The WSJ argues that climate litigation is both frivolous, anti-business, and sets and a dangerous precedent leading to an anarchic world. Yet, a long history of litigation suggests that society is better for it. Despite the costs involved, the principle should simply be to let the truth prevail.
The Indian Solar Mission is an example of a developing country attempting to decouple growth from carbon emissions. But if developed countries want concerted action on climate change it is time they put their money where their mouth is. Then we can start defining a post-Kyoto framework.
Thomas Friedman’s suggestion that funding for innovation is broken and the government should step in is far off the mark. Neither is it substantially broken, nor is the alternative he proposes any better.
Getting the world to act on climate change is in India’s interests, yet the country has avoided action of its own. This can be explained by the realities of international negotiation. But amid mounting pressure for a global policy framework, what are the steps India should move the agenda in its favor?
India would benefit from a collective response to global warming, but in the short term a unilateral strategy of high emissions growth is better. How can India ensure the optimal outcome?
Cleantech venture capital may have to accommodate longer innovation cycles if it is to reduce its dependence on subsidies and become financially sustainable.
Ever wonder how ideas proliferate, gather momentum, and then are taken as fact? Take climate change. Regardless of its factual basis, it was not mainstream even in the late 1990s. From whence did it come?
I did some research that presents insights into how climate change as an issue has evolved. But its even more revealing [...]