Skip to content
Home > EcoPolitics > Page 2


A 6 year old’s take on climate change

  • by

A load of dead important people from all over the world are flying to a place called Bali.

They are going to talk for ages about if we should do enough to save the climate. They will decide if loads and loads of people in Africa and other places might die, lose their homes, animals, plants and stuff. And this is all bicause of how many trees are chopped down, and how much stuff we dig out of the ground and burn, to make dirty enregy from. This makes bad gas escape which traps the heat of the sun, making the planet hotter. I don’t think people, animals and plants should be dying bicause of that.

Read More »A 6 year old’s take on climate change

UK nuclear waste policy “incoherent and opaque”

Photograph by Chris McKenna

This is a guest post by Pete Roche, editor of the No2nuclearpower website.

The Westminster Government completed yet another nuclear consultation on 2nd November. (1) This one was not about building new reactors, but how to get rid of the mess they leave behind, so was no less crucial to the nuclear industry’s expansion plans. It was the most recent stage in the “Managing Radioactive Waste Safely” process which began in 2001 as a progressive stakeholder consultation exercise, but after a series of misjudgements it now looks as though the Government may be about to pluck defeat from the jaws of victory.

In the first half of 2008 the Government will announce its new policy – most likely based on the idea of offering “community benefit packages” – bribes to you and me – to persuade communities to volunteer to host a nuclear waste dump. Then the search for a site will begin in earnest with an invitation to communities to express an interest in taking part in the siting process.

The history of government schemes to deal with this extremely dangerous waste has been a disaster going back as far as 1976 when eight sites were first selected for an underground dump. (2) The “Managing Radioactive Waste Safely” process looked as though it might work – having been based for the first time on much more intensive public consultation. But this latest stage which began in June 2007 got off to an inauspicious start. The House of Lords Science and Technology Committee called for it to be delayed because the institutional framework being proposed by the Government was “incoherent and opaque”. (3) And in an unprecedented move the Scottish Government refused to endorse the process at all saying it ruled out allowing deep disposal in Scotland. (4) (5)

The crux of the problem is that the Government has ignored important recommendations of the Committee it set up to look into the nuclear waste problem.
Read More »UK nuclear waste policy “incoherent and opaque”

The 2007 Energy Bill – Can the U.S. Ever Green Its Energy Policy?

This is a guest post by Lorna Li, of Lorna Li : Green 2.0 Marketing.

35by2020sm.gifAs oil prices skyrocket and the climate heats up, the debate around the 2007 Energy Bill, currently being debated in U.S. Congress behind closed doors, is getting hotter. Environmentalists, students, rock stars, and even auto industry workers in the United States are clamoring for a strong, clean 2007 Energy Bill that includes high fuel efficiency standards, more renewable electricity and no nukes. The U.S. auto industry is contentiously divided, as American students rally across the nation, and everyone launches YouTube video campaigns.

Can the U.S. Ever Reach 35 mpg by 2020?

The United States Congress is hard-pressed to choose between 2 fuel efficiency standards – the 35 mpg Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standard, which was approved by the Senate in June, and the U.S. Auto Industry counter-proposal of 32 mpg by 2022.

A large group of auto workers and dealers have broken from the industry in order to support the 35 mpg by 2020 fuel efficiency standard. As oil prices continue to rise, what is at stake in the debate over fuel efficiency is the future of the American auto industry and the livelihood of U.S. autoworkers, not to mention the wallets of American drivers in the years to come.

Adam Lee, a third generation auto dealer, makes this personal plea in his 3-minute video clip.

“My family has been selling American made cars since 1936. My livelihood and the livelihood of over 350 employees who work for us depend upon the success of the automobile industry. Today that strength is severely compromised by the lack of fuel-efficient cars and trucks customers want to buy. …

Without a 35 mile-per-gallon mandate, I’m afraid, global warming and our dependence on foreign oil will continue to get much worse in the long run. And, in the short run, I’m afraid I’ll be stuck with a lot full of cars that no one wants to buy or even worse: This country will no longer have an American auto industry.”

To emphasize the difference between the 2 fuel efficiency proposals, the Pew Campaign for Fuel Efficiency delivered Trick or Treat bags to members of Congress, illustrating the Spooky Truth about the32 mpg by 2022 Auto Lobby proposal.
Read More »The 2007 Energy Bill – Can the U.S. Ever Green Its Energy Policy?