IMG.displayed { display: block; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto }
  • PIELC 2015 Recap

    Changing Currents: A Reflection on PIELC 2015

    By Alexis Biddle, Anne Haugaard, Rory Isbell, Malia Losordo, and Tori Wilder

    The 33rd annual Public Interest Environmental Law Conference (PIELC) was held at the University of Oregon on March 5 – 8. All six keynote sessions were live-streamed on YouTube and may be viewed at https://www.youtube.com/user/lawpielc.

    This year’s conference featured over 120 panels, two workshops, and several film screenings. Despite substantial construction at the University, PIELC persevered. With limited classroom access and many panels resorting to standing room only, it was encouraging to see attendees enjoy the weekend and find their “piece of PIELC” to inspire them year-round.

    2015-03-08 11.29.16

    As the organizers of PIELC 2015, we chose the theme Changing Currents to signify society’s need to change courses from our environmentally catastrophic business-as-usual path. As the physical, biological, and chemical currents of our world change, we too must change our own currents and work collectively to mobilize and set humanity on a path toward resiliency.

    The conference opened with a blessing by Gordon Bettles, the steward of the Many Nations Longhouse and a member of the Klamath Tribes. Changing Current’s inaugural keynote featured internationally renowned journalist and activist Amy Goodman appearing by video and philosopher-writer-extraordinaire Kathleen Dean Moore. Goodman delivered a truly powerful address. She spoke of how our political system and media are systematically broken in their ability to address climate change and the need for the media to make the connection between extreme weather and the science of global climate change. She emphasized our nation’s power and responsibility to reign in global environmental devastation brought by United States-chartered companies. Kathleen Dean Moore called for us to “throw our stones” into the river of society, that we may alter its path and perhaps even change its direction.

    We were fortunate enough to have Bill McKibben grace us with his wisdom and inspiration via (carbon friendly, of course) video to kick off the Friday afternoon keynote. He brought home the deep changes the Earth and climate are undergoing and how we need to continue to press forward at this critical juncture in the climate movement. Gary Nabhan followed McKibbin with an illumination of his work on collaborative conservation of food producing landscapes. In his speech, Nabhan related these new collaborative efforts to the concept of the radical center – a place where the values, cultures, ideologies and faith intersect. The afternoon keynote ended with Antonio Oposa, Jr. of the Philippines. He provided an exceptional speech focusing on the importance of reducing carbon emissions from transportation through transforming the way we share space on public streets.

    Friday evening was special: two friends, and partners in saving us from ourselves, Severine Von Charner Fleming and Janelle Orsi took the stage. Fleming’s passion and creativity shined thought as she talked about the changing currents of agricultural land ownership and her efforts to pass farmland into the hands of the next generation of farmers. Orsi, who followed Fleming but invited her back on stage during her keynote, delivered a hilarious account of her work through cartoons and comedy. Orsi works to help communities become more efficient with their resources through establishing frameworks of trust and accountability among neighbors. She also works with Fleming to help secure land tenure for the next generation of farmers. Listening to both of these inspiring women was not only a treat, but also mind-opening and hilarious.

    It is important to include a younger perspective as we strategize how to change our currents, as the stones we cast land in our children’s river, not our own. On Saturday, fourteen-year-old Xiuhtezcatl Roske-Martinez used both speech and music to convey the critical role young people must play in healing our planet. Roske-Martinez has since spoken (again) before the United Nations, demanding that our governments take serious action. Wahleah Johns, of the Red Bottom People, closed the afternoon keynote with a presentation about her work to replace coal mining atop Black Mesa on Hopi and Navajo lands with renewable energy. She closed with a poignant reminder that our work as activists, students, and lawyers must be done to preserve pristine lands and leave a habitable earth to future generations.

    After ENR alumni gathered for the annual Alumni Reception in Gerlinger Lounge, Saturday evening’s keynotes began with the David Brower Lifetime Achievement Award presentation. This year, we honored University of Oregon Professor and ENR Faculty Director Mary Wood for her lifelong dedication to innovative legal scholarship, restoration of the public trust, and passionate activism. The award itself was a remnant piece of the former Elwha Dam, which we hoped would remind all present and future generations to “think like a river,” as Professor Wood has taught us all to do.

    Helen Slottje, winner of the 2014 Goldman Environmental Prize, followed the award ceremony. She shared her inspiring story as New York attorney turned community-organizer who rallied her neighbors to ban fracking through land use regulation. Under her innovative legal framework, the resulting ordinances withstood lawsuits and asserted communities rights over those of the fossil fuel industry. Derrick Evans then delivered a moving speech that followed his remarkable journey dedicated to protecting his home – the Turkey Creek Community – from encroaching urban development. The development has been erasing Turkey Creek’s rich history and subjecting it to increased flooding. Through the Turkey Creek Initiative, Evans is employing conservation and historical preservation laws to resist the undermining of his community.

    It is always a blessing when PIELC coincides with the Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide (ELAW) conference. This year, the ELAW conference took place the weekend before PIELC and we were honored to have many international environmentalists and attorneys join us and speak at PIELC. In his keynote address, Rugemeleza A.K. Nshala, a lawyer and activist from Tanzania, spoke of the ills that industrial mining has wrought on his nation, and the great  struggle we face in protecting the land, air, and water of East Africa from pollution and exploitation.

    The final keynote also featured Malia Akutagawa, a native Hawaiian and law professor. Akutagawa reminded us of the importance of remembering our roots, our history, and the importance of searching within cultural traditions and practices to find sustainable answers.

    As we write this reflection, there are activists suspended below the St. Johns Bridge in Portland, Oregon, and kayakers camped out below the bridge on the Willamette River. They do this to prevent an icebreaking vessel from reaching the Arctic Circle and enabling the extraction of fossil fuels from the formerly frozen polar ice cap. Whether we protest in the courtroom, in the community, or bravely dangling from a massive bridge, we all agree that this much is clear: we are upset by the events taking place around us and the time is now to rise up and change these currents.

    We had an incredible experience planning this year’s conference. In addition to the five of us, there were dozens of law student volunteers working around the clock to make Changing Currents a reality. We hope to see you next year from March 3-6, 2016, and we wish the best of luck to the 2016 PIELC Co-Directors!  

    Alexis Biddle is Co-Director of Land Air Water and a Sustainable Cities Initiative Fellow for the ENR Sustainable Land Use Project.  Anne Haugaard is President of the Student Bar Association, Staff Editor of the Western Environmental Law Update, and an Oregon Child Advocacy Project fellow. Malia Losordo is Marketing Director and Western Environmental Law Update Editor-in-Chief for Land Air Water and a Bowerman Fellow for the ENR Oceans, Coasts and Watersheds Project. Rory Isbell is Co-Director of Land Air Water and a Sustainable Cities Initiative Fellow for the ENR Sustainable Land Use Project. Tori Wilder is the Articles and Source Editor for the Journal of Environmental Law and Litigation, Secretary of Land Air Water, Secretary of Student Legal Advocates for Tribal Sovereignty, and a Global Environmental Democracy Project Fellow.  

     

  • PIELC 2014: Running Into Running Out

    By Gordon Levitt

    Four weeks ago, the 32nd annual Public Interest Environmental Law Conference: Running into Running Out, began with Dr. Michael Pavel (Chixapaid), introducing the conference with a traditional indigenous ceremony that got the EMU Ballroom buzzing (WATCH). Next, Professor John Bonine – Land Air Water’s Faculty Advisor – and the conference co-directors set the tone for PIELC 2014, challenging attendees to urgently act on the knowledge gained over the four-day conference. These introductions were followed by keynote addresses that presented a challenging contrast on civilization. The first set of speakers – Wen Tiejun and Zhihe Wang – are experts on ecological Marxism and constructive post-modernism, respectively, and are working to solve China’s daunting environmental challenges. As one of the oldest civilizations in the world, China’s history and ideas are crucial to understand if we are to form just solutions to the global environmental crisis. Their presentation provided the audience with a perspective that is rarely discussed in the U.S., yet is so important because the relationship between the U.S. and China is one of the defining relationships for global environmental governance in this century.

    The presentation by Chinese scholars was followed by Lierre Keith’s speech on the downsides of civilization, and how civilization is the root of environmental degradation. Although her solution to the ills of civilization are believed by many to be “radical,” and I certainly do not claim to be supportive of her views, I think the views are illustrative of the situation humanity is in, and of the possible reactions to the unprecedented speed at which the ecological web is unraveling. My personal opinion is that the tension between the Chinese speakers’ ideas on how to construct an ecological civilization and Keith’s ideas on how to deconstruct civilization spurred many to recognize the diversity of responses that humans are capable of implementing in response to the climate crisis. It is exactly this kind of discourse, and exactly this kind of unvarnished look at proposed solutions, that makes PIELC one of the most meaningful, and occasionally controversial, environmental conferences in the world.

