February 8, 2011 12:44
There was a lot of hype in the papers today about some contest in Dallas with people running around, bumping into each other, dropping balls and otherwise exhaling a lot of greenhouse gases. We contemplated a discussion of the Superbowl but knew you would be more interested in some shameless marketing. So here's where we are: LexisNexis has nominated the blog for the first ever LexisNexis “2011 Top 50 Environmental Law & Climate Change Blogs.” In their words, “For the first time, the LexisNexis Environmental Law & Climate Change Community is honoring a select group of blogs that set the online standard for our practice area,” said Karen C. Yotis, ELCCC Community Manager, in an emailed statement to us.
As some of you may know, we initiated the blog, ClimateLawyers.com, in 2008, in the vanguard of those addressing climate issues in the legal profession. We have focused on not just being a news blog, but instead try to incorporate analysis in everything we post. We like to think that we are succeeding as our readership is consistently growing. The blog is dedicated to the discussion of legal, public policy, and business risk questions presented by climate change and renewable energy initiatives.
LexisNexis has created an online community page to allow members to provide commentary on the list. To show your support of ClimateLawyers.com, please click here.
The deadline for comments is February 14.
And since we promise analysis, here is some. In climate change circles, there has been much written about the conclusions that can be drawn from the hard data. The scientific community is agreed that climate change is occurring. It is also agreed that atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are the highest they have been in thousands and thousands of years. Where the controversy has been is whether one can conclude that anthropogenic carbon dioxide is the cause of climate change. Similarly here. The hard facts are the writings in the various blogs under consideration. There is no dispute that we and our peers labor to churn out our best thoughts. The question, though, is what are those thoughts' significance? And that in turn depends on who is reading, which in turn may depend on whether he or she has found what was in the blog worth reading before. So there is a large amount of serendipity in this blog competition and the ultimate conclusion may depend on exactly what question the judges ask. Be that as it may, if you have positive comments about our writing, we would be grateful if you would let the folks at LexisNexis know. Thanks.