How should we think about wildfires?

Imagine if a factory periodically spewed massive amounts of pollution when its pollution control device failed, fouling the air and … More

An antiquated California water law encourages political conflict rather than market transactions

California ski resorts are experiencing record snowfall this February, thanks to a storm system that has dropped an estimated 18 … More

Climate conscious consumers: study suggests better-informed consumers would reduce their climate footprint

Often, environmental challenges are the result of externalities—costs of a good or service that are not borne by the producer … More

Environmental protectionism: when environmental laws protect businesses from competition

The environment’s greatest friend is technological innovation. Human ingenuity–what Julian Simon called “the ultimate resource”–has consistently enabled us to make more with less. Yet environmental laws too often throw up roadblocks to that progress, favoring the dirty status quo over a cleaner future.

Is EPA head Pruitt a federalism hypocrite for criticizing California climate policy?

Federalism is not a facile commitment to “states-rights” no matter what states do. EPA Administrator Pruit’s criticism of California’s attempt to regulate beyond its borders is entirely consistent with a commitment to federalism.

Ideological blinders affect both extremes of the climate debate

Climate change challenges conservative and libertarian instincts in a way that makes it harder to believe the evidence, no matter how strong it is. Climate evangelists likewise tend to embrace science and evidence when it confirms their prior political views and reject it otherwise. For progressives and big-government liberals, climate change is easy to accept to the extent it seems to call out for a big-government solution. But even among climate evangelicals, where science and their prior political commitments conflict, politics usually win.