News From TreeHugger: Thursday, October 8

photo: <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/cloudsoup/3831741068/" target="_blank">David Jones</a> via flickr.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Editor’s Note: We’re happy to host a weekly news roundup from our friends over at TreeHugger. Enjoy!

How the World Can Cut 13 Billion Tons of CO2 Per Year and Save $14 Billion in the Process

Reducing deforestation, improving energy efficiency and working towards a global renewable energy standard of 20% could cut global CO2 emissions by 13 gigatons a year, and save $14 billion at the same time. That’s the conclusion of a new study from the UN Foundation and the Center for American Progress.

New Clean Coal Hazards Revealed: Could Poison Plants, People

Clean coal may be trotted out as the future of the coal industry, but a new study from the University of Toronto confirms what many in the green community have be saying for a while: Scaling up CCS will need an infrastructure rivaling the oil industry, groundwater reserves could be contaminated, adding CCS to coal plants will up to one-third more water intensive, and unexpected leaks could poison animals, plants and people.

UN Forest Protection Scheme Open for Organized Crime Abuse

Two words of warning about the current wording of REDD: Interpol says international criminal syndicates are already eyeing the program and that enforcement with be very difficult. And, the Ecosystems Climate Alliance takes issue with the lack of explicitly protecting intact forests and indigenous peoples.

Will Carbon Capture & Storage Conflict With Mineral & Property Rights?

Here’s one aspect of carbon capture & storage you may not have considered: A new assessment coming out of Carnegie Mellon University raises the issue of conflicts between mineral exploration and areas where CO2 might be injected under CCS schemes. As you wouldn’t be able to exploit those mineral rights in these areas, how and will property owners be compensated?

Stop Crying Wolf! Cap-and-Trade Will Increase Farmer’s Production Costs Less Than 1%

Another nail in the ‘climate legislation will cost too much’ coffin: The Environmental Working Group’s new assessment on the increased costs of production for farmers shows that there will be less than a 1% increase for soybeans, corn, wheat, cotton and rice.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate