Issues / Environment
While melting ice caps and alarming shifts in ocean currents flashed across the headlines, little progress was made at December's climate change meetings.
We stand, first, with the emerging scientific consensus, which tells us we have very little time to act if we honestly expect to avoid a global (as opposed to a merely local) climate catastrophe.
Shrinking oil supplies are heightening U.S. interest in making energy investments in the newly independent republics of the Caspian Sea basin, but for now that's ill-advised.
The breakup of the Soviet Union brought great hopes that the successor states would embark on a path toward building free market democracies.
Instead of looking back at the successful CFC phaseout, the U.S. needs to be looking toward the future and working to rapidly phase out all ozone depleting substances without compromising the goals of other treaties.
By insisting on an ineffectual and inequitable system of international emissions trading, the U.S. is obstructing other nations, courting ecological disaster, and preventing a worldwide economic boom from a transition to clean energy.
The international community has, at long last, recognized that there are some toxic chemicals that are just too dangerous to produce, use, and storeput simply, too dangerous to have on the planet.
Once again, the U.S. is squandering an opportunity for leadership in the international environmental policy arena.
When Former Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) administrator L. Paul Bremer III left Baghdad after the highly publicized “transfer of sovereignty” in June 2004, he left his imprint through 100 orders that he enacted as chief of the occupation authority in Iraq.
Of the many lessons to be learned from the effects of Hurricane Katrina, none is perhaps more important over the long run than the obvious need for a new national energy strategy.