The current U.S. drought will cause at least $18 billion in crop damage this year. And climate models suggest that drought will only get more severe in the years ahead. So how will farmers cope? Many scientists are hoping genetically engineered crops could help provide the answer, but not everyone's convinced that it will be enough.
A new report argues that wind power has firmly established itself in the United States. Installations are surging. Costs are tumbling. But, the report concludes, the industry is at risk of shrinking dramatically in 2013 as key tax credits disappear. Here's the story (yes, in chart form).
Mitt Romney once said that "it's important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases." Paul Ryan once accused climate scientists of trying to "intentionally mislead the public." Those sound like very different views. But when it comes to energy and climate policy, Ryan and Romney don't disagree much at all.
About 1.7 billion people depend on freshwater aquifers that are being depleted faster than they can be refilled by rain. That includes the crucial Ogallala Aquifer in the midwestern United States. Once those aquifers are gone, they'll take thousands of years to replace. Can they be saved?
Back in 2008, food prices hit record highs, triggering riots around the world. A new report from the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization suggests that we still haven't returned to that point just yet, even with the massive U.S. drought. But there's reason to think the world could get there.
July was the hottest month ever in the U.S.
Coal was once America's top source of electricity. But thanks to cheap natural gas and air-pollution rules, coal plants are disappearing fast. A look at which plants are getting retired and what to expect in the future, in graphs.
A new study finds that cutting air pollution may have a hidden benefit--people spend less on heart and lung medication. About $900 million less per year. The study could persuade the White House to rethink its approach to controversial air-pollution rules like the ozone standard it nixed last year.
This week, the press is giving plenty of attention to two climate papers, one from "converted skeptic" Richard Muller and one from current skeptic Anthony Watts. But neither have gone through the traditional peer-review process. And neither seem to be all that significant. Do they really deserve this much hype?
Some legal experts now wonder if the precedent set by Supreme Court's decision on Obamacare could eventually be used to weaken U.S. air pollution rules. If the court was willing to rein in a proposed Medicaid expansion, couldn't it rein in the Clean Air Act too?
The Post Most: Business
Blog Contributors
Ezra Klein is the editor of Wonkblog and a columnist at the Washington Post, as well as a contributor to MSNBC and Bloomberg. His work focuses on domestic and economic policymaking, as well as the political system that’s constantly screwing it up. He really likes graphs, and is on Twitter, Google+ and Facebook. E-mail him here.
Suzy Khimm covers the budget, economic policy, and financial regulatory reform. Before coming to Washington, she was based in Brazil and Southeast Asia, where she wrote for the Economist, Slate, and the Wall Street Journal Asia. Follow her on Twitter here, and email her here.
Sarah Kliff covers health policy, focusing on Medicare, Medicaid and the health reform law. She tries to fit in some reproductive health and education policy coverage, too, alongside an occasional hockey reference. Her work has appeared in Newsweek, Politico, and the BBC. She is on Twitter and Facebook.
Brad Plumer is a reporter focusing on energy and environmental issues. He was previously an associate editor at The New Republic. Follow him on Twitter. Email him here.
