Breakthrough Institute

Last updated

Breakthrough Institute
Formationcirca 2003 [1] [2]
Founder Michael Shellenberger
Ted Nordhaus
Purpose Environmental research
Headquarters Berkeley, CA
Location
Key people
Ted Nordhaus (Founder, executive director), Alex Trembath (Deputy director), Kathryn Salam (Executive editor)
Website thebreakthrough.org

The Breakthrough Institute is an environmental research center located in Berkeley, California. Founded in 2007 by Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus, [5] The institute is aligned with ecomodernist philosophy. [6] [7] The Institute advocates for an embrace of modernization and technological development (including nuclear power and carbon capture) in order to address environmental challenges. Proposing urbanization, agricultural intensification, nuclear power, aquaculture, and desalination as processes with a potential to reduce human demands on the environment, allowing more room for non-human species. [8] [9] [10] [11]

Contents

Since its inception, environmental scientists and academics have criticized Breakthrough's environmental positions. [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] Popular press reception of Breakthrough's environmental ideas and policy has been mixed. [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [15] [23] [24] [25]

Organization, funding and people

The Breakthrough institute is registered as 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization and is supported by various public institutions and individuals. [26]

Breakthrough's executive director is Ted Nordhaus. Others associated with Breakthrough include former National Review executive editor Reihan Salam, journalist Gwyneth Cravens, political scientist Roger A. Pielke Jr., sociologist Steve Fuller, and environmentalist Stewart Brand. [27]

Nordhaus and Shellenberger have written on the subjects ranging from positive treatment of nuclear energy and shale gas [28] to critiques of the planetary boundaries hypothesis. [29] The Breakthrough Institute has argued that climate policy should be focused on higher levels of public funding on technology innovation to "make clean energy cheap", and has been critical of climate policies such as cap and trade and carbon pricing. [30] [31] [32]

Programs and philosophy

Breakthrough Institute maintains programs in energy, conservation, and food. [33] Their website states that the energy research is “focused on making clean energy cheap through technology innovation to deal with both global warming and energy poverty.” The conservation work “seeks to offer pragmatic new frameworks and tools for navigating" the challenges of the Anthropocene, offering up nuclear energy, synthetic fertilizers, and genetically modified foods as solutions.

Jonathan Symons, Senior Lecturer at Macquarie University, Australia, has written an extensive survey of the Breakthrough Institute and its philosophy. He argues that ecomodernism is best understood as a social democratic response to environmental challenges, and that the Breakthrough Institute's argument for state investment in development and deployment of zero carbon technologies aligns with the IPCC’s position that new technologies are crucial to avoiding dangerous climate change. [34]

Criticism

Scholars such as Professor of American and Environmental Studies Julie Sze and environmental humanist Michael Ziser criticize Breakthrough's philosophy as one that believes "community-based environmental justice poses a threat to the smooth operation of a highly capitalized, global-scale Environmentalism." [12] Further, Environmental and Art Historian TJ Demos has argued that Breakthrough's ideas present "nothing more than a bad utopian fantasy" that function to support the oil and gas industry and work as "an apology for nuclear energy." [13]

Journalist Paul D. Thacker alleged that the Breakthrough Institute is an example of a think tank which lacks intellectual rigour, promoting contrarianist reasoning and cherry picking evidence. [15]

The institute has also been criticized for promoting industrial agriculture and processed foodstuffs while also accepting donations from the Nathan Cummings Foundation, whose board members have financial ties to processed food companies that rely heavily on industrial agriculture. After an IRS complaint about potential improper use of 501(c)(3) status, the Institute no longer lists the Nathan Cummings Foundation as a donor. However, as Thacker has noted, the institute's funding remains largely opaque. [15]

Climate scientist Michael E. Mann also questions the motives of the Breakthrough Institute. According to Mann, the self-declared mission of the BTI is to look for a breakthrough to solve the climate problem. However Mann states that basically the BTI "appears to be opposed to anything - be it a price on carbon or incentives for renewable energy - that would have a meaningful impact." He notes that the BTI "remains curiously preoccupied with opposing advocates for meaningful climate action and is coincidentally linked to natural gas interests" and criticises the BTI for advocating "continued exploitation of fossil fuels." Mann also questions that the BTI on the one hand seems to be "very pessimistic" about renewable energy, while on the other hand "they are extreme techno-optimists" regarding geoengineering. [16]

Publications

"The Death of Environmentalism: Global Warming in a Post-Environmental World"

In 2004, Breakthrough founders Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger coauthored the essay, “Death of Environmentalism: Global Warming Politics in a Post-Environmental World.” [35] The paper argued that environmentalism is incapable of dealing with climate change and should "die" so that a new politics can be born.

