Welcome to this week's edition of the Friday Linkfest and happy 4th of July to those of you in the US. Now let's take a closer look at the environmental news of this past week:

Good News:

• The World Bank has approved two climate investment funds to help developing economies switch to clean energy technologies to curb carbon emissions and assist poor countries adapt to climate change. The Clean Technology Fund will consist of $4 to $5 billion in donor money.
• Georgia overturns permit for a new coal-fired power plant, ruling it must address its CO2 emissions before a state permit is granted. This unprecedented decision marks the first time a decision is based on the Supreme Court's classification of CO2 as a pollutant under the Clean Air Act.
• The US Bureau of Land Management reconsidered its recently announced moratorium on new solar projects on public land.
• Meanwhile, global investment in renewable energy surged 60% in 2007, in what is being dubbed a "green gold rush". Wind power is ahead, claiming one third of total clean energy investment, while solar has seen a 250% investment growth in 2007. Biofuels, on the other hand, are down and out.
• Prince Charles reduced his emissions by 18%! His "activities" were only responsible for 2,795 tonnes of CO2 last year, which he offsets of course. Quick, give the man a cookie! I'm going to be polite and not mention the average UK footprint is 10 tonnes per person... oh, oops!

Bad News

• California raging wildfires, which so far have affected more than 660 square miles of forest, are taking a toll on the state's air quality.
• According to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, 1.5 billion people are at risk of starvation due to land degradation. A quarter of the world population is currently dependent on land damaged by erosion and loss of organic matter, which leads to reduced productivity, migration and food insecurity, as well as environmental consequences.
• A study shows endangered wildlife extinction risks are being grossly underestimated. According to the authors, extra factors need to be taken into account to determine whether a fragile population can make a recovery.
• Another study claims that while the UK's direct carbon emissions, measured by the Kyoto protocol, fell by 5% between 1992 and 2004, its consumption related emissions rose by 18%! These emissions were, in 2004, calculated to be 37% higher than domestic emissions.

Just shoot me now:

• A study argues we should pump all cows full of growth hormones to "cut CO2emissions". Because cows are nothing but machines that can be optimized for minimum "input" and maximum "output". I suppose animal welfare and public health should just suck it up and take one for the team. Cue Monsanto violins.

This week's choice reads:

• The Island in the Wind - don't miss the story of how a small danish community weaned itself off fossil fuels and became a model "2000W society" in the New Yorker.
• Tom Philpott explains how the organic movement can regain its relevance.
• How the army is trying to cut its emissions by 30% over the next 7 years because - wait for it- Bush told them to. What? It's not unpatriotic to interfere with the war effort? Now if only the Defense Department would clean up their Superfund sites like the EPA said.