Cars News and Reviews Size Creep- CARS NEWS AND REVIEWS

Posted by Carmella Ross on Saturday

When I was pregnant, I started wearing men's T-shirts over skirts of which the waist had ferocious stretch. After all, my waist was going through a ferocious stretch. It was very comfortable to wear clothes that matched that.

By the time I was ready to buy new clothes again, it was a decade later, and I had all but forgotten what my size was. A store assistant sized me up and said, "You'd be a six, ma'am. Maybe a four."

From the way she turned away from me I could tell that my face was set to maximum incredulity. It was all I could do to keep myself from saying, "You're out of your mind. Before the babies I was a ten. I'm sure I'm a twelve now. There is no. bloomin'. way. that I'm a six."

I tried on a few things.

I'm a six.

[Original painting: The Abduction of Deianeira by the Centaur Nessus (ca. 1640) by Peter Paul Rubens, the painter of all those "rubenesque" ladies.]

I went home and rifled through my old stuff. Sure enough: a decade has passed, and now six is the new twelve. This size creep is downright creepy, if you ask me. I don't like to have my perceptions manipulated, thanks very much.

So this is how people get overweight and then obese: there's no feedback when we go clothes shopping. In fact, we all get lulled in a comfortable but false sense of security that we're still the same size as back when we were in high school.

Until, that is, you try on some real-sized clothing. Like Icebreaker woollens, made in New Zealand: Medium is still medium. Oops, nasty surprise, better order that LARGE. And -umm- "Large" is the largest size they carry. And it's on the small side of US Medium.

The same holds for cars. If you live in North America you can be forgiven to think that a Ford Focus is a tiny car, and a Honda Accord is a "regular" size. But try this exercise: Just for fun, pretend you're renting a car in, say, Great Britain. Go to, and put in some dates.

When I did that, for a ten-day rental in the beautiful southwest of England, Avis came up with a menu of choices, much like would do for a rental in New England. But check out the classification of these cars.

The Mini is called "Small": okay, I get that. It's a standard Mini, not a Monster Mini. The Renault Clio (just a touch larger than a Toyota Yaris) is also called "Small". That's okay too: in Europe this class is called a Supermini.

The Ford Focus is called a "compact". We recognise that, it has the same designation in the US. But "Medium"? Oh wait: they mean, on the small side of medium. A Volkswagen Golf is also in the "Medium" class; apparently Avis has theirs appointed with more than average luxury, hence the "executive" modifier. It has air conditioning. Maybe even power windows.

Note it still has manual transmission. Also called "standard": because automatic transmission still adds $1000-2000 to a car's sticker price, and tends to have lower fuel efficiency to boot. It's a luxury item, really. As are large cars.

What Europeans call "Large" encompasses such cars as the Volkswagen Passat and the Audi A4. These "large family cars" are what in the US fall in the "mid-size" class. The A4 is pretty luxurious, as is clear from the "Saloon" designation; hey, it even comes with automatic transmission.

Its rental rate is also more than three times higher than that of the Medium sized cars, beaten only by a Mercedes E Class sedan with the "Luxury Automatic" designation. While the lineup includes a 7-seat minivan, a Citroën C4 Picasso, it contains no SUVs.

No wonder Brits think Americans drive bungalows with wind shields.

Interestingly, the size creep for all cars in the US means that luxury cars don't stand out as much. The epithet that most often goes with BMWs on the European continent is "fat". This goes for any BMW that's not part of the 1 or 3 series. On European roads, larger BMWs actually look fat; they tend to spill over the sides of parking spots, for instance. But on American roads they look like "regular" cars, nothing special about them.

Let's not fool ourselves into thinking that we, nor our cars, are smaller than we/they really are. Let's call a spade a spade. And let's call SUVs "Oversize", and large SUVs like the Cadillac Escalade "T-rex Oversize". Because they are dinosaurs.