The paper was criticized by members of the mainstream environmental movement. [36] Former Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope called the essay "unclear, unfair and divisive." He said it contained multiple factual errors and misinterpretations. However, former Sierra Club President Adam Werbach praised the authors' arguments. [37] Former Greenpeace Executive Director John Passacantando said in 2005, referring to both Shellenberger and his coauthor Ted Nordhaus, "These guys laid out some fascinating data, but they put it in this over-the-top language and did it in this in-your-face way." [38] Michel Gelobter and other environmental experts and academics wrote The Soul of Environmentalism: Rediscovering transformational politics in the 21st century in response, criticizing "Death" for demanding increased technological innovation rather than addressing the systemic concerns of people of color. [39]

Writing in The New York Times , Matthew Yglesias said in 2008 that "Nordhaus and Shellenberger persuasively argue, environmentalists must stop congratulating themselves for their own willingness to confront inconvenient truths and must focus on building a politics of shared hope rather than relying on a politics of fear.", adding that the paper "is more convincing in its case for a change in rhetoric." [17]

Break Through: From the Death of Environmentalism to the Politics of Possibility

In 2007, Nordhaus and Shellenberger published their book Break Through: From the Death of Environmentalism to the Politics of Possibility. The book argues for a "post-environmental" politics that abandons the environmentalist focus on nature protection for a new focus on technological innovation to create a new, stronger U.S. economy. [40]

The Wall Street Journal wrote that, "If heeded, Nordhaus and Shellenberger's call for an optimistic outlook—embracing economic dynamism and creative potential—will surely do more for the environment than any U.N. report or Nobel Prize." [18] NPR's science correspondent Richard Harris listed Break Through on his "recommended reading list" for climate change. [19]

However, Julie Sze and Michael Ziser argued that Break Through continued the trend Gelobter pointed out related the authors' commitment to technological innovation and economic growth instead of focusing on systemic inequalities that create environmental injustices. Specifically Sze and Ziser argue that Nordhaus and Shellenberger's "evident relish in their notoriety as the 'sexy' cosmopolitan 'bad boys' of environmentalism (their own words) introduces some doubt about their sincerity and reliability." The authors asserted that Shellenberger's work fails "to incorporate the aims of environmental justice while actively trading on suspect political tropes," such as blaming China and other Nations as large-scale polluters so that the United States may begin and continue Nationalistic technology-based research-and-development environmentalism, while continuing to emit more greenhouse gases than most other nations. In turn, Shellenberger and Nordhaus seek to move away from proven Environmental Justice tactics, "calling for a moratorium" on "community organizing." Such technology-based "approaches like those of Nordhaus and Shellenberger miss entirely" the "structural environmental injustice" that natural disasters like Hurricane Katrina make visible. [12]

Joseph Romm, a former US Department of Energy official now with the Center for American Progress, argued that "Pollution limits are far, far more important than R&D for what really matters -- reducing greenhouse-gas emissions and driving clean technologies into the marketplace." [23] Environmental journalist David Roberts, writing in Grist , stated that while the BTI and its founders garner much attention, their policy is lacking, and ultimately they "receive a degree of press coverage that wildly exceeds their intellectual contributions." [25] [24] Reviewers for the San Francisco Chronicle, [41] the American Prospect, [42] and the Harvard Law Review [43] argued that a critical reevaluation of green politics was unwarranted because global warming had become a high-profile issue and the Democratic Congress was preparing to act.

