Web Letters: A Global Green Deal

By Mark Hertsgaard

This article appeared in the March 16, 2009 edition of The Nation.

February 25, 2009

Write a Web letter about this article.

What's a Web Letter?

Web Letters are continuously published e-mails from real people, signed with their real names. No registration is required. Each article page on The Nation includes a Web Letters link.

Read the best Web Letters on this page.

We're committed to publishing your comments as they are received. We place a red star () on the best submissions and may edit your e-mail for length or content. Your e-mail address will not be published or shared with any third party without your consent.

If you prefer, you may submit a letter to the print edition only.

We look forward to hearing from you.

  • I think we rush too fast to the still-hypothetical global warming model. Also, my scientist husband (and many other experts) are not sure that the global warming logic/data is correct.

    But putting global warming debates aside, this ambitious article outlines several goals--which are worthy, if indeed we achieve them and still preserve human families and jobs.

    The article says on reducing emissions: "Pursuing sharp emissions reductions, however, would give America leverage to press China to do its part." However, China is not embarrassed by its still poor and widespread human rights violations. Why would China even care if the US reduces emissions?

    When China wanted to host the last Olympics, they reduced pollution in their cities--at least enough to satisfy the Olympic Committee. That was real leverage.

    V. L. Knutsen

    St. John, IN

    04/01/2009 @ 4:13pm


  • There is only one way this can work, and that is to put the science on the table, in a very open, transparent and accessible way.

    Then the whole world must be invited to come and look at the science and the numbers, and to achieve a solution that fits the science. A political solution won't do, only a scientific one. If political solutions are offered, they must be quietly sent back to the drawing board until they match the science.

    A public model (or series of models) can be used to evaluate how much each proposed solution adds to the total effort needed to reach the target.

    Mike Cope

    Cape Town, South Africa

    03/02/2009 @ 03:26am


  • Please, please, please stop this childish gibberish regarding climate change. When people say we need to save the earth, I always laugh, because the earth will go on with or without us. The earth is indifferent. The people that are losing sleep over climate change should go on with their lives and stop trying keep the earth forever locked in its current form with the shoreline and mountains exactly as we see them now. I wonder if the Ice Age people of several thousand years ago were hunkering down in their caves or shelters losing valuable time from the finite thing called life worrying about how to stop the sea ice from receding.

    robert karasek

    Washington, DC

    02/26/2009 @ 8:58pm


Advertisement
Advertisement

Blogs

» The Beat

Obama's "Finish the Job" Talk Sets Stage for Afghan Troop Surge | But Appropriations Committee chair Obey warns the move would "wipe out every initiative we have to rebuild our own economy."
John Nichols
6 Comments

» The Notion

Bad Black Mothers | For African American women, reproduction has never been an entirely private matter.
Melissa Harris-Lacewell
18 Comments

» Act Now!

Coal Country | Stunning film reveals new dimensions to the cost of America's over-reliance on coal.
Peter Rothberg
84 Comments

» The Dreyfuss Report

A Kingdom of Bicycles No Longer | China's ambassador for climate change speaks on the eve of the Copenhagen summit meeting.
Robert Dreyfuss
40 Comments

» Editor's Cut

Around the Nation | The week we went Rouge. Plus, Moyers on Afghanistan.
Katrina vanden Heuvel
114 Comments

» Altercation

Slacker Friday | The "Second Amendment" sale; the raving paranoids of the right.
Eric Alterman