You may also like:

1. The Power of Names

2. Review: BMW 1 Series


More aboutCars News and Reviews Size Creep- CARS NEWS AND REVIEWS

Cars News and Reviews Enough Hockey Sticks for TWO Teams- CARS NEWS AND REVIEWS

Posted by Carmella Ross on Thursday

Now that my eldest has gained admission to a Canadian university, I am reminded that hockey is the Canadian national sport. And that my best friend in college used to play it: she learned to skate in an unbelievably short time, and got so good at running circles around everyone on the ice that she was appointed the captain of my dorm's co-ed hockey team, competing intramurally.

Before games, she would go around the dorm, tear people away from their problem sets and papers, to scrape together enough players to field a team of six (including the goalie). If she was lucky she got a few extras. I would come to some of the games, to shout.

These days, I don't think of hockey much. But I do think of hockey sticks, a lot. Michael Mann, the climate scientist, has done pioneering work on how the globally averaged temperature has been steady for nearly 10,000 years - if anything, decreasing slowly - until the onset of the Industrial Revolution. After that global temperatures started rising rapidly. So if you graph global average temperature as a function of time, the data lies on a curve that resembles a hockey stick.

Lots of global warming deniers have tried to beat up on Michael Mann (with non-physical sticks, like law suits) but the hockey stick metaphor has proven robust and, if anything, has become stronger over time. And while globally averaged temperature is the first quantity shown to have time dependence resembling a hockey stick, it is not the only one.

There are in fact enough hockey sticks to field a whole team, plus a few backups. The temperature is the captain of all the other hockey sticks.

Next up are a trio of greenhouse gases, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O). It is the anthropogenic part of these greenhouse gases, all rising rapidly since the Industrial Revolution, each following their own hockey stick, that are at the root of human-caused global warming.

Of these three, carbon dioxide is like the goalie: it tends to stay put, with its lifetime counted in hundreds of years. The product of the burning of fossil fuels is what we need to get around in order to score in our play to stabilise the climate.

In comparison, methane is like a nimble forward: fast (lifetime about 10 years) and packing a punch (it is a much more powerful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, and it's a good thing there's a lot less of it in our atmosphere).

A little over half the anthropogenic carbon dioxide remains in the atmosphere acting like a blanket. Most of the rest has been absorbed by the oceans. On the one hand that's fortunate, because we would have had much more global warming otherwise.

On the other hand, the excess carbon dioxide is wreaking havoc: The oceans, which have enjoyed a finely tuned chemical balance for millions of years, are now suddenly become more acidic. And marine life, which has evolved in a stable ocean, is now facing fast-paced changes for which it is not prepared. For instance, the lower pH (higher acidity) is corrosive to any marine life forms that builds shells. That includes some forms of plankton which are at the base of the marine food chain.

Speaking of oceans, the Arctic Ocean is suffering a devastating melt, which has already allowed ships to sail the formerly elusive Northwest passage.

The Earth is losing its white ice caps that are so effective at reflecting incoming sunlight, and in the Arctic the melting of the sea ice exposes darker water that absorbs more sunlight and helps to hasten global warming. A real team player, this one.

So that's enough for a full on-the-ice team.

But we don't have to stop there: hockey teams can have up to twelve additional players waiting for their turn. So here are a few more sticks for those slots on the sidelines.

First up are the coral reefs. They are suffering a double whammy: because the waters are getting warmer, the symbiotic algae on their surfaces die, and the corals are bleached. Moreover, the higher ocean acidity is making it harder for the corals to grow their skeletons. Coral growth rates are already decreasing measurably, and this will continue since the oceans are not easily relieved of their carbon dioxide content.

On land, spring is arriving earlier. So much so, that the USDA's plant hardiness zone map used by gardeners and farmers have had to be revised. Those records don't go very far back in time, but in Japan there is an ancient tradition of enjoying the blooming of the sakura as the harbinger of spring.