"An Ecomodernist Manifesto"

In April 2015, "An Ecomodernist Manifesto" was issued by John Asafu-Adjaye, Linus Blomqvist, Stewart Brand, Barry Brook. Ruth DeFries, Erle Ellis, Christopher Foreman, David Keith, Martin Lewis, Mark Lynas, Ted Nordhaus, Roger A. Pielke, Jr., Rachel Pritzker, Joyashree Roy, Mark Sagoff, Michael Shellenberger, Robert Stone, and Peter Teague. It proposed dropping the goal of “sustainable development” and replacing it with a strategy to shrink humanity's footprint by using natural resources more intensively through technological innovation. The authors argue that economic development is necessary to preserve the environment. [44] [45]

According to The New Yorker , "most of the criticism of [the Manifesto] was more about tone than content. The manifesto's basic arguments, after all, are hardly radical. To wit: technology, thoughtfully applied, can reduce the suffering, human and otherwise, caused by climate change; ideology, stubbornly upheld, can accomplish the opposite." [20] At The New York Times , Eduardo Porter wrote approvingly of ecomodernism's alternative approach to sustainable development. [21] In an article titled "Manifesto Calls for an End to 'People Are Bad' Environmentalism", Slate's Eric Holthaus wrote "It's inclusive, it's exciting, and it gives environmentalists something to fight for for a change." [22] The science journal Nature editorialized the manifesto. [46]

The Manifesto was met with critiques similar to Gelobter's evaluation of "Death" and Sze and Ziser's analysis of Break Through. Environmental historian Jeremy Caradonna and environmental economist Richard B. Norgaard led a group of environmental scholars in a critique, arguing that Ecomodernism as presented in the Manifesto "violates everything we know about ecosystems, energy, population, and natural resources," and "Far from being an ecological statement of principles, the Manifesto merely rehashes the naïve belief that technology will save us and that human ingenuity can never fail." Further, "The Manifesto suffers from factual errors and misleading statements." [14]

T.J. Demos agreed with Caradonna, and wrote in 2017 that "What is additionally striking about the Ecomodernist document, beyond its factual weaknesses and ecological falsehoods, is that there is no mention of social justice or democratic politics," and "no acknowledgement of the fact that big technologies like nuclear reinforce centralized power, the military-industrial complex, and the inequalities of corporate globalization." [13]

Breakthrough Journal

In 2011, Breakthrough published the first issue of the Breakthrough Journal, which aims to "modernize political thought for the 21st century". [47] The New Republic called Breakthrough Journal "among the most complete efforts to provide a fresh answer to" the question of how to modernize liberal thought, [48] and the National Review called it "the most promising effort at self-criticism by our liberal cousins in a long time". [49]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Stewart Brand</span> American writer (born 1938)

Stewart Brand is an American project developer and writer, best known as the co-founder and editor of the Whole Earth Catalog. He has founded a number of organizations, including the WELL, the Global Business Network, and the Long Now Foundation. He is the author of several books, most recently Whole Earth Discipline: An Ecopragmatist Manifesto.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jevons paradox</span> Efficiency leads to increased demand

In economics, the Jevons paradox occurs when technological progress increases the efficiency with which a resource is used, but the falling cost of use induces increases in demand enough that resource use is increased, rather than reduced. Governments, both historical and modern, typically expect that energy efficiency gains will lower energy consumption, rather than expecting the Jevons paradox.

Neo-Luddism or new Luddism is a philosophy opposing many forms of modern technology. The term Luddite is generally used as a pejorative applied to people showing technophobic leanings. The name is based on the historical legacy of the English Luddites, who were active between 1811 and 1817. While the original Luddites were mostly concerned with the economic implications of improving technology in regard to industrialization, neo-Luddites tend to have a broader and more holistic distrust of technological improvement.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Roger A. Pielke Jr.</span> American academic (born 1968)

Roger A. Pielke Jr. is an American political scientist and professor, and was the director of the Sports Governance Center within the Department of Athletics at the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research at the University of Colorado Boulder.

