In December 2009, a month after President Obama’s visit to China, the United States joined a host of delegates at the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference, also known as the Copenhagen Summit or Cop15.

Years of planning went into these negotiations between 115 world leaders, though the outcome (by most assessments) was pretty disappointing.

The main conclusion of days of discussion and debate was the Copenhagen Accord, a document “taken note of” (rather than “adopted”) by the United States, Brazil, China, India, and South Africa.  …read more of Copenhagen Accord Falls Short here

The Group of 20 (G-20) meeting in Pittsburgh has yielded promise on the environmental sustainability front… but not quantifiable, time-specific progress.

Developing nations–including the member states of the African Union–and international leaders–including former United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan–have been vocal about what they want from December’s international climate change meeting in Copenhagen: a well defined plan for how developed countries will help support environmentally sustainable development in the developing world.

The G-20, a club for the heads of state of powerful  countries, acknowledged that they want to take action on this issue. They did not, however, define how much action they want to take. …read more of G-20 Vague On Environmental Sustainability here

In the US the average person emits a metric ton of CO2 every two weeks. For the developed world as a whole it takes an average of one month. In the developing world, three months.

Ever wonder how big a metric ton of carbon dioxide really is? It’s a measurement thrown around in green circles and even mainstream media all the time, but a rather intangible concept. You can’t see a metric ton of CO2 emissions the same way you can a clear-cut forest.

With the Copenhagen convention to be held this coming December, the UN and an organization called Millennium Art are attempting to help us visualize a metric ton of CO2 with their project CO2 Cubes: Visualize a Tonne of Change. …read more of CO2 Cubes: Visualize a Tonne of Change here

China’s economic emergence has been the big story in the world economy since the fall of the Soviet Union. While China’s development has brought a lot of good, it has taken an often under-reported toll on the environment.

It’s now becoming popular to say that if China’s not on board in Copenhagen, the rest of the world’s emissions reductions and environmental sustainability pledges will mean nothing.

You’ve probably heard that China is the largest polluter of greenhouse gases (GHGs) at about 7.5 gigatons per year, which makes some sense since 1/5 of the world’s population lives within its borders. …read more of China’s Green Revolution here

There is a lot of excitement about the prospect of new green jobs, and rightfully so. President Obama has made it a priority in his administration and even hired Van Jones as Green Job Advisor to help make it happen.

But under the radar and excitement, and in response to all of the excitement about green jobs, there is some negative chatter concerning the “myths” of these jobs.

Recently, a collaborative report was written by law and economics professors at the University of Illinois arguing that the proposal of green job creation has many myths attached to it.

The paper postulates that these jobs will not really help the economy, and that they’ll also cause great harm and detriment to our society and to the industry’s growth and potential.

So how can new jobs be bad for the economy?

Upon reading, you find the authors of this report are convinced that …read more of Green Jobs: Myth or Reality? here