Indeed, the bloom time of Kyoto cherry blossoms have been noted meticulously in records that go back to 800 AD, and those records show that the date of first bloom is shifting to earlier in the year - following its own rose-petalled hockey stick.

Cherry blossoms in Kyoto may seem remote, but here is something that many of us must have every day: coffee. Brazil has lost half its coffee harvest to drought this year, and that is reflected in a sharp upturn in the price of coffee, not exactly the kind of kick you'd like to get from your morning joe.

And here is a player for the later in the game: sea level rise has a time-lagged response to the carbon dioxide emissions that cause it, but proceeds inexorably; the most recent IPCC prediction is between one and three feet by the end of this century.

It doesn't end there. There are many other hockey sticks waiting in the wings, about to develop or about to be discovered. I'll take a shot and predict the emergence of the following:

Food price.

California has been hit hard by drought. So far, farmers have limited the losses on their crops by pumping more water out of the ground than usual. But the aquifer can only sustain that for so long, and then the water shortage will hit the harvests, and food prices will rise. It's not just California: elsewhere, global warming forms a threat to corn, rice and other staples of the human diet.

Home insurance premiums.

Already insurers and re-insurers are putting their risk managers to work on getting a handle on risk from erratic weather patterns, hurricanes and other natural disasters. Homes build on flood plains are particularly vulnerable, but so are homes on mountain sides that are susceptible to mud slides, homes in tornado alley, and in the now extended hurricane lane.

Insect borne diseases.

As the range of insects extend poleward, so does the range of diseases for which those insects are vectors. Think of West Nile virus, dengue fever, malaria, all ailments that have so far been largely confined to tropical latitudes.

Okay, enough of that. Because while trouble is amassing, not too far into the future, we will not be completely helpless. We are getting ready to face the challenge, and are assembling a team of our own. The movers in this game are real people, thinking outside the box, working on solutions that make a difference in their own lives and that of our children - and making a living doing so.

Introducing the good guys.

On this side, the captain of hockey sticks must be that of solar energy capacity, which has been growing by leaps and bounds. Our greatest hope lies in the cost-effective, fossil free generation of energy.

The co-captain spot must go to wind energy, which has also expanded rapidly in the last few years:

While fossil fuel powered transportation still makes up a large fraction of our carbon emissions, change is coming. For instance, the number of electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids on US roads is obviously forming a hockey stick of its own.

And the same holds for the number of bike share programs:

Lots of people are starting to re-invent and re-imagine the way they live, the way they move around, the way they grow their food. The Transition Network is a loose collection of these local efforts, and their numbers are growing fast.

In addition, the number of CSA farms has been skyrocketing; it appears that many of us are re-discovering the joy of getting our food from someone we know by name and face, not too far from where we live, and on whose farm we are invited to put in some of the labour. For resilience, there is nothing like community supported agriculture.

Here you go: six hockey sticks for the Good Guys' team. And there are others waiting in the wings.

More good news is in the way we design our buildings: in the US, the number of LEED certified buildings have risen fast. A very few of these building are zero-net-carbon, that is, they generate as much carbon free energy as they consume, including the "embodied" carbon necessary in their construction.

I don't have pretty pictures for the following, but there are some other exciting developments that give me hope.

One is the steadily increasing number of photovoltaic cells on the roofs of private homes. This kind of distributed clean energy generation increases our resilience in general.

There is also the increasing interest in installing transportation infrastructure that is inclusive instead of being car-focused. Complete Streets and similar urban planning strategies offer safe mobility for everyone, including the handicapped, those who can't afford a car and those too young to drive.

The number of farmers' market has been mushrooming, as have places that offer organic produce for sale. Our hope for food security lies in modestly sized, family owned farms where the owners really know their land.

I'm sure it doesn't end there, either. If you know of any positive trends that will help us win the climate change fight, please share in the comments!



