In a sure sign that climate change is no longer a left vs. right issue, the WSJ has launched an environmental blog called Environmental Capital to cover the global economic impact and response to warming and energy issues.

While I disagree with virtually every editorial position the Journal takes on climate change (a few days ago one editorial referred to those of us working on climate issues as ‘warmists’!), they have, paradoxically, had some of best coverage of energy, sustainability and carbon emissions. The blog is yet another example of how this situation has major implications for businesses large and small- it is the classic opportunity shrouded in a crisis.

Bamboo is the hot new ’sustainable’ material because it grows ultra-fast (it’s a grass) and it can be used for everything from building materials to fabrics. And it’s very attractive, durable and cost-efficient. So what’s not to like? Nothing unless this stuff is traveling thousands of miles to reach an end-user. This is a major dilemma of the carbon economy.

I don’t buy a lot of organic products in spite of a commitment to cutting the use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides. Why? Because the last quart of organic milk I bought traveled all the way across the US before it got to me. There is a balance to be determined between environmentally beneficial labels like ‘organic’ and ‘fair trade’ and the carbon cost of some of these products above and beyond their other benefits.

I’ve had basic discussions with the optimistic 21st century hippie types who run my local holistic food store and it’s not a comfortable conversation. If you imply that organic milk may actually be bad for the environment if it comes from Oregon and you live in NY, you’re treading in religious belief territory for many folks who’ve been fighting the good fight for a long time.

Unfortunately, carbon cost is now another factor in making buying decisions if you are a responsible consumer. And BTW, buying used and local is a great way to limit carbon costs if you need stuff.

Given the plunge in worldwide markets, the theory that the Asian and EU markets have somehow become decoupled from the US is not proving a viable hypothesis. Decoupling implies that these markets now stand alone and can move independently of the world’s most active economy. I have to wonder when the pundits will realize that we have a world economy that is one huge interdependent eco-system. It’s not something you can isolate yourself from regardless of your political or ethical leanings- it’s just out there growing connections every minute, a classic network in the making.