    On Friday, former NOAA director Dr. Jane Lubchenco (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kyprqlMnvyw) and Vermont Law Professor Patrick Parenteau (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ajI4KUxOd8) delivered the lunch-time keynote addresses, focusing on the connections between science and policy. Some of the things that I learned during their speeches were the importance of building genuine relationships across political divides and the transformative impact of optimistic humor when communicating with a group of people. For the evening keynote, Dr. Stephen Corry from Survival International and Mary Pavel, Chief Counsel for the Senate’s committee on Indian Affairs, (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RcN8PTKdNg) discussed the historical and cultural dimensions of the relationship between environmentalism and development. Corry focused on the self-determination of indigenous peoples around the world and how the imposition of development, even if done in good faith, can destroy communities and traditional knowledge. Pavel discussed ongoing challenges in the relationship between tribal sovereigns and the US, as well as the conflicting environmental priorities of different tribes.

    One of the challenges of PIELC is the impossibility of engaging in all of the events. Following the end of the Friday keynote, my intent was to go to the Indigenous People’s Reception, but instead I had to rush off to pick up Dr. James Hansen from his hotel for an event. Due to miscommunication on my part, a ride had not been arranged for Dr. Hansen, and he did not know what his schedule was for that evening. When I showed up to his lodging, it was like a bad horror movie; no one was there and the hotel seemed deserted. I called Dr. Hansen and others repeatedly and eventually knocked on every door in the hotel, but no one was around. After 20 nervous minutes, Dr. Hansen wandered down to the lobby and apologizing for his cell phone being on vibrate while he was in the shower. Whew! Now that I had found him, we were finally off to a gathering of attorneys, law professors, and other engaged citizens working on the atmospheric trust legal efforts (http://ourchildrenstrust.org/legal). It was very exciting to meet many of the attorneys I have been working with over the past nine months as a law clerk for Our Children’s Trust, and to hear them pick the brain of Dr. Hansen about how the newest climate science should inform environmental legal and policy change.

    As exciting as the events of Friday had been, Saturday was even better in my opinion. The morning began with a breakfast with Dr. Hansen and other Environmental and Natural Resrouces Law Fellows, followed by a presentation to the University of Oregon Climate Change Research Group. However, the most impactful moment of the conference for me came during the Saturday afternoon keynotes (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhgVHWmcCrQ). The first set of keynoters – Lauren Regan from the Civil Liberties Defense Center and Richard Monje from Workers United/SEIU and Move to Amend – provided an incisive take on building the environmental movement through innovative coalition building. Their speeches were followed by the introduction of two tribesmen from the Amungme and Kamoro tribes of West Papua. They came to tell the audience about the environmental and cultural damage that the world’s largest gold mine has done to their ancestral land, and to share their struggle to change mining practices in their homeland. This presentation was the most heart-wrenching of the weekend for me because it demonstrated the clear and present paradoxes of modernity and environmental protection. On one hand technology allows us to more efficiently manage resource usage and to monitor changes, but that same technology is often a product of archaic and destructive practices that are devastating to some communities. At the end of this emotional presentation, the presenters invited all of the PIELC co-directors up to the stage and bestowed upon us stunning, handmade gifts. We each received a hand-woven bag, and were told that we should carry what we had learned in this bag. My bag is now the centerpiece of the art collection in front of my desk, reminding me of what I have learned and the expectations that accompany that knowledge.

    After a short respite, two of the most fun PIELC events rolled around – the student reception and the Environmental and Natural Resources (ENR) Law Alumni reception. It was great to mingle with environmental law students from around the country and to (re)connect with UO law alumni, many of whom travel to PIELC every year. As these receptions came to a close, my most anticipated moment of the conference arrived: the keynote addresses of Dr. James Hansen, the former director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, and University of Oregon Law Professor Mary Wood (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5kSlsPctWo). Their groundbreaking work to understand climate science and environmental law, respectively, have been the guiding forces behind my work as a law clerk for Our Children’s Trust and as a fellow for the ENR Center’s Conservation Trust Project. The evening began with the presentation of the David Brower Lifetime Achievement Award to five long-time employees of the Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide (ELAW), and then segued to the world premier of the 10th film in the series: Stories of Trust: Youth Calling for Climate Recovery. The film featured Dr. Hansen, Professor Wood, and a number of other important figures in the fields of environmental science and law, and contextualized the interconnections between science, law, and communication that will be so important in the years ahead. Next, Dr. Hansen laid out the state of the climate and the need to severely reduce fossil fuel use NOW, and Professor Wood called for a holistic transformation of environmental law in the U.S. and around the world. I was truly blown away by the impact of these presentations upon the audience of nearly 800, and could barely contain my excitement to be returning to work for Our Children’s Trust this coming summer.

    On the final day of the conference, Heather Milton-Lightening, the Co-Director of the Indigenous Tar Sands Campaign, and Dr. Jill Stein, 2012 Green Party Presidential Candidate, delivered powerful keynote addresses to conclude PIELC 2014. They spoke about the growing mass movement that is mobilizing to stop dirty energy, promote renewable energy, and build healthier communities (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wY9TJu12Ajw). Dr. Stein also announced the launch of the Global Climate Convergence, to take place this spring between Earth Day and May Day (http://globalclimateconvergence.org/). I am hopeful that a global outpouring of actions over these ten days will show our political leaders that a critical mass of society wants, and is ready to work for, serious efforts to create a sustainable future.

    Ultimately, looking back on the conference, one of Professor Wood’s statements is going to stick with me. During her keynote, she went out of her way to thank the students of Land Air Water for organizing PIELC, saying that we will never see or know 99% of the synapses that we facilitated at this year’s conference, but that these conversations will have transformative impacts in the years ahead. This statement alone made all of the conference organizing over the past 10 months worth it, but then something more happened. I witnessed two of the conversations that could have a huge impact moving forward. The first conversation was between the Amungme and Kamoro tribesmen and Stephen Corry from Survival International. Although they had worked together previously, the opportunity to connect in person allowed them to discuss strategy for how to move forward with the protection of the tribes’ land and culture. The second conversation was between Professor Wood and Dr. Jill Stein – two of the most radiant advocates for a greener, cleaner future that I have yet met. I’m not sure what they talked about, but I can only imagine that some big ideas will be forthcoming.

    In closing, I want to thank the entire team of PIELC gurus and volunteers, the staff and faculty of the law school, and all of the conference attendees for making this year’s conference such a resounding success. In particular, I am thankful for the opportunity to have worked with the other conference co-directors, Land Air Water’s treasurer, and two amazing 1L representatives to organize this year’s conference. I am confident in the future of Land Air Water and PIELC, and cannot wait to see what next year’s organizers will bring to PIELC 2015.

    Gordon Levitt was a conference co-director for the 2014 PIELC and is a second-year law student also pursuing a Masters degree in Conflict and Dispute Resolution. He is a lifelong resident of Oregon and a graduate of the University of Oregon Robert D. Clark Honors College, where he studied Political Science and Business Administration. Ultimately, he aims to help resolve international environmental conflicts by protecting the environment and encouraging sustainable progress. Outside of class, he is active in the local Sierra Club chapter and enjoys skiing, hiking, and other adventures in Oregon’s great outdoors.

  • Student Articles: Nate Bellinger

    The Environmental Threat We Would Rather Ignore: Overconsumption

    By Nate Bellinger(i)

    Student Scholarship- Nate BellingerWhen the population of the world reached seven billion people in October of 2011, many environmentalists used the occasion to renew their claims that overpopulation is the foremost environmental threat we are facing and will lead to ecological destruction and natural resource deficits. Overpopulation is definitely an important issue that we all should take seriously. However, in addition to overpopulation, an equal, if not greater, threat to the environment is overconsumption of finite natural resources. Here, I argue that overconsumption by the world’s wealthiest people, and the negative externalities of this overconsumption, is one of the most pressing threats to our environment and something that we should all be paying more attention to and be thinking about ways to address.

    Blaming overpopulation alone for the environmental problems that we are facing is a too simplistic approach; because the point at which the Earth is “overpopulated,” or put differently, has reached its carrying capacity, necessarily depends on how many resources people are consuming. An overly simplistic example may help illustrate this point. Say there are 100 units of fresh water on Earth. If everyone consumed 20 units of freshwater, Earth’s carrying capacity would be five people. If however, everyone consumed one unit of water, Earth’s carrying capacity would be 100 people. Thus, population and consumption are inextricably linked – the more people consume, the fewer
    people Earth can support. If we did not consume so many resources, population would not necessarily be such a pressing environmental problem.

    Overconsumption exists when resources are consumed at an unsustainable level as measured by the ecosystem’s capacity. This is a problem because we live on a planet with finite natural resources. Some of the most critical natural resources that we rely on include freshwater, forests, topsoil, biodiversity, marine fish stocks, and clean air.

    Today, we find ourselves facing a situation where overconsumption of natural resources is contributing significantly to deforestation, overdrawn rivers and aquifers, landscape degradation from
    mining, and other environmental problems. Furthermore, the negative externalities of this overconsumption are polluting rivers and oceans, contributing to climate change, and making people sick. It is time that we recognize overconsumption as one of the more serious threats facing our environment and begin thinking about ways to address the problem.

    Overconsumption in Developed Countries

    The world’s wealthiest billion people, primarily living in developed countries like the United States, consume far more resources than is ecologically sustainable on average. We(ii) buy cell phones (which we upgrade every two years); we have TVs, video game consoles, and cable boxes in multiple rooms in our house; we buy lots of cars(iii) (which are much bigger than they need to be); our houses (which are also unnecessarily large) contain appliances such as air conditioners, dryers, dishwashers, and microwaves; and we are constantly buying new clothes, shoes, toys, and other household items. Consuming these products is not necessarily bad, but increasingly we are consuming these things excessively and are discarding and replacing things that are still perfectly functional. For example, two-thirds of appliances that are disposed of still work.(iv)

    In addition to all the “stuff ” we consume, we also consume an inordinate amount of fossil fuels – coal, oil, and natural gas. These fuels power the cars and planes that enable us to travel around the world, heat and cool our homes, and provide us with electricity for our homes and for manufacturing. Again, this is not inherently bad, but we use far more fossil fuels than is necessary or sustainable, with perilous consequences for the climate.

    We also consume many products that are used just once before ending up in a landfill. Every year, Americans use more than one billion plastic bags and throw away enough paper and plastic cups, spoons, and forks to circle to equator 300 times. In the United States, we consume 1,500 plastic water bottles every second.(v) We also consume tons (literally) of paper and cardboard, glass, aluminum, and other materials, which are used just once before being discarded (Recycling helps, but not consuming these products in the first place would be much better.) No matter what indicator is used, the fact is that the world’s wealthiest are consuming a staggering amount of resources, far exceeding the sustainable level of consumption.

    What is particularly troubling about overconsumption is the inequality in who is overconsuming.  Unsustainable levels of consumption are generally found in affluent societies such as the United States, Canada, Europe, Japan, and Australia (countries where population growth is generally not perceived to be a problem). However, many of the externalities of this consumption are born by the poorest people. Carbon emissions, an indicator of fossil fuel consumption, provide a vivid example of this inequality – the world’s richest half-billion people, 7% of the global population, are responsible for 50% of the world’s CO2 emissions, while the world’s poorest 50% are responsible for just 7% of CO2emissions.vi American’s have a particularly large carbon footprint – our per capita CO2 emissions are second in the world among all major countries (Australia is number one).(vii) The carbon emissions of one American today are equivalent to the emissions of 4 Chinese, 20 Indians, 30 Pakistanis, 40 Nigerians,or250Ethiopians.(viii) These emissions are accelerating climate change, which affects us all but has particularly negative consequences on the world’s poorest people.

    In short, we are faced with an undeniable situation where a small number of people are consuming far more than their share of the planet’s natural resources to the detriment of the planet and to the detriment of the poorest people.

    It is worth noting briefly that overconsumption is not inevitable, and, in fact, has been increasing in recent decades. Although there are various factors contributing to this rise in consumption, the advertising industry is a major contributor. The average American is exposed to 3000 advertisements a day – and these ads tell us that we will be happier, sexier, and cooler with a new car, a bigger TV, the latest clothing style, and the newest cell phone or iPod. In 2012, there were 36 companies that spent more than one billion dollars on advertising, primarily to convince people to consume more of their products.(ix) The influence and success of advertising campaigns in encouraging people to consume more goods should not be underestimated.

    What Can We Do About Overconsumption?

    Admittedly, figuring out how to address the issue of overconsumption is challenging (though no more challenging than figuring out how to deal with the very sensitive and morally-charged issue of overpopulation). Here, I explore some preliminary thoughts on things that we as individuals and as the Sierra Club can do to address the issue of overconsumption; my hope is that this article will encourage others to think of their own ideas and ways to contribute, as well.

