Guilt, anyone?? An entertainingly written article covering a few of the icons of the green-living movement. Guess what many of them do?  Hints: they're a cardinal sin in green circles, and they go on the bottom of a baby.

Here's one of those studies that apparently shatters our intuition: energy efficiency won't help reduce the use of energy??  Read on for the reason why, all about the "rebound effect" and indirect vs. direct energy consumption.  Again, looks like sustainability requires that we address the bigger picture.

A fascinating review, certainly to understand the technological advances of this "sustainable city" but also to understand its shadows: "[the designer's] fantasy world is only possible as a meticulously planned community, built from the ground up and of modest size. What Masdar really represents, in fact, is the crystallization of another global phenomenon: the growing division of the world into refined, high-end enclaves and vast formless ghettos where issues like sustainability have little immediate relevance."  Is this what we are after?

Here's an interesting quote from BPA: "In the interest of getting as much wind on the system as we can, it's important to find other resources.''  This article clarifies how the upturn in wind production is driving an upturn in other (often conventional) sources of energy, and how, ironically, wind energy will be more stable once much larger energy systems (read: lots of powerlines) are built.  Wind, the icon of energy self-sufficiency, actually may depend on mega-networks and conventional sources to achieve its rightful place.

The surprising conclusion to this argument: "We have reason to desire the extinction of all carnivorous species."  The author bases this conclusion on, in part, the terrible suffering of other animals at the claws and fangs of meat-eating animals.  Would you agree?

What if it's true that the effects of the BP oil spill are far less serious than originally predicted?  It would not mean that nothing bad happened at all, nor that no changes are needed to business as usual , but maybe we need to reconsider the perennial sky-is-falling rhetoric of environmentalism.

One of the cornerstones of the early modern environmental movement, the Clean Air Act is now forty years old.  This brief article reviews events around the 40th anniversary and discusses controversial extensions to control carbon dioxide emissions.

Upcoming limits on use of antibiotics to promote faster growth in livestock turn out to be far less than many food activists want, and far more than many farmers want. Is there any possibility for getting producers and consumers on the same page?

Just here in time for fall semester: new theories on how to study effectively…and some vindication of techniques you may already be following.

All throughout Europe, nuclear power is on the rebound, with a number of plants formerly slated for decommissioning now receiving (mixed) political support.  As the chancellor of Germany states, "Nuclear energy is a bridge technology." There is debate in the enviro movement over the use of nuclear as a bridge technology while renewable forms are being developed; what do you think?

One of the icons of the climate movement is, well, giving up…but imagining a new dawn, one that looks a lot like the utopia of traditional societies that many in the environmental movement prefer: "The momentum of the heat, and the momentum of the economy that power it, can't be turned off quickly enough to prevent hideous damage. But we will keep fighting, in the hope that we can limit that damage. And in the process…we'll help build the architecture for the world that comes next, the dispersed and localized societies that can survive the damage we can no longer prevent.…We'll need, chief among all things, to get smaller and less centralized, to focus not on growth but on maintenance, on a controlled decline from the perilous heights to which we have climbed." So, what's wrong with this picture??

Publisher's summary: "Author E. N. Anderson maintains that the world can escape impending ecological disaster only by embracing a political and ethical transformation that will imbue modern societies with the same shared sense of emotional rationality practiced by traditional cultures." One of humankind's most perennial utopias is the utopia of the good old days, and this one is near and dear to many in the environmental movement.  What's wrong with this picture?

Okay, everyone, out go the earplugs when you're in the Great Outdoors!  Has anyone seen similar cases of park visitors being tuned out?

It's always easy to see how people subscribing to ideas we don't like succumb to groupthink, but we are capable of the same -- here, the topic concerns the anti-Islamicist trend in this country but it could equally concern any environmentalist/anti-environmentalist bandwagons out there. Dowd quotes a Scottish historian: "[People], it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, one by one."

Overpopulation was one of the major issues of the early 1970s environmental movement, then became such a divisive issue that it was hard for anyone to discuss. This article considers opportunities and challenges in slowing population growth for India; would be interested if others find it to be reasonable. 

The animal rights movement is making headway on chicken farmers and others who raise livestock.  It's easy to see the economic interests of chicken farmers being affected by these new regulations, but can we appreciate that they genuinely find nothing to be wrong with current cage regulations, as suggested in quotes from this article?

So, our worst fears about GMOs have come true.  But should we still be afraid?  This article starts by saying "This might not even be a problem at all," then describes how genetically engineered canola is sprouting up all along roadsides in North Dakota.  As it turns out, "These genetically engineered canola plants have been found growing along roads in Canada, where canola is widely grown, and in Japan, which imports the crop."  Doesn't this mean lots of other crops will soon follow suit?  One scientist offers in conclusion that plants like corn and soybeans, also preponderantly GMO-based, are "super-domesticated and they just don't really like to go wild." So maybe we'll get used to only certain GMOs alongside our roads?

The author, who grew up in Kibera, a large slum in Nairobi we feature in our treatment of the East Africa research site, argues that "Slum tourism turns poverty into entertainment, something that can be momentarily experienced and then escaped from."  I did this myself in a quick tour of Kibera in 2007.  The author concludes, "Slums will not go away because a few dozen Americans or Europeans spent a morning walking around them. There are solutions to our problems - but they won't come about through tours."  I'm curious what those of you who have visited slums as part of an LC overseas program or on your own think about the author's position?