Eat Meat to Help the Earth? You Grass-Hugger!

by Katherine Gustafson

categories: Food & Agriculture, Greenhouse Gas, Solutions

Published November 02, 2009 @ 06:00AM PT

Eating meat contributes to climate change, right? Hamburgers must be abolished if we are to save the Earth. Many staunchly support this point of view, while others scoff at what they see as radical buffoonery. But it's not quite so black and white. You see, it all depends on what kind of meat you're talking about.

A recent post of mine on the subject over on the sustainable food blog drew an interesting comment from alert reader Harry Hamil: "it is clear that well designed, intensive grazing of grasslands by domesticated livestock offers the quickest and greatest opportunity to reduce atmospheric carbon."

So, producing meat could actually be good for our climate?

Read More »

Tackling Climate Change Will Cost Only $150bn a Year Says the EU

by Mike Smith

Published November 01, 2009 @ 06:01PM PT

The European Union put the cost of fighting climate change into cold-hard figures last week. They explained that fighting climate change will cost $150 billion a year by 2020. But who's going to pay for it? There's some discussions to be had over whether it's up to the developed world to pay the vast majority of the bill, with many of the Europe's richest countries agreeing that they had to bear the biggest burden. Poland didn't agree, explaining that it was ridiculous for them to give aid to Brazil, a richer country, to help them develop cleaner industries and reduce emissions.

As usual when it comes to tackling climate change, most wanted to avoid making specific commitments, not wanting to go as far as Sweden, Denmark, the UK and the European commission demanded in leading the world to fight climate change. There was some agreement though — $10 billion a year would be needed from January to fast-track funding for the developing world. The EU is promising to pay its fair-share of the eventual full $150bn — one-third seems to be the most likely agreed upon figure for the EU to contribute. If China and the US match that ($30-40 billion a year), we'll be well on our way to tackling climate change.

Don't all of these numbers pale into insignificance when held against Wall Street losses and the stimulus package? After the last few years of billions and trillions, $150 billion a year, spread across the whole world, to save the world, doesn't seem like too much. The best bit? We're not just piling the money up as a sacrifice to climate gods, oh no — this is a real investment in green industry, in our future, and in our planet.

Photo credit: Alfonso Jiménez

Climate Action Goes Creative

by Katherine Gustafson

categories: Activism, Imagining the Future, Solutions

Published October 31, 2009 @ 06:00AM PT

Last Saturday's International Day of Climate Action was, as Mike Smith wrote on this blog, "the most widespread day of political action in the planet's history." Not only that, but it was fun.

The action was structured around the concept of 350, which is the parts per million of carbon dioxide we can afford to have in our atmosphere.

Enthusiastic participants all over the world made visual depictions of 350 -- using everything from their bodies to sandbags to sailboats to a flotilla of yellow balloons -- and photographed them for the world to see. The curious one that heads this post was generated by lantern walkers in Sydney, Australia.

So what's so important about 350 and how can you get in on the fun?

Read More »

Himalayas Left High and Dry By Climate Change, So a Man Builds Glaciers

by Mike Smith

Published October 30, 2009 @ 08:42AM PT

The Man Who Builds Glaciers. It sounds like a cutesy indie film, but in India a man is building artificial glaciers and saving communities. Chhewang Norphel does it because Himalayan communities rely on year-long glacial runoff to grow food. If glaciers continue to melt, run-off will be unpredictable and they may suffer climate-induced emergency like the Maldives — in the Maldives the waters will rise and flood the land, in the Himalayas, the rivers will run dry.

Norphel's scheme involves diverting unneeded winter and autumn water into rock lined ponds. The water will freeze and ponds interconnect to form glaciers which melt in the spring and allow runoff to continue. He's so far built ten glaciers, but they're expensive at $50,000 a pop, and though he's receiving international coverage, no scientists have come to study the effects and lend their support. He's hoping developed countries will fund his work by recompensating developing for years of pollution as a form of "climate justice." Until then, he's doing his best to ensure the next generation isn't left high and dry.

If you want to get an idea of how the world will have to deal with glacial melt and increasing emissions this weekend, then have a go at the Sim City like game Clim'City in which you manage a city and are tasked to reduce its emissions, slash energy consumption, keep your citizens happy, and your farms productive. It's realistic, and shows the tough interplay of politics, environment, and industry when it comes to climate change.

Photo credit: futureatlas.com

Cooling Rumor Debunked: The World Is In Fact Still Warming

by Katherine Gustafson

category: Global Warming Denial

Published October 30, 2009 @ 06:00AM PT

We've been over this before. The climate change debate often seems like one big roller coaster of public opinion. The globe is warming, no it's not, yes it is, what about the natural cycle of ice ages?, this is different, no it's not, yes?, no?, and finally . . . okay, maybe we can agree, yes it is. Yes it is different than the Earth's natural warming and cooling trends, yes it is happening. Yes, the Earth is warming.

We seemed, for a brief, magical moment, to be all on the same page. Then comes this crushing report from Mike Smith: people are skeptical again. Stop this merry-go-round! I want to get off!

But thanks to some statisticians that The Associated Press put to the task of assessing whether the skepticism is justified, we can now state -- yet again, yet again -- that the Earth is indeed warming. The AP gave data on temperatures over several years to the statisticians without telling them what the numbers were and asked them to state whether they could detect a trend. The experts found nothing in the data that indicated cooling.

Read More »

Astrotruth Peels Back The Turf on Big Oil Supported Astroturf Groups

by Mike Smith

Published October 29, 2009 @ 05:01PM PT

Astrotruth.org seeks to expose the 'astroturfing' done by Big Oil and Dirty Coal. Astroturfing is the now all-too-familiar creation of an organization designed to look like popular grass-roots programs when in fact it's a planned public relations campaign that mislead who is behind supposedly spontaneous campaigns. They disguise a commercial entity's involvement, misleading the nature and origin of their opposition.

Astrotruth have so far identified three big-oil and two dirty-coal organizations who are spouting false claims and presenting themselves as legitimate groups. Astrotruth needs your help to uncover and "peel back the turf" to see who's propping up and funding organizations misleading the public.

Astroturfing is dishonest and underhanded at best, fraudulent and responsible for corrupting the political process at worst. Timothy Karr, the campaign director for freepress.net explained to the Guardian that "A healthy 21st-century democracy doesn't need phoney front groups. We need openness, accountability and real debate."

Photo credit: Dmealiffe

Global Warming and Meat: A Debate with a Bite

by Katherine Gustafson

categories: Climate Security, Food & Agriculture, Global Warming Denial, Greenhouse Gas, LessMeat Monday, Solutions, Water

Published October 29, 2009 @ 06:37AM PT

Writing about the clean-energy potential of pig manure yesterday got me thinking: We've been writing frequently over on the sustainable food blog about the growing consensus that the meat industry is a major contributor to global warming. More and more people are saying what a lot of others don't want to hear: eating a low-meat diet is one of the most effective ways of shrinking your carbon footprint.

The most high-profile figure to expound this idea is the UK's Lord Stern of Brentford, a leading figure in climate change studies, who recently told the Times of London that "Meat is a wasteful use of water and creates a lot of greenhouse gases. It puts enormous pressure on the world’s resources. A vegetarian diet is better.”

Stern himself is not a strict vegetarian, which is a great illustration of an important point in this debate: You don't have to disavow meat entirely to start using your eating choices to make a difference on climate change.

Read More »