MetaFilter posts tagged with GlobalWarming and Pollution

The New New Environmentalism

salvia — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 09:50:50 -0800

Not ones for subtlety, the Death of Environmentalism guys (previously) are at it again with a Manifesto for a New Environmentalism. Their Apollo Alliance is getting early support from both Clinton and Obama. But it's not the only "new environmentalism" out there. There's this New Environmentalism, while others would include both market-based approaches among the the idols of old environmentalism.

Helping you because you can't help yourself

homunculus — Tue, 13 Feb 2007 13:03:45 -0800

Cheatneutral. "When you cheat on your partner you add to the heartbreak, pain and jealousy in the atmosphere. Cheatneutral offsets your cheating by funding someone else to be faithful and NOT cheat. This neutralises the pain and unhappy emotion and leaves you with a clear conscience." [Via Gristmill.]

Toxic Sludge is GOOD for you!

XQUZYPHYR — Thu, 18 May 2006 10:13:34 -0800

CO2: We Call it Life. Actual ads being run by the "Competitive Enterprise Institute," heavily funded by oil companies such as Exxon-Mobil, to counter the growing concerns about global warming and carbon dioxide emissions.

Global dimming is the new global threat

scarabic — Fri, 14 Jan 2005 19:18:45 -0800

Global dimming. It's official. Particulate pollution in the air has decreased the amount of sunlight reaching the earth. How much? A fraction of a percent? Try 10% globally over the past 50 years. Worse yet, global dimming is thought to be counteracting CO2 and its greenhouse effect, lessening the worldwide temperature increase called global warming. Why's that bad? Because, in the coming decades, particulate pollution is expected to level off, while CO2 emissions are expected to rise strongly, multiplying the effects of global warming as we know it. "That means a temperature rise of 10 degrees Celsius by 2100 could be on the cards, giving the UK a climate like that of North Africa, and rendering many parts of the world uninhabitable." Holy fucking shit! [via kottke]

But clear skies are good, aren't they?

stavrosthewonderchicken — Wed, 17 Dec 2003 20:31:39 -0800

The Bush administration's conservation policy: 'protecting the nation's environment', or you know, 'not'? [more inside]

mcwetboy — Sun, 06 Oct 2002 11:19:13 -0800

As the Alberta government ratchets up its campaign against the Kyoto Protocol (and the Canadian government's support thereof), two environmental groups release a report that argues that Canadians could cut greenhouse gas emissions by 50 per cent and save $30 billion a year in the process by 2030 (PDFs of the report summary and full report). And, if reducing emissions starts at home, you can apparently cut your own energy bills and emissions in half simply by stopping leaks and drafts in your house.

vanderwal — Tue, 27 Mar 2001 04:52:52 -0800

Bush Tries to Change Advisor's Mind on pollution policy. That does not work. President Bush does what he wants. EPA leaks Witman's Private Memo.

Mr. skullhead — Sun, 12 Nov 2000 19:57:07 -0800

OK, with all of the whining, crying and teeth gnashing over the electoral process interfering with our oh so happy worker bee lives, I've decided to link to something much more important:

High stakes at The Hague

Clinton's climate change warning

'Massive' pollution cuts needed

Since climate change disaster is preparing to bite us all in the ass and no one seems likely to do anything about it, than it doesn't really matter who gets elected president, now does it?

Kudos to the american press for ignoring this story. . .