The Economist: we need action and the US should lead the charge

The Economist Magazine, renowned for it's staunch conservatism, put out a Special Edition last week devoted to climate change and the need for action .
It's a great read, here are links to a couple of the stories:

The Heat is On

The uncertainty surrounding climate change argues for action, not inaction. America should lead the way

FOR most of the Earth's history, the planet has been either very cold, by our standards, or very hot. Fifty million years ago there was no ice on the poles and crocodiles lived in Wyoming. Eighteen thousand years ago there was ice two miles thick in Scotland and, because of the size of the ice sheets, the sea level was 130m lower. Ice-core studies show…

Survey: climate change
Global warming, it now seems, is for real. Emma Duncan examines the nature of the problem, and possible solutions

THE world's climate has barely changed since the industrial revolution. The temperature was stable in the 19th century, rose very slightly during the first half of the 20th, fell back in the 1950s-70s, then started rising again. Over the past 100 years, it has gone up by about 0.6°C (1.1°F). So what's the fuss about? Not so much the rise in temperature as the reason for it. Previous changes in the world's climate have been set off by variations either in the angle of the Earth's rotation or in its distance from the sun. This time there is another factor involved: man-made “greenhouse gases”.


Don’t forget the audio interview with the author, also available to non-subscribers:

Great post, hadn’t seen this Special Edition. Did you read by any chance the recent study from Nature Sep.7 issue? More evidence from Siberian lake permafrost thats melting and releasing more methane. it’s from Seed, since you need to be subscribed to Nature to access it from there.