You may also like:

1. Wedding on a Wind Farm

2. Google Maps: directions with options

3. The Car of the Future

4. We Need Good News on Climate Change


More aboutCars News and Reviews Enough Hockey Sticks for TWO Teams- CARS NEWS AND REVIEWS

Cars News and Reviews Warning Labels for Gasoline Pumps- CARS NEWS AND REVIEWS

Posted by Carmella Ross on Friday

A plucky teen has let her voice be heard, even though she is not yet old enough to vote. Emily Kelsall, a sixteen year old living in West-Vancouver, sees clearly the link between global warming and the everyday action of filling a car's gas tank, and wants drivers to see it too. In order to help motorists connect the dots, she has taken a proposal to West Vancouver's municipal council.

The way to get her message out is very simple: put warning labels on the nozzles of gas pumps. Every time drivers fill their tank, they can't help seeing the label reminding them that every mile they drive contributes to the carbon emisssions that are causing climate change, with consequences that we can all feel even today.

Emily Kelsall was inspired to her extraordinary action by hearing a radio interview with Rob Shirkey, the founder of Our Horizon, who points out that municipalities (at least the ones in Ontario) "have the legal authority to require gasoline retailers to put warning labels on gas pumps similar to those found on cigarette packages". And that cities and towns should use that authority.

Shirkey's view is that, in the face of the planetary emergency posed by global warming, we should not wait for our governments to act to protect us - they are clearly not doing so - but we should do what we can now, at the local level.

Mayors of major cities all around the world think along the same lines, and have joined together in the C40 inititative, a network of the world's megacities committed to addressing climate change. As of this writing the group counts 67 participating cities.

West Vancouver, population 40,000, is not exactly a mega-city. But smaller municipalities are nimble in the way that mega-cities, and certainly unwieldy national governments, are not. For one thing, they will listen to individual residents make their case for novel policies.

And that is exactly what Emily Kelsall did: in a poised performance, she took ten minutes to put forward, in a methodical way, why climate change is a problem; how it is connected to the carbon emissions from cars; how putting warning labels on gas pumps serves to remind drivers that their actions have consequences; and what's in it for West Vancouver.

It is heartening to see that the West Vancouver council members immediately reacted positively to the proposal. They had a few questions which Kelsall had no trouble answering: she came well prepared. She also pointed out that Our Horizon can help towns sort through the legal nitty-gritty of getting the measure in place.

The words "voice" and "vote" has the same root. Emily Kelsall has made her voice be heard: her local government has listened, and is proving willing to consider her proposal seriously. I am sure that they are well aware that Emily, and all her friends and supporters, will remember, come the next election cycle, how they actually acted on the proposal.



You may also like:

1. Ten Ways to Calm Car Traffic

2. How to talk with our children about global warming

3. The Toyota Yaris is Not a "Teen" Car


More aboutCars News and Reviews Warning Labels for Gasoline Pumps- CARS NEWS AND REVIEWS

Cars News and Reviews I Bleeping Love Science- CARS NEWS AND REVIEWS

Posted by Carmella Ross on Wednesday

Well, that's it. I've come to the end of a broad overview of planetary science as it pertains to climate change. Affectionately known as 12.340x, it's a course (online through edX) on Global Warming Science, given (mostly) by MIT's Kerry Emmanuel.

In contrast to the World Bank's course on climate change that I had taken earlier (through Coursera), this one was all about the science, and explicitly not about policy. In twelve weeks, it surveyed topics like paleoclimate, the composition of the atmosphere over earth's history, heat transfer of all kinds, atmospheric and ocean circulations, the carbon cycle, forcings and feedbacks, and finally a little bit about the models that need to incorporate all of that in order to give us a sense of where we're headed next.

When you start to get into the details of how it works, you get your nose rubbed into it: our planet is stunningly beautiful.

As a single example, take the thermohaline circulation: it's the large-scale ocean flows, driven place-to-place differences of temperature and salt content, that churns the oceans and help transport heat from tropical regions towards the poles.

