<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Green Blog &#187; climate economist</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.green-blog.org/tag/climate-economist/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.green-blog.org</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 02:58:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Fossil fuel expansion is a crime against humanity</title>
		<link>http://www.green-blog.org/2011/06/27/fossil-fuel-expansion-is-a-crime-against-humanity/</link>
		<comments>http://www.green-blog.org/2011/06/27/fossil-fuel-expansion-is-a-crime-against-humanity/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 14:02:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Green Blog</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Green Quote]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate economist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Climate Genocide]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[crime against humanity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fossil fuel expansion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fossil fuels]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Global Warming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marc Lee]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Progressive Economics Forum]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.green-blog.org/?p=2986</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Marc Lee who is the senior economist for the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives and chair of the Progressive Economics Forum writes in one of his latest articles that we should see fossil fuel expansion as a crime against humanity. &#8230; <a href="http://www.green-blog.org/2011/06/27/fossil-fuel-expansion-is-a-crime-against-humanity/"></a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Marc Lee who is the senior economist for the <a href="http://www.policyalternatives.ca/">Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives</a> and chair of the <a href="http://www.progressive-economics.ca/">Progressive Economics Forum</a> writes in one of his latest articles that we should see fossil fuel expansion as a crime against humanity. Lee writes: </p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;But I think we need to up the ante for those pursuing business as usual, the relentless expansion of oil and gas infrastructure that is causing these problems and guaranteeing that they will be worse in the future. Actions that lead to mass deaths and displacements, either directly due to a weather event or indirectly from impacts on land and livelihoods, beg for some accountability. I’m no international law-talking guy, but I believe that these things can only be called crimes against humanity.</p></blockquote>
<p><span id="more-2986"></span></p>
<blockquote><p>Let’s say that again. Efforts to expand the oil and gas industry, like the <a href="http://www.naomiklein.org/articles/2011/06/invitation-washington-d-c">Keystone XL</a> and <a href="http://wcel.org/category/keywords/enbridge-pipeline">Enbridge</a> pipelines, are crimes against humanity. Expanding the coal industry, like the <a href="http://daily.sightline.org/2011/02/22/coal-exports-and-carbon-consequences/">proposal to export</a> megatonnes of Washington state coal, is not just bad environmental policy, but a crime against humanity.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;[...] I may be willing to give a grace period for actions take before 2000 or so, on the grounds that we did not know better (though we actually did). Nor would I punish regular folks (including me) who burn fossil fuels because of the structure of the world we live in and the lack of alternatives. This is about the dealers not the addicts; about the need for urgent change in response to the unfolding crisis.<br />
It matters not whether such actions today are “legal” (almost all genocides were legal at the time) but they are deeply immoral and wrong. Major shareholders and senior executives in big fossil fuel industries – and the politicians that dote on them – need to understand that their profiteering off of destabilizing the climate will pay a price. That’s a little thing we call justice.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>You can <a href="http://www.progressive-economics.ca/2011/06/23/fossil-fuel-expansion-as-a-crime-against-humanity/">read his whole article here</a>. Related posts: <a href="http://www.green-blog.org/2008/04/30/biofuels-are-a-crime-against-humanity-says-un-official/">UN official says biofuels are a “crime against humanity”</a> and <a href="http://www.green-blog.org/2008/06/25/dr-james-hansen-says-we-should-prosecute-climate-change-liars/">Dr James Hansen says we should prosecute climate change liars</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.green-blog.org/2011/06/27/fossil-fuel-expansion-is-a-crime-against-humanity/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Nicholas Stern endorses 350 ppm as &#8220;a very sensible long-term target&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.green-blog.org/2009/09/12/nicholas-stern-endorses-350-ppm-as-a-very-sensible-long-term-target/</link>
		<comments>http://www.green-blog.org/2009/09/12/nicholas-stern-endorses-350-ppm-as-a-very-sensible-long-term-target/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Sep 2009 17:12:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Simon Leufstedt</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Global Warming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[350]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[350 ppm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[435 ppm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bill McKibben]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate economist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CO2]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[endorsement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nicholas Stern]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[parts per million]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[runaway climate change]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.green-blog.org/?p=1886</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This week Nicholas Stern, the British top climate economist and academic who is probably most known for the Stern Review, endorsed 350 ppm as “a very sensible long-term target.” 350 ppm, as in parts per million, the level scientists have &#8230; <a href="http://www.green-blog.org/2009/09/12/nicholas-stern-endorses-350-ppm-as-a-very-sensible-long-term-target/"></a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://green-blog.org/media/images/2007/12/nicholas-stern.jpg" alt="Nicholas Stern" title="Nicholas Stern" class="alignright size-full wp-image-1870" />This week Nicholas Stern, the British top climate economist and academic who is probably most known for the Stern Review, endorsed 350 ppm as “a very sensible long-term target.” </p>
<p>350 ppm, as in parts per million, the level scientists have identified as the safe upper limit for CO2 in our atmosphere. We are currently at <a href="http://gpolya.newsvine.com/_news/2009/07/08/3006978-atmospheric-co2-concentration-now-exceeds-390-ppm-180-300-for-past-800000-years">390 ppm</a> and, according to the science, we need to get back to 350 ppm as soon as possible to be able avoid runaway climate change.</p>
<p>In an interview with a German newspaper Stern endorsed the 350 ppm target saying he “think it&#8217;s a very sensible long-term target.&#8221; Bill McKibben, environmental writer and founder of <a href="http://350.org">350.org</a>, <a href="http://www.350.org/about/blogs/lord-nicholas-stern-supports-350ppm-target">writes</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;I think it’s a very sensible long-term target.&#8221; He went on to explain: “People have to be aware that is a truly long-term target. We have already passed 350ppm, we are at 390 ppm of Co2 and at 435 ppm of Co2-equivalents right now. It is most important to stop the increase of flows of emissions short term and then start the decline of flows of annual emissions and get them down to levels which will move concentrations of CO2 back down towards 350ppm.</p></blockquote>
<p><span id="more-1886"></span></p>
<p>McKibben says &#8220;Stern is right&#8221; and that his endorsement will &#8220;help stiffen the push for real measures&#8221; at the <a href="http://www.green-blog.org/2009/09/11/uk-foreign-secretary-warns-that-the-un-climate-talks-could-fail/">climate talks in Copenhagen</a> this December.</p>
<blockquote><p>Stern is right, of course&#8211;even if we do everything right at Copenhagen, we won&#8217;t be back at 350 soon. But unless we do everything right we&#8217;ll be back at 350 never ever. His call will help stiffen the push for real measures at the conference.</p></blockquote>
<p><strong>Also read:</strong><br />
- <a href="http://www.green-blog.org/2009/03/12/nicholas-stern-climate-change-will-create-billions-of-refugees-extended-world-war/">Nicholas Stern: Climate change will create billions of refugees, extended world war</a><br />
- Nicholas Stern: <a href="http://www.green-blog.org/2008/04/23/i-underestimated-the-threat/">&#8220;I underestimated the threat&#8221;</a><br />
- Green Quote of the Week: <a href="http://www.green-blog.org/2007/12/01/green-quote-of-the-week-nicholas-stern/">Nicholas Stern</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.green-blog.org/2009/09/12/nicholas-stern-endorses-350-ppm-as-a-very-sensible-long-term-target/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