Technogaianism is a bright green environmentalist stance of active support for the research, development and use of emerging and future technologies to help restore Earth's environment. Technogaianists argue that developing safe, clean, alternative technology should be an important goal of environmentalists and environmentalism.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mark Lynas</span> British author and journalist (born 1973)

Mark Lynas is a British author and journalist whose work is focused on environmentalism and climate change. He has written for the New Statesman, The Ecologist, Granta and Geographical magazines, and The Guardian and The Observer newspapers in the UK, as well as the New York Times and Washington Post in the United States; he also worked on and appeared in the film The Age of Stupid. He was born in Fiji, grew up in Peru, Spain and the United Kingdom and holds a degree in history and politics from the University of Edinburgh. He has published several books including Six Degrees: Our Future on a Hotter Planet (2007) and The God Species: Saving the Planet in the Age of Humans (2011). Lynas is research and climate lead for the Alliance for Science and is co-founder of the pro-science environmental network RePlanet. Since 2009 he has been climate advisor to former president of the Maldives Mohamed Nasheed, and he currently works to assist Nasheed with the Climate Vulnerable Forum, a group of the world's most climate-vulnerable 58 developing countries. He is a strategic advisor for the international ecomodernist NGO WePlanet. He has co-authored a number of peer-reviewed scientific publications, including a 2021 paper which found that the consensus on anthropogenic climate change in the scholarly literature now exceeds 99%.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">William Nordhaus</span> American economist (born 1941)

William Dawbney Nordhaus is an American economist. He was a Sterling Professor of Economics at Yale University, best known for his work in economic modeling and climate change, and a co-recipient of the 2018 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences. Nordhaus received the prize "for integrating climate change into long-run macroeconomic analysis".

<i>Hell and High Water</i> (book) 2006 book by Joseph J. Romm

Hell and High Water: Global Warming – the Solution and the Politics – and What We Should Do is a book by author, scientist, and former U.S. Department of Energy official Joseph J. Romm, published December 26, 2006. The author is "one of the world's leading experts on clean energy, advanced vehicles, energy security, and greenhouse gas mitigation."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Michael Shellenberger</span> American author and environmental policy writer (born 1971)

Michael D. Shellenberger is a professor, author, and journalist who writes on a wide range of topics including free speech, homelessness, and the environment. He is a co-founder of the Breakthrough Institute and the California Peace Coalition. Shellenberger founded the pro-nuclear non-profit Environmental Progress in 2016.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ruth DeFries</span> American geographer

Ruth S. DeFries is an environmental geographer who specializes in the use of remote sensing to study Earth's habitability under the influence of human activities, such as deforestation, that influence regulating biophysical and biogeochemical processes. She was one of 24 recipients of the 2007 MacArthur Fellowship, and was elected to the United States National Academy of Sciences in 2006.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Robert Stone (director)</span> British-American documentary filmmaker

Robert Stone is a British-American documentary filmmaker. His work has been screened at dozens of film festivals and televised around the world, notably seven of his films have appeared on PBS's American Experience series and four of his films have premiered at the Sundance Film Festival. He is an Oscar nominee for Best Feature Documentary and a three-time Emmy nominee for Exceptional Merit in Documentary Filmmaking.

<i>Break Through</i> (book) 2007 book by Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger

Break Through: From the Death of Environmentalism to the Politics of Possibility, first published in October 2007, is a book written by Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger, both long-time environmental strategists. Break Through is an argument for a positive, "post-environmental" politics that abandons the traditional environmentalist focus on nature protection for a focus on creating a new sustainable economy.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Barry Brook (scientist)</span> Australian scientist

Barry William Brook is an Australian scientist. He is an ARC Australian Laureate Professor and Chair of Environmental Sustainability at the University of Tasmania in the Faculty of Science, Engineering & Technology. He was formerly an ARC Future Fellow in the School of Earth and Environmental Sciences at the University of Adelaide, Australia, where he held the Sir Hubert Wilkins Chair of Climate Change from 2007 to 2014. He was also Director of Climate Science at the Environment Institute.

Ted Nordhaus is an American author and the director of research at The Breakthrough Institute. He has co-edited and written a number of books, including Break Through: From the Death of Environmentalism to the Politics of Possibility (2007) and An Ecomodernist Manifesto (2015) with collaborator Michael Shellenberger.

