By Alex Felsinger •
October 16, 2008
This article is part of EcoWorldly’s week-long spotlight on Politicians You Can Believe In. To read more, subscribe to our RSS feed, or view our posts about politics.
Despite their tumultuous economy, Iceland is vying for one of the non-permanent United Nations Security Council seats going up for a vote tomorrow.
Iceland, which generates nearly all of its power from geothermal and hydroelectric sources, has emphasized their valuable experience in the fight against climate change and said they would represent the goals of all small countries with their position on the council.
Not every country has Iceland’s volcanoes, geysers, and hot springs to tap for electricity, but President Olafur Ragnar Grimsson is convinced that all nations possess the natural resources to cut their fossil fuel use and that doing so is vital for global security.
By Chris Milton •
October 8, 2008
I have an issue. A problem, a concern. A nag. It’s an itch, and I just gotta scratch it.
It’s this. America, the UK and Iceland have all been bailed out by the taxpayer. You see it and you hear it: “Taxpayer to pump billions of squidoos into financial system” etc.
Except it’s a bald and blatent lie. The USA’s bailout was $700bn. The UK’s bailout has been estimated at $400bn. Iceland is more tame, at about $5.4bn.
By Timothy B. Hurst •
August 30, 2008
The partnership will certainly make use of Iceland’s experience with geothermal energy. Together with hydropower, the tiny island nation in the North Atlantic gets 99% of its electricity from renewables.
By Levi Novey •
June 29, 2008
On Friday, the International Whaling Commission’s annual meeting came to a close with a whimper. This year’s gathering was held in Chile, and the meeting’s chairperson, United States delegate William Hogarth, made a gutsy and stupid decision. Hogarth wanted to avoid confrontations at this year’s meeting, with the hope of creating good will among countries. He pontificated that this good will could be used to find solutions in the future (not now). Translation: he pleaded for member countries not to vote on or discuss important issues that concern whales. Based on what happened (or more accurately, did not happen), the meeting was very unsuccessful.
By Levi Novey •
June 24, 2008
Starting things off with a bang, Chile declared a permanent ban on whaling on the opening day of the International Whaling Commission’s annual meeting. The Pacific Ocean-bordering country is playing host to the conference, where tensions are running high. One goal of the conference is to get enough countries to vote affirmatively to create a new whale sanctuary in the South Atlantic Ocean. But this plan might be stymied by the meeting’s own chair person.
In an effort to build consensus, the chair person of the conference urged for there to be little debate and no voting at the meeting this year. The goal is to “pay it forward,” and use any additional good will that is created this year at next year’s meeting with the hope that more can be accomplished. Many environmentalists find the chairman’s plan to be intolerable, as they claim that Japan is using “scientific research” as an excuse to hunt approximately 1,000 whales each year. But Japan isn’t the only country ignoring a 1986 ban on commercial whaling that was agreed upon by the commission.
