A student at the School of International and Public Affairs was pleasantly surprised by the range of attendees at a recent Young Professionals in Energy event in New York City.

Throwing out the changes could make the new administration’s climate initiatives harder to implement.

The outdated treaty is an obstacle to addressing climate change. A legal expert weighs the pros and cons of several pathways around it.

A new report details a plan to kickstart energy innovation in the U.S.

Most economists and policy experts agree that the most effective and cheapest way to curb the carbon dioxide emissions that are warming the planet is to “put a price on carbon.” How effective are carbon taxes and cap and trade programs?

The United States has joined 185 countries in promising to curb carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions, develop other ways to mitigate the impacts and to make communities more resilient to climate change. So what exactly is the United States proposing to do?

Environmental protection and economic development have been integrated into the single overarching idea of “sustainability.” These are centrist public policy positions in the mainstream of politics here in New York State.

In the United States, our political process sends us strong signals about what problems and proposals can achieve agenda status. Increased federal support for science and technology will not be easy, but unlike a carbon tax, it is capable of drawing bipartisan support.

The idea behind the carbon tax is that by raising the price of fossil fuels, one promotes energy efficiency and, as fossil fuels become more expensive, renewable energy technologies will become more competitive. I am certain this is true. But few elected officials are going to advocate higher fossil fuel prices.

Pushker Kharecha and James E. Hansen write about their recent paper on the long-term health effects of nuclear power versus fossil fuels, and argue that nuclear power needs to be part of the solution to climate change.