<?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>The Berkeley Blog &#187; Eric Biber</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.berkeley.edu/author/ebiber/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.berkeley.edu</link>
	<description>Provocative thinking from UC Berkeley</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 20:28:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Why it&#8217;s important that we know we&#8217;re at 400 ppm of CO2</title>
		<link>http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2013/05/20/why-its-important-that-we-know-were-at-400-ppm-of-co2/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2013/05/20/why-its-important-that-we-know-were-at-400-ppm-of-co2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 23:21:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Biber</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Energy & Environment: What's on your mind?]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[carbon dioxide]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[monitoring]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.berkeley.edu/?p=11015</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>A major (and unfortunate) milestone has been crossed this past week.  Measurements of atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide passed 400 parts per million, the highest in millions of years.  Others have  commented  on how worrying this milestone is for the planet. But what I want to focus on here is how important it is that we even know that this milestone has been passed.</p>
<p>Our understanding of atmospheric carbon dioxide levels is actually relatively new, and it began with research starting in the 1950s.  It was only through years and decades of dedicated monitoring of atmospheric carbon dioxide levels that ... <a href="http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2013/05/20/why-its-important-that-we-know-were-at-400-ppm-of-co2/">More ></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2013/05/20/why-its-important-that-we-know-were-at-400-ppm-of-co2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The future of climate politics (pt. 2)</title>
		<link>http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2013/02/22/the-future-of-climate-politics-pt-2/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2013/02/22/the-future-of-climate-politics-pt-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2013 21:32:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Biber</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Energy & Environment: What's on your mind?]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AB 32]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[greenhouse gas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Proposition 23]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.berkeley.edu/?p=10806</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>In my last post, I noted a recent report that called for a new political path for environmentalists and others seeking to enact carbon policy in the United States, one that focused on developing policy proposals that would help mobilize a grassroots movement to support limits on greenhouse gases.  My question was, is there anything that we could do to help make the political landscape friendlier to such a grassroots movement, and therefore lower the bar to enacting legislation?</p>
<p class="wp-caption-text">NASA photo</p>
<p>At the same time that Republicans swept to power in the House of Representatives in the 2010 elections, Californians went ... <a href="http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2013/02/22/the-future-of-climate-politics-pt-2/">More ></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2013/02/22/the-future-of-climate-politics-pt-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The future of climate politics (pt. 1)</title>
		<link>http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2013/02/21/the-future-of-climate-politics-pt-1/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2013/02/21/the-future-of-climate-politics-pt-1/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2013 19:13:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Biber</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Energy & Environment: What's on your mind?]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cap and trade]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[carbon credits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics & Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Waxman-Markey]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.berkeley.edu/?p=10805</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>I’m a little late to the game here, but I’ve finally had a chance to read Harvard Prof. Skocpol’s post mortem of why she thinks cap-and-trade legislation failed in the U.S. Congress in 2009-10, and what she thinks the best way forward in the future is.  (Dan blogged about this already here and here; Matt Kahn here.)</p>
<p>For those of you who haven’t read the 140-page pdf (available here), I encourage you to do so.  It’s well written and a good overview of the history of why Waxman-Markey failed (though as Skocpol herself notes, the best narrative is still Eric Pooley’s ... <a href="http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2013/02/21/the-future-of-climate-politics-pt-1/">More ></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2013/02/21/the-future-of-climate-politics-pt-1/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How certification could reduce the environmental impacts of marijuana farms</title>
		<link>http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2013/01/16/how-certification-could-reduce-the-environmental-impacts-of-marijuana-farms/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2013/01/16/how-certification-could-reduce-the-environmental-impacts-of-marijuana-farms/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2013 18:22:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Biber</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Energy & Environment: What's on your mind?]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cannabis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[marijuana]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[marijuana environmental impact]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[marijuana legalization]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.berkeley.edu/?p=10697</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This article from the LA Times (a few weeks old) highlights an emerging environmental problem in California – and presumably, elsewhere around the country: The negative impacts on water quality and availability and habitat from marijuana farms.  Farms often use enormous amounts of water to grow their crops, without getting the necessary permits for diverting water – placing endangered salmon runs on the north coast of California at risk.

There is evidence the farms use large amounts of pesticides and herbicides that can eventually make their way into waterways, posing risks to fish populations and to the people that use that ... <a href="http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2013/01/16/how-certification-could-reduce-the-environmental-impacts-of-marijuana-farms/">More ></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2013/01/16/how-certification-could-reduce-the-environmental-impacts-of-marijuana-farms/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