The green bubble is an economic theory that the world is facing an over-investment in renewable energy and that the current levels of debts in many clean technology companies are unsustainable. As the interest rate rises many clean technology projects will go bust, a major setback for the renewable energy industry.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ecomodernism</span> Environmental philosophy

Ecomodernism is an environmental philosophy which argues that technological development can protect nature and improve human wellbeing through eco-economic decoupling, i.e., by separating economic growth from environmental impacts.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Zion Lights</span> British science communicator and environmental activist (born 1984)

Zion Lights is a British author and activist known for her environmental work and science communication.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Michel Gelobter</span>

Michel Gelobter is an American born social entrepreneur especially in the field of clean technology, who is also known for his research into and advocacy for environmental justice and social sector innovation.

<i>Apocalypse Never</i> 2020 book by Michael Shellenberger

Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All is a 2020 book by Michael Shellenberger.

References

  1. ↑ Barringer, Felicity (February 6, 2005). "Paper Sets Off a Debate on Environmentalism's Future". The New York Times . ISSN   0362-4331.
  2. ↑ "Michael Shellenberger". The Breakthrough Institute.
  3. ↑ "The Breakthrough Institute". GuideStar.
  4. ↑ "The Breakthrough Institute". Open990.
  5. ↑ "About". The Breakthrough Institute. Retrieved April 28, 2022.
  6. ↑ Porter, Eduardo (April 15, 2015). "A Call to Look Past Sustainable Development". New York Times.
  7. ↑ Kloor, Keith (December 12, 2012). "The Great Schism in the Environmental Movement". Slate.
  8. ↑ "Orion Magazine - Evolve". Orionmagazine.org. Archived from the original on January 7, 2012. Retrieved August 13, 2018.
  9. ↑ Samuelsohn, Daren (July 26, 2011). "Report: Treat climate change like 'Fight Club'". Politico.
  10. ↑ Friedman, Lisa (July 26, 2011). "'Climate pragmatists' call for an end to Kyoto process". ClimateWire.
  11. ↑ Walsh, Bryan (July 26, 2011). "Fighting Climate Change by Not Focusing on Climate Change". Time– via content.time.com.
  12. 1 2 3 Ziser, Michael; Sze, Julie (2007). "Climate Change, Environmental Aesthetics, and Global Environmental Justice Cultural Studies". Discourse. 29 (2/3): 384–410. doi:10.1353/dis.2007.a266843. JSTOR   41389785. S2CID   143411081.
  13. 1 2 3 Demos, TJ (2017). Against the Anthropocene: Visual Culture and Environment Today. MIT Press. pp. 46–49. ISBN   9783956792106.
  14. 1 2 Caradonna, Jeremy L.; Norgaard, Richard B.; Borowy, Iris (2015). "A Degrowth Response to an Ecomodernist Manifesto". Resilience.
  15. 1 2 3 4 "The Breakthrough Institute's Inconvenient History with Al Gore". ethics.harvard.edu. April 14, 2014.
  16. 1 2 Mann, Michael E.; Tom Toles (2016). The Madhouse Effect: How Climate Change Denial Is Threatening Our Planet, Destroying Our Politics, and Driving Us Crazy. Columbia University Press.
  17. 1 2 Yglesias, Matthew (January 13, 2008). "Beyond Mother Nature". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved June 28, 2022.
  18. 1 2 Jonathan Adler, The Wall Street Journal, 27 November 2007, The Lowdown on Doomsday: Why the public shrugs at global warming
  19. 1 2 "A Climate Change Reading List For Laypeople". Talk of the Nation . December 3, 2009. NPR. Retrieved December 5, 2009.
  20. 1 2 "Is the "Ecomodernist Manifesto" the Future of Environmentalism?". The New Yorker . June 2, 2015. Retrieved June 29, 2022.
  21. 1 2 Porter, Eduardo (April 14, 2015). / 'A Call to Look Past Sustainable Development." The New York Times.
  22. 1 2 Holthaus, Eric (20 April 2015). "Manifesto Calls for an End to "People Are Bad" Environmentalism." Slate.
  23. 1 2 Joe Romm, Grist, 3 October 2007, Debunking Shellenberger & Nordhaus: Part I: The death of 'The Death of Environmentalism' Archived December 7, 2008, at the Wayback Machine
  24. 1 2 Roberts, David (June 14, 2013). "Some thoughts on "Pandora's Promise" and the nuclear debate". Grist. Retrieved October 25, 2022.
