Last summer, I put together a list of the top 10 climate blogs. For the sake of objectivity, I used Technorati, which ranks all blogs by "authority" (the number of blogs linking to it). The lower the rank, the better.
One of the blogs on that list, It's Getting Hot In Here, has updated it (old ranks in parenthesis):
New ranking - Blog - Last year's ranking - Tagline
10. Accuweather Climate Blog (68,071 - #10) -- "Global warming news, science, myths, articles."
9. Climate Feedback (46,821 - #9) -- "An informal forum for debate and commentary on climate science."
8. A Few Things Ill Considered (35,362 - #2) -- "A layman's take on the science of global warming, featuring a guide on How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic."
7. Climate Ark (22,922 - #5) -- "Climate change and global warming portal."
6. Climate of Our Future (15,042 - #8) -- "A discussion on climate change."
5. It's Getting Hot In Here (13,992 - #7) -- "Dispatches from the youth climate movement."
4. Celsias (8,394 - #3) -- "Cooling the planet one project at a time."
3. DeSmogBlog (6,671 - #4) -- "Clearing the PR pollution that clouds climate science."
2. Climate Progress (4,359 - #6) -- "An insider's view of climate science, politics, and solutions."
... and the reigning champ:
1. RealClimate (3,222 - #1) -- "Climate science from climate scientists."
But there is more than one way to rank blogs. You could, for instance, rank blogs by traffic using Alexa, which also allows you to directly compare different sites over time. In any case, the blog-ranking business should, I think, be left to others -- so they can take the heat for who is included and who is excluded, for what counts as a dedicated climate blog, and what doesn't. There are lots of others related websites that are certainly must reads, like Dot Earth.
In any case, if you are interested in keeping up to date on climate issues, then you should be regularly looking at several of the above blogs. I certainly do.
This post was created for ClimateProgress.org, a project of the Center for American Progress Action Fund.
Bloggers of all stripes grab a piece of the climate pie for Blog Action Day 2009
Comments
View as Flat
stevenearlsalmony Posted 6:14 am
24 Sep 2008
In light of the increasing number of emergent and convergent, human-driven challenges that appear before the family of humanity on the far horizon, I believe it is vital for the climate blogging community to come together and, if only for a few moments, "get real" about what our species is doing, here and now, in these early years of Century XXI, to extirpate biodiversity, degrade the environment, dissipate Earth's resources and threaten the very existence of life as we know it.
Once the economy has been bailed out, I would like the self-proclaimed Masters of the Universe among us, the ones with hundred of millions of dollars in their priviate bank accounts, who are so adamant and urgent in their appeals to save the economy, to turn their attention, energy and vast wealth to the task of saving Earth and its environs from ruination.
After all, what is the point of choosing to save the economy now if that choice means we could inadvertently ravage the Earth, upon which any manmade construction, even the colossal global economy, depends for its existence?
What kind of economy can function without adequate resources and ecosystem services only the Earth provides?
Steven Earl Salmony
AWAREness Campaign on The Human Population, established 2001
http://sustainabilitysoutheast.org/index.php
Permalink
Jonas Posted 9:29 pm
24 Sep 2008
We don't need to stabilize at 450ppm or so, which is what most climate blogs in Romm's list seem to be okay with. We need to go much further. We need to go beyond zero emissions.
Permalink
vakibs Posted 11:33 pm
24 Sep 2008
Essentially it means we can burn oil and natural gas (not oil-shale / tar sands), but no more coal.
450 ppm is noway close to an ecologically acceptable limit. With sustained forestry and biomass, this should be brought down to 350 ppm in the next 100 years.
We should use 4th generation nuclear power in this endeavour. Jonas, your friends on the beyond-zero-emissions are net yet in tune with Dr Hansen's message. Their energy plan has lots of natural gas. It can be done for probably Victoria, Australia but not for the whole earth.
One world. Think global.
Let's think in terms of eco-dollars.
Permalink