Expanding our environment coverage

May 5, 2009

When the Reuters.com editorial and business teams met last year to frame our priorities for 2009, one of the ideas that most excited us was an expansion of our environment section. Our environment correspondents around the world were already ramping up their coverage of the business of clean technology, anticipating increased demand for news about how companies were addressing the challenges of climate change and pollution. This was before the election of President Obama and the promise of economic stimulus money for environmental projects.

So the timing felt right when we relaunched our Environment section as Green Business last week. You’ll still find all the news that was on the old page, from correspondents such as Oslo-based Alister Doyle and Peter Henderson in San Francisco. But we’ve added more financial content and news from partners with complementary coverage.

Here’s a quick tour of the page:
1: Business news from correspondents such as Nichola Groom, who covers alternative energy out of Los Angeles.

2: Featured stories from our partners GreenBiz.com, Matter Network, Wired, Earth2Tech and IDG.

3: The Reuters Global Green Portfolio, an index of green stocks with a related blog and discussion group.

4: General environment news. Here’s where you’ll find the news from the old Environment page.

5: Green Business Topics: News from our partners divided into 10 themed sections.

In addition, you’ll find links in the right-hand column to our Environment blog, environment video channel and the Thomson Reuters Carbon Community. Let us know in the comments if there’s anything else you’d like to see. We value your feedback.

Green Business

7 comments

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/

It would be good if you could explore the possible openings or certificaion options for green jobs in this section. Green jobs is now a hazy concept, except for those in the field, and making information to this end more assessable for the public would help a lot.

I think it would be helpful to include occasional views of mankind’s future as relates to the environment and other approaching problems. It seems to me that few people ever see prognostications of the future state of the world if we don’t mend our ways. There is a lot of mainstream news about sea levels rising, Arctic and Antarctic melting, species extinctions, etc. but I seldom see information such as the projected collapse of modern agriculture that is based on oil and other problems such as GMO crops and water scarcity that have the potential to ensure the destruction of modern civilization if not our species. There are numerous web sites that provide this information but they are not easily discovered by the casual reader of the news. A little future shock from time to time might help people decide on how they want to proceed. Otherwise it’s easy to ignore the small incremental steps we are taking toward global disaster.

Posted by Ray | Report as abusive

Why is the environmental section of your site now labeled “Green Business”? While it is true business activity affects the environment, so does the activities of private citizens in their homes and modes of transportation. Governments have the ability to regulate what people do privately as well. These types of articles and blogs are suspiciously missing from your site.The IPCC puts together data from the world’s preeminent climate research centers and universities. Most readers will never go to Scripps’ website. There are plenty of article that give a “Macro” view of environmental issues. This would give your readers a better understanding of the challenges humanity faces.Climate change, health care, education and energy discussions are always couched in terms of economic impact. Why can they not be discussed in real terms. The economic impact of action need not always be contrasted to the human impact. Some things we must do and simply bear the cost. I believe that is the definition of responsibility.

Posted by Anubis | Report as abusive

Any discussion of enviormental concerns needs to include the effects of population growth. Our population was 203 million in 1970, we just passed 300 million and we’re projected to reach 439 million by 2050. (Most of this growth is driven by immigration, another hot topic…)This will have major effects on our environment and needs some coverage.

Posted by Vince D | Report as abusive

I think that some people might not realize that the environment news have been moved to green business section. I think that the Reuters website should continue to have an “environment” news heading on the left side, which would re-direct the reader to green business section. Not everybody reading the news is automatically looking for the business side of the story.

Posted by Lyuba | Report as abusive

A good topic of discussion on the enviroment would be property rights. Right now sense we have given up so much of our property rights and freedom in general to big government we have to not only fight the polluters who pollute our land but the big corrupt government that protects them. Another words we can’t just sue Exxon-Mobile for example if they pollute our land we have to also fight the EPA and the politicians in the pocket of the big corporate giant because they say it is ok for polluter to pollute this much (it is in the safe level of mercury contamination). How can you say stop them from polluting my land when the government passes laws saying it is ok. It is even worse when you think that we are actually paying with are tax dollars for the polluters protection!

Posted by Rand | Report as abusive

P.S. My brother-in-law (fondly known as “Dr. Megadoom and an environmental engineer)warned of global warming 40 years ago. We’ve done nothing. We haven’t even had the dialogue in 30 years. Now we’ve come full circle…. We are at the same point we were at in 1979.

Posted by Jclayton | Report as abusive