I’m sure this does not come as a big shock — but it isn’t the President. Still, Rolling Stone has unearthed “thousands of pages of internal documents” detailing the full extent of the malevolent role played by the Vice President — hey they don’t call him Vice for nothing!

It is no secret that industry-connected appointees within the White House have worked actively to distort the findings of federal climate scientists, playing down the threat of climate change. But a new investigation by Rolling Stone reveals that those distortions were sanctioned at the highest levels of our government, in a policy formulated by the vice president, implemented by the White House Council on Environmental Quality and enforced by none other than Karl Rove.

The article is coincident with the launch of a 20,000-word, 4-part series by the Washington Post delving into Cheney’s power, how he spies on White House staffers, and how “Stealth is among Cheney’s most effective tools.”

What kinds of things did Cheney do on climate?

Read more

Even from abroad, you can see the United Kingdom’s internal gears cranking, investigating global warming solutions and mapping out their strategy.

London’s mayor has recently announced a climate change plan to encourage residents (7.5 million of them) and local businesses to choose green options for power generation and use. The scale of the city and the committment, which is to cut emissions 60% in the next two decades, is an unprecedented combination.

Similarly, the UK government has circulated a Draft Climate Change Bill and is open to suggestions for the next six months. The bill is agressive and unique in that it calls for short-, medium-, and long-term targets. Ultimately, the UK aims to cut its emissions by 60% by 2050. In order to monitor its progress, the country proposes budget periods of 5 years each that are established for the successive fifteen years. Their technique is meant to give emitters flexibility within 5-year increments but a clear idea of the future allowances.

All of this in the context of a new EU pledge to generate 20% of its power from green sources and to cut emissions by at least 20% below 1990 levels (30% if others join). Of course there is still a lot left to be discussed and decided – but are we behind or what?