The "conveyor belt" looks a bit like the blood circulation in the human body. In the Atlantic, waters flow at the surface toward the North Pole (mostly scrunched into a narrow strip: the Gulf Stream), then sinks down, flowing back toward the South Pole at large depth. In one of the problem sets you got to estimate how long it takes for a parcel of water to go from the coast of Greenland to the coast of Antartica: about 400 years.

The currents at the ocean surface are modeled, and rendered in a mesmerising visualisation that replicates all the features of the real ocean. Find it here (on the website, click the "View Movie" image to start the visualisation).

It's hard to say what I find more stunning: the beauty of the planet, or the scientific wherewithal to understand it and describe it to the point that you can arrive at a reasonably accurate, albeit virtual, replica of this highly complex system.

The rest of the course was in a similar vein. Having immersed myself in climate change issues for the past year, I'm familiar with most of the concepts, but to actually crunch through a few equations, and to work out some numbers yourself (I had to revive my scientific calculator for the problem sets), really starts to open the window that before was only ajar. I had quite a few Aha! moments.

I took the final yesterday. And am already wishing there would be a follow up course. I feel I want to go deeper than this overview, the introduction serving as a come-on, a bait. Hard to resist.

The whole delivered by Kerry Emmanuel in a steady, calm voice, methodical and, accurate. I could hear that voice right through this marvellous piece Emmanuel wrote for FiveThirtyEight, a devastating rebuttal to a climate denier piece by Pielke Jr.

MIT students have an acronym to be applied to situations of exasperation, usually at the workload: IHTFP. One cleaned-up version of the acronym (trotted out for the benefits of parents who, after all, pay at least part of the tuition) is "Institute Has The Finest Professors". I guess you can point to Emmanuel in support of the latter interpretation.



You may also like:

1. Watch "Years of Living Dangerously" - but not alone

2. National Climate Assessment: Why I'm Cautiously Elated


More aboutCars News and Reviews I Bleeping Love Science- CARS NEWS AND REVIEWS

Cars News and Reviews Road Safety- CARS NEWS AND REVIEWS

Posted by Carmella Ross on Sunday

In 2013 there were 570 road deaths in the Netherlands. Of those, more than half - 320 - were non-vehicle deaths, that is, pedestrians, bicyclists, and riders of scootmobiles: electric mobility aids that share bike paths.

Small numbers. But then again, it's a small country with population less than 17 million. For a more realistic comparison, we divide the road death numbers by the population, and find 34 road fatalities per million, about half the European average.

For comparison, in 2010 there were 32,885 road deaths in the US, or 107 per million, the overwhelming majority were drivers or passengers of vehicles. That seems a lot more until you remember that Dutch people don't drive all that much or that far. Very, very few have the supercommutes that are not uncommon in the US. I mean, in most places in the Netherlands, driving three hours would land you outside the country and in some places, two countries over.

Dividing by miles travelled, the number of road fatalities in the US in 2010 was 1.11 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles, or 11.1 deaths per billion miles. That's to be compared to 3.8 deaths per billion kilometers travelled, or 6.1 fatalities per billion miles travelled in Holland. Leaving out the bikes and pedestrians, vehicular fatalities per vehicle mile is about four times higher in the US than in the Netherlands.

  US (2010) NL (2013)
Road Fatalities 32,885 570
Non-vehicular Fatalities 5,549 320
Fatalities per million population 107 34
Non-vehicular Fatalities per million population 18 19
Fatalities per billion miles 11.1 6.1

The non-vehicular fatalities per million population is about the same in both countries: 18 and 19, respectively. However, these numbers are deceptive, because so many more trips in the Netherlands are made by bike and on foot. My guess is that the number of fatalities per bicycle trip or per bicycle mile is far lower in the Netherlands than in the US. I don't have to add that those fatalities are caused by vehicles: that's just the physics of car-bike collisions.

