ban has been in place, approximately 27,000 whales have been slaughtered -- either accidentally or for "scientific" purposes. This is hardly a secret. But you probably aren't aware of the 20,000 dolphins and porpoises Japan kills every year.

A Beautiful Find

Scientists discover 52 new marine species near Indonesia Eight new species of shrimp, 20 new species of coral, and 24 new species of fish, including two types of sharks, have […]

How Do You Solve a Problem Like Malaria?

World Health Organization endorses controlled use of DDT to fight malaria Reversing a 30-year-old policy, the World Health Organization on Friday announced that the pesticide DDT, used indoors in moderation, […]

What to expect.

So, rumor's in the air about a new Bush climate policy. As Bart says, this is no doubt an authorized leak and, like everything the Bush administration does, done with politics in mind.

I imagine Rove sees the Gore cloud gathering on the horizon and wants to blow it away with some hot air before it gets too big.

How? By stealing Gore's signature issue. It's exactly what Turdblossom did in the 2000 election: Bush's promise to regulate CO2 was nothing but a successful bid to take the issue off the table, to dilute media and voter attention (same with "compassionate conservatism"). It immunized Bush.

Now Rove is trying to immunize the party, by changing its stance on global warming from "No!" to "blah blah blah." Voters understand No, and on an issue like this they'll come to see it as obstructionist. But they don't really follow the blah blah blah. They'll get the impression that both parties are addressing the issue; then it's six of one half dozen the other.

Will it work? Let's just say the last six years have encouraged me never to underestimate the charlatans or overestimate the voting public.

Now, let's turn to prediction. If it's true that Bush will announce a big climate plan, here's what I expect will be in it, from most to least likely: