For Teddy Roosevelt, it was the creation of our system of national parks. For Richard Nixon it was the passage of landmark environmental reforms found in the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and the National Environmental Policy Act. For Bill Clinton it was an eleventh-hour preservation of millions of acres of public land. For George W. Bush, will leading the world in addressing climate change with strong, substantive policy be his legacy? I kind of doubt it.
read more | digg story
Photo courtesy of Madison Guy
IMPORTANT! PLEASE READ: Ecopolitology has moved to a new host and a new domain. Please adjust your bookmarks and be sure to check out the beautiful new ecopolitology 2.0 theme by pointing your browser to www.ecopolitology.org, or by following this link.
April 17, 2008
Could Taking Substantive Action on Climate Change Possibly Be Bush Legacy?
December 23, 2007
Just when you thought the coast was clear - more Lomborg.
An E&E Publishing Service Climate: Skeptical enviro Bjorn Lomborg discusses post-Kyoto roadmap, calls Kyoto "feel good strategy" (Wednesday, December 12, 2007)
About E&ETVE&ETV is produced by the staff of E&E Publishing, LLC and broadcast from our state-of-the-art Capitol Hill studios. E&ETV brings viewers insightful interviews with the top policy makers and opinion leaders from the energy and environmental policy world. E&ETV broadcasts daily at 10 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.
|
All content is copyrighted and may not be reproduced or retransmitted without the express consent of E&E Publishing, LLC. Click here to view our privacy policy. |
September 14, 2007
A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing, part 1
Lomborg has presented us with a false premise: that the way to solve the world's problems is simply to throw money at them--after doing a cost-benefit analysis. There is an inherent absurdity that comes along with trying to reduce social and environmental issues to quantifiable--in Dollars or Euros--terms such as "social good" (let's see, how about if we say that the loss of an island nation to sea-level rise has the same value as a 10% change in cancer incidence). It is equally silly to try and draw a dividing line between social and environmental issues, and then depict the two "separate causes" as competitors.
For instance, coal mining intensifies as the demand for energy rises to meet the needs of an expanding population; and burning that coal increases mercury pollution, which increases the incidence of developmental disabilities; of course, coal also contributes to global warming, which harms many communities in the form of drought, more intense hurricanes, and loss of coastline. Not to mention that working in a coal mine is extremely dangerous--in 2006 a BBC story reported that as many as 6,000 thousand coal miners die every year in mine accidents in China alone.
Socio-environmental problems can not be fixed by separating out their various components. In fact, separating "environmental" and "social" issues from one another virtually guarantees that more egregious eco-social problems will arise.
September 3, 2007
The Upshot to Global Warming?
With all of the news about the potentially devastating effects of climate change aside, it is refreshing to see that there may be a few things that we can look forward to. First, there is the potential for longer growing seasons (albeit with less total rainfall). Some can look forward to smaller heating bills (but larger cooling ones). And of course there will be more opportunities to surf the double overhead tsunami-waves created by chunks of breaking ice as they plunge into the Arctic. Do yourself a favor and watch this unbelievable video of surfer Kealii Mamala and his jet-skiing accomplice Garrett McNamara, as they enjoy some icy crumblers up north(thanks to Kingsley for sending me this).