    One of the most important things we need to do is to decouple the link between consumption and happiness. While
    advertisers spend billions convincing us that buying stuff will make us happy, there are numerous studies that support the notion that once people’s basic necessities are met (mainly food and shelter), consuming additional products will not make you any happier.(x) The fact that you can’t buy and consume your way to happiness is great news. It means that many people may not need to work so hard to make so much money in order to buy stuff that they don’t need and won’t make them any happier. Getting this message out is an important step that will hopefully encourage people to think more critically about why we unnecessarily consume so much stuff.

    We also need to do more to educate ourselves and others about the true environmental impacts of our consumption. Sometimes this information can be hard to come by; at other times, it is out there, but we don’t want to hear it. Before buying a new cell phone or flying on an airplane, we need to be aware of how that decision will affect the environment and think hard about whether the negative impacts are justified. If people had a better understanding of the true environmental impacts of their decisions, it might encourage them to consume less.

    There are a number of lifestyle and cultural changes that we can promote to reduce consumption. One example is promoting a sharing economy, where people share various goods and services. For example, each household probably does not need its own lawnmower, vacuum cleaner, tool shed, or car. Instead, these products could be shared among households. This trend is catching on as more neighborhoods and communities are beginning to have tool- lending libraries and car sharing opportunities. Not only does sharing resources help reduce consumption, but it also tends to create a sense of community, which has many additional benefits.

    Finally, we should be thinking about ways in which to incorporate the negative externalities of the goods and services we consume into their cost. One way to do this is through a carbon tax.(xi) Such a tax would incorporate the negative externalities of carbon pollution into the
    cost of our decisions that result in fossil fuel consumption. If we were forced to pay for the true costs of all the fossil fuels we burn, we would very likely consume less. Whatever approach or combination of approaches is taken, it is extremely important for the sake of the environment and our overall well being to reduce the current levels of consumption in developed countries.

    Conclusion

    I believe that we, as Americans, the most proflagate consumers of natural resources in the world, have a responsibility and an opportunity to reduce our levels of consumption in order to minimize the negative impact we have upon the environment. Currently, we are consuming far more resources than is sustainable, with perilous consequences for the environment. Addressing the issue of overconsumption will not be easy, but it is critical if
    we want to leave a habitable planet for future generations.

     

    ——————-

     

    (i) Nate Bellinger is on the Executive Committee of the Many Rivers Group of the Sierra Club and is a law student at the University of Oregon. Please send correspondences to natebellinger@gmail.com.

    (ii) I use the term “we” loosely because most Americans and readers of this publication will fall into the class of the world’s wealthiest billion people.

    (iii) The United States leads the world (excluding Monaco and San Marino, two small countries with a combined population of less than 70,000) in automobiles per capita.

    (iv) Clean Air Council. (2013). Waste and Recycling Facts. Retrieved from
    http://www.cleanair.org/Waste/wasteFacts.html.

    (v) Scholtus, P. (2009). The US Consumes 1500 Plastic Water Bottles Every Second. Retrieved from http://www.treehugger.com/clean-water/the-us-consumes-1500-plastic-water- bottles-every-second-a-fact-by-watershed.html.

    (vi) The Guardian. (2009). Consumption Dwarfs Population As Main Environmental Threat. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2009/apr/15/consumption- versus-population-environmental-impact.

    (vii) Pettinger, T. (2012). List of CO2 Emissions Per Capita. Retrieved from http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/6131/economics/list-of-co2-emissions-per-capita/.

    (viii) The Guardian. (2009). Consumption Dwarfs Population As Main Environmental Threat. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2009/apr/15/consumption- versus-population-environmental-impact.

    (ix) Austin, C. (2012). The Billionaires’ Club. Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com/ the-35-companies-that-spent-1-billion-on-ads-in-2011-2012-11?op=1.

    (x) For example, see Rosenbloom, S. (2010) But Will It Make You Happy? Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/08/business/08consume.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0; Schwartz, B. (2012). Consumption Can Make Us Sad? Science Says We Can Be Happy With Less. Retrieved from http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/01/14/consumption- makes-us-sad-science-says-we-can-be-happy-with-less.html.

    (xi) For more information about a carbon tax, see Parry, W. (2012). James Hansen, Climate Scientist, Suggests Price on Carbon. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com /2012/10/11/james-hansen-climate-change-carbon_n_1959268.html; http://www.carbontax.org/.