  25. 1 2 Roberts, David (April 27, 2011). "Why I've avoided commenting on Nisbet's 'Climate Shift' report". Grist. Retrieved October 25, 2022.
  26. ↑ "The Breakthrough Institute". Charity Navigator.
  27. ↑ "Technological Solutions to Environmental Challenges". The Breakthrough Institute. Retrieved March 10, 2022.
  28. ↑ Totty, Michael (April 17, 2010). "Nuclear's Fall—and Rise". Wall Street Journal– via www.wsj.com.
  29. ↑ "Boundary conditions". The Economist. June 16, 2012.
  30. ↑ Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger, "Second Life: A Manifeto for a New Environmentalism," The New Republic, September 24, 2007
  31. ↑ Richard Harris, "Putting a Financial Spin on Global Warming," NPR News, June 24, 2009
  32. ↑ Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger, "How to Change the Global Energy Conversation, Wall Street Journal, November 28, 2012
  33. ↑ "Programs". Breakthrough Institute.
  34. ↑ Symons, Jonathan (2019). Ecomodernism: Technology, Politics and The Climate Crisis. Polity. ISBN   978-1509531196.
  35. ↑ Garofoli, Joe (June 16, 2011). "Thinkers take liberalism apart in order to save it". San Francisco Chronicle.
  36. ↑ Walsh, Bryan (July 29, 2009). "Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger - Heroes of the Environment 2008". Time. Archived from the original on July 29, 2009. Retrieved September 18, 2022.
  37. ↑ "Dead movement walking?". Salon.com. January 14, 2005. Retrieved August 13, 2018.
  38. ↑ Barringer, Felicity (February 6, 2005). "Paper Sets Off a Debate on Environmentalism's Future". The New York Times.
  39. ↑ Gelobter, Michel; Dorsey, Michael; Fields, Leslie; Goldtooth, Tom; Mendiratta, Anuja; Moore, Richard; Morello-Frosch, Rachel; Shepard, Peggy M.; Torres, Gerald (May 27, 2005). "The Soul of Environmentalism Rediscovering transformational politics in the 21st century". Grist. Archived from the original on July 11, 2005.
  40. ↑ "'Break Through' The Book". The Breakthrough Institute. Retrieved March 10, 2022. The planet is getting hotter, faster, and the old environmental solutions cannot save us. What's required is not that we constrain human power but rather unleash it. In opposition to regulation-focused greens and anti-government conservatives, the authors call for epic government investment in a new economy, and herald a "politics of possibility" — one of hope and renewal — to overcome global warming and allow America to become, once again, a great nation.
  41. ↑ Robert Collier, San Francisco Chronicle, 7 October 2007, Review: Why get so heated about global warming?
  42. ↑ Kate Sheppard, American Prospect, 11 October 2007, Life After the Death of Environmentalism
  43. ↑ Douglas Kysar, Harvard Law Review, June 2008, The Consultants' Republic Archived January 31, 2009, at the Wayback Machine
  44. ↑ "An Ecomodernist Manifesto". Ecomodernism.org. Retrieved April 17, 2015. Intensifying many human activities — particularly farming, energy extraction, forestry, and settlement — so that they use less land and interfere less with the natural world is the key to decoupling human development from environmental impacts. These socioeconomic and technological processes are central to economic modernization and environmental protection. Together they allow people to mitigate climate change, to spare nature, and to alleviate global poverty.
  45. ↑ Eduardo Porter (April 14, 2015). "A Call to Look Past Sustainable Development". The New York Times. Retrieved April 17, 2015. On Tuesday, a group of scholars involved in the environmental debate, including Professor Roy and Professor Brook, Ruth DeFries of Columbia University, and Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus of the Breakthrough Institute in Oakland, Calif., issued what they are calling the "Eco-modernist Manifesto."
  46. ↑ "Decoupled ideals: 'Ecomodernist Manifesto' reframes sustainable development, but the goal remains the same." (21 April 2015). Nature .
  47. ↑ "About". Breakthrough Journal.
  48. ↑ Schmitt, Mark (June 30, 2011). "Breakthrough Journal: Has Liberalism Entered a Post-Obama Era?". New Republic.
  49. ↑ Hayward, Steven (July 18, 2011). "An Environmental Reformation". National Review.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.