The Dutch Office for Traffic Safety (yes, there is such a thing) takes last year's statistics as a spur to make roads even safer, by implementing more separate bicycle paths, making traffic signs and rules more explicitly clear, and planning more "forgiving" road architecture, e.g. by removing obstacles by the side of the road or the medians to minimise collisions in the event that a car strays off the car lanes. Basically the same approach as in Sweden, which has the lowest number of traffic fatalities in Europe.

These measures save money and lives: back in the 1960s and 1970s, when Dutch roads were more like American roads are now, traffic deaths exceeded 3000 per year, and a large fraction of that number were children under 14 who were struck by cars. So it's well worth fighting for bicycle paths, physically separated from car lanes.

One more item: the number of fatalities among riders of public transport in Holland last year? One.



You may also like:

1. How the Dutch got their Bicycle Paths

2. Ten Ways to Calm Car Traffic

3. The Netherlands: Bike-Friendly By Law


More aboutCars News and Reviews Road Safety- CARS NEWS AND REVIEWS

Cars News and Reviews National Climate Assessment: Why I'm Cautiously Elated- CARS NEWS AND REVIEWS

Posted by Carmella Ross on Wednesday

The National Climate Assessment, the culmination of a four-year effort to catalog the effects of climate change on the United States, is a breath of fresh air in the national discussion of climate change.

Finally, scientists are saying it like it is, without using technical jargon or probabilities: The NCA report states bluntly that climate change has arrived in the United States, and spells out the many ways that it is making life harder - and more expensive - for many of us. That's us, not our children or grandchildren.

The report emphasises that, as we have already started to see, climate change is not about a gradual warming up of the place we call home: it's more properly called climate disruption, or even climate chaos, where wild weather events frequently dominate the news.

The report is huge. But it is not a dry document stuffed with scientific jargon, equations and graphs. It has been presented on a beautifully crafted website that is easy to navigate at several levels, from a cursory look at the key points, to the "highlights" to an in-depth look at the relevant pages of the report itself. The designer(s) of this fantastic site deserve a medal, really.

Because it is a large and diverse country, the NCA focuses on climate disruption effects on each region separately, covering everything from extreme drought and wildfires in the Southwest to hurricanes and sea level rise on the Eastern seaboard.

And because life is multi-faceted, the report spells out the implications of climate change on the many aspects of our lives, such as the energy we use to run our homes, our transportation, the food we eat and the water we drink, and the health of our families.

This assessment doesn't hold back from telling it the way it is. Even though the way it is, is actually pretty grim, and the prospects for our future even grimmer.

This is not, however, a reason to give up.

If reading about how climate change is affecting our lives makes you feel cold inside; if you start to loose sleep; if you feel deeply sad, you have a right to feel that way. Such reactions are completely normal in the face of a profound change in our home. It's reasonable to feel depression, even despair. We need to face that and work our way through it. And I'm not saying it's easy.

But this is not the time to turn away, to say, "Oh well: we blew it. And that's that." Because it's not over. The situation is pretty bad, but we can - and we must - do what we can to prevent it from turning catastrophic.

So the NCA report devotes an entire chapter to Response Strategies, in which it outlines the many ways in which we, individually, in our local communities and as a society, can fight climate change. And it points out that many of the strategies are win-win propositions: "Many of these actions can also improve public health, the economy, and quality of life."

And this is the reason I feel elated at a report that, after all, paints a dark picture of our predicament. I smell the possibility of a real shift.

For one, I don't think it's too much to say that the report is a triumph in climate communications.

Secondly, and perhaps because the material has been made so accessible, it has had wide coverage in the mainstream media that usually does such a good job of skirting the issue of global warming.

I feel this is a watershed moment. I'm cautiously optimistic that from now, the national discourse on climate change has left the embarrassing stage of the is-it-real? "debate", and will move on to the stage where we all sit down together, at the level of city, state and federal government, and say, "Okay, how shall we tackle this?"

Because, of course, we can.

Shift happens.



