In counties across the U.S.—rural and urban, democrat and republican—communities are living up close and personal with data centers. And the new neighbor is a real nightmare.
The number of data centers in the U.S., whether planned, under construction, or operating, is 3,897. This is by far the most anywhere in the world, and the number is increasing weekly.
We are hitting our heads on the ceiling of limits to growth.
To stop global warming, the 6th mass extinction, and ecological unravelling in general, humanity must degrow its ecological footprint very fast. We must degrow by 2–3 percent per year until our footprint falls under the planet’s biocapacity to regenerate itself. The only way to do this is to completely overhaul our growth-oriented, capitalist economic system.
There is a passionate ongoing debate in degrowthUK’s Prospects for Degrowth series about how to achieve this.
In cap-and-trade systems, the government places a “cap,” or limit, typically on pollution or resource extraction. The amount of pollution or extraction is then divided into “allowances,” which are allocated to the polluting or extracting corporations. These corporations can trade their unused allowances in the marketplace.
Cap-and-trade policies promise significant abatement at an optimally low cost. But does experience with cap-and-trade systems vindicate this promise?
The United States and other countries have tested a variety of cap-and-trade systems.
This week marks the fourth annual International Conference on Financing for Development (FfD4). Leaders of governments, international organizations, and financial institutions meet in Seville, Spain, to “reform financing at all levels.” Global South countries and advocacy groups from across the world hoped this would be the moment for a UN Framework Convention on Sovereign Debt.
According to Didier Jacobs, Oxfam International’s Debt Relief Advocacy Lead,
Twenty years ago, visionary economist Herman Daly exhorted the readers of Scientific American to create new ways of thinking towards a sustainable economy:
“The global economy is now so large that society can no longer safely pretend it operates within a limitless ecosystem. Developing an economy that can be sustained within the finite biosphere requires new ways of thinking.”
In Carbon County, Pennsylvania, the conservation ethic runs deep. It manifests in the county’s comprehensive plan, its “return on environment” analysis, and most recently, a fund to preserve open space, which voters overwhelmingly supported.
Carbon County derives its name from the abundant deposits of anthracite—the highest quality coal—that were once mined there. The county is located in the southern Pocono Mountains,
We live in an age defined by contradiction. On one hand, the climate crisis demands urgent and systemic action. On the other hand, we are more connected to a digital world that profits—at great ecological cost—from our distraction, desires, and deeply human need to belong.
This tension is constant and personal for many Gen Z users, who overwhelmingly identify with sustainability as a lifestyle and a moral imperative.
Apple, Cargill, Walmart, United Airlines, Chevron, BlackRock, Starbucks, Ford Motor Company, Amazon, McDonald’s, Sotheby’s…What do they all have in common? They are among many megacorporations that fund Conservation International, one of the most prominent conservation foundations in the world. World Wildlife Fund and the Conservation Fund, also conservation powerhouses, have similar though less expansive funder profiles.
Walmart and BlackRock are two of the world’s top deforestation perpetrators.
While transportation is vital to American prosperity, the transportation sector is the largest direct contributor of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions among all economic sectors. Even though passenger-car efficiency has steadily increased in recent years, the sector’s contribution to environmental degradation has continued to rise. Since 1995, U.S. transportation sector emissions have risen by almost 20 percent.
We cannot ignore the principal problems in the U.S.
For some reason, recognizing planetary boundaries, including support for a steady state economy, is seen by some as a “progressive” cause. And granted, some steady staters and degrowthers seem to have a checklist of “progressive” causes they identify with. Perhaps adhering to these checklists helps them avoid unwanted labels.
This is a big mistake. Support for a steady state economy is no more “woke” than the laws of thermodynamics.