Insight and inspiration in turbulent times.
Andrew Revkin is one of America’s most honored and experienced environmental journalists and the founding director of the new Initiative on Communication and Sustainability at Columbia University’s Earth Institute. He addresses the question of “What Could Possibly Go Right?”
The world needs a “radical” shift towards renewables to reach net-zero emissions by 2050 and secure the 1.5C goal, says the International Energy Agency (IEA).
It might seem odd to find supporters of climate action debating the merits of a concept that science shows to be essential for halting climate change, and which is accordingly embedded at the heart of the defining global agreement.
If we are serious about guaranteeing a decent future to our families and those who will come after us, we must change our societies at large.
Under common law, uttering is when a person offers as genuine a forged instrument with the intent to defraud.
We need a Green New Deal. But we also need a new internationalism, an emergency internationalism, and a solidarity than includes distant strangers as well as strangers within our own borders. Without it, we haven’t got a chance.
The climate policymaking orthodoxy is that markets can efficiently price and mitigate climate risks, but this blog argues that when risks are existential — that is, a permanent and drastic curtailing of human civilisation’s future development — then the damages are beyond calculation.
One Blue Earth seeks to raise public awareness about the consequences of global warming and to educate our communities about current scientific and grass-roots efforts to develop workable solutions to mitigate and reverse climate change.
Starting last summer, people from several organizations have been working to update a booklet on false solutions to climate change (I was involved with this effort for awhile and wrote the first draft of a couple of the sections).
It’s a bit of a challenge, to imagine what Earth Day will look like in ten years. Part of that challenge arises from the fact that it depends on what we do throughout that decade to deal with and try to correct the ravages of incipient climate change effects.
Collectively we three authors of this article must have spent more than 80 years thinking about climate change. Why has it taken us so long to speak out about the obvious dangers of the concept of net zero?
I suggest respectfully that the time has long passed for debate on the science, useless apportionments of blame, or idle comparisons. Action is now needed, and I ask all engineers across all branches of engineering to play their role.