You may also like:

1. Let's Talk with Our Children about Global Warming

2. Slash your carbon footprint

2. How to buy a gas sipper for less


More aboutCars News and Reviews National Climate Assessment: Why I'm Cautiously Elated- CARS NEWS AND REVIEWS

Cars News and Reviews Our Children's Trust- CARS NEWS AND REVIEWS

Posted by Carmella Ross on Friday

Our children look to us to feed them when they are hungry. They come for a hug when they are scared, or very happy, or just for the joy of being hugged. When they have a boo-boo we kiss their tears away. And they count on us to do all that: to keep them safe, healthy and happy. We have our children's trust on a personal level; it is an enormous responsibility that we take on when we become parents, and one that we bear gladly.

It is in fact such a large responsibility that many of us make provisions in case we die while our children are still minors: we write wills that specify who will take care of our children, and who will manage whatever funds and property we may leave for them, until they come of age. That person is called a trustee, for the trust we invest in them, to act like a parent in our stead.

Looking up the legal meaning of the word Trust, I found this:

In common law legal systems, a trust is a relationship whereby property is held by one party for the benefit of another.

In the context of our home, the planet, that sounds a lot like the native American saying:

Sometimes it appears that we have forgotten that keeping the planet habitable is part of our responsibility to our chidren. This seems to have slid so far down on our list of priorities that a few children have decided to remind us of what we owe them.

In particular, a far-reaching national policy is urgently needed to start cutting carbon emissions as soon as possible to prevent catastrophic global warming - but right now the US government has no such policy in place. So, in a bold and innovative move, five young people are suing the US Environmental Protection Agency for its "Failure to rapidly reduce CO2 emissions and protect and restore the balance of the atmosphere".

These brave children are helped by an organisation called Our Children's Trust, which names the lawsuit "Atmospheric Trust Litigation". The case is based on two legal principles, which they even explain in plain English:

The first is the Public Trust Doctrine, which says that one of the most essential purposes of government is to protect crucial natural resources for the survival and welfare of citizens.

The second principle is that of Intergenerational Justice, which says each generation must leave the planet in good shape for use of future generations.

This is one of those examples when a case is so sensible, you wonder why it ever had to become a lawsuit in the first place. It is shameful, really, that our children have to resort to litigation to make the grownups do the right thing, which is to give our children a functional planet to inhabit rather than one that we have soiled and degraded.

The children's case is supported not only by the outstanding lawyers from Our Children's Trust, but also by an array of friends that include organisations like the Sierra Club, the Climate Reality Project and, as well as climate scientists like James Hansen, Stefan Rahmstorf and Kevin Trenberth. The argument is legally as well as scientifically sound.

They have proceeded to the US Court of Appeals in Washington DC, where they were scheduled to appear on Friday May 2, 2014 to present oral arguments. That session has been cancelled by the Court, which is a pity. As James Hansen says in his brief: "The give-and-take [of the oral proceedings] would have been illuminating, not only for young people in attendance, but the public at large."

One wonders if that isn't Hansen's understated way of saying, too bad we're missing an opportunity for our children to shame us publicly.

Your child can be part of this exciting effort: Our Children's Trust has a page where you can sign a Pledge of Support. Our children do not vote: this is one way for their voices to be heard. And their support is important to the children who are spearheading the effort.

I have a feeling CelloPlayer was well aware of that when filling in name and age on the Pledge, carefully picking out the letters on my keyboard. We talked of how children, even if they are not going to court themselves, can help by spreading the word among their friends, so that those friends can tell their friends.

As Hansen remarks, "Regardless of the outcome of this specific trial, if we continue to improve the presentation and press for the rights of young people, their case will be won eventually. However, it is important that “eventually” be sooner rat her than later."



You may also like:

1. Let's Talk with Our Children about Global Warming

2. Teach Your Parents Well: Children's Views on Climate Change


More aboutCars News and Reviews Our Children's Trust- CARS NEWS AND REVIEWS