Write a citation for the journal article at the top of the review.

The citation should follow the American Psychological Association's style--consult the APA-style manual or the link under Resources for citation information. You will need the title of the article, the journal where the article is published, the volume and issue number, publication date, author's name and page numbers for the article. 4
Write a summary of the article. This should be one to three paragraphs, depending on the length of the article. Include the purpose for the article, how research was conducted, the results and other pertinent information from the article.

5
Discuss the meaning or implication of the results of the study that the article is about. This should be one to two paragraphs. This is where you offer your opinion on the article. Discuss any flaws with the article, how you think it could have been better and what you think it all means.

6
Write one paragraph discussing how the author could expand on the results, what the information means in the big picture, what future research should focus on or how future research could move the topic forward. Discuss how knowledge in the area could be expanded.

7
Cite any direct quotes or paraphrases from the article. Use the author's name, the year of publication and the page number (for quotes) in the in-text citation. Refer to the link in the Resources section to do this correctly.

Read more: How to Write a Journal Article Review APA Style | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/how_4796768_write-article-review-apa-style.html#ixzz2EqoRL6AS

The Climate Fight Gets Hotter

For the most updated details for Bioneers Conference 2012, please visit our Conference site! Plenary Speech by BILL McKIBBEN.

Saturday, October 20, 2012, 9am 1:00pm (plenary sessions) Location: San Rafael, CA

The award-winning environmental journalist, author, Co-Founder of 350.org, and leading global climate activist will survey the landscape of climate action, including the remarkable holding action by 350.org and others to suspend approval of the Keystone XL pipeline carrying Canadian tar sands oil, the biggest carbon bomb on the planet.

Bill McKibben wrote The End of Nature in 1989, the first book for a general audience on climate change. Hes the author of a dozen books about the environment, beginning with The End of Nature in 1989. The grassroots group 350.org has coordinated 15,000 rallies in 189 countries since 2009. Time magazine called him the planet's best green journalist and the Boston Globe said in 2010 that he was probably the country's most important environmentalist. As Schumann Distinguished Scholar at Middlebury College, he holds honorary degrees from a dozen colleges. In 2011 he was elected a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

The Farming Forecast Calls for Change

By BRUCE CAMPBELL Published: December 12, 2012

FACEBOOK TWITTER GOOGLE+ SAVE E-MAIL SHARE PRINT REPRINTS

WEATHER and agriculture have always been intertwined in most every part of the world. No matter which continent, farmers have always been at the mercy of rainfall and temperature.
Related News

Climate Talks Yield Commitment to Ambitious, but Unclear, Actions (December 9, 2012)

Thus it is curious that most of the conversation surrounding climate change how the weather has been modified by industrial activity revolves around reducing emissions (climate mitigation) and not on how to modify agriculture to new weather conditions. But with the world population expected to rise by another one billion people in 15 years, we need to produce more food with less emissions while adapting to changing climates. Another round of international negotiations on climate change wrapped up in Doha, Qatar, last week without a major consensus on emissions. This was mostly expected at the talks last year the most important decision was to draft a legally binding international treaty in 2015 that would take effect in 2020. This years talks marked the beginning of that effort. Strikingly, though, there was a lack of consensus on addressing agricultural adaptation. Efforts to implement a formal program that addresses the dire problem of food security ended without agreement and the issue was punted to June for additional discussion. But outside of diplomatic circles, a different consensus is forming one that does not rely on negotiations. People are noticing that climate change has already taken hold. Maybe this is due to the superstorm of news coverage that followed Hurricane Sandy, which caused more than $50 billion in damage in the New York City region. More likely, though, it was the failed monsoon that withered crop yields in India, or the fierce drought that hit most of the United States this year and that many other places still confront. In Doha like much of the Middle East and North Africa deserts and other drylands are becoming even drier, driving down local crop yields. Food prices have become increasingly volatile. Many governments are not waiting for an international consensus before taking action. In Brazil, for example, a two-year-old, $250 million program has financed more than 2,000 farming projects to help recover degraded pastures, improve the processing of livestock

waste, implement no-till agriculture to increase the life of the soil, plant commercial forests and employ other practices that have low emissions and respond to the changing climate. In Niger, more than 1,000 separate projects were implemented in agriculture, fisheries and livestock management, benefiting more than 100,000 people. These projects developed almost 9,000 hectares of land with more sustainable management practices. Almost 90 percent of them reduced water and soil erosion. They also increased plant cover and the amount of carbon stored in the landscape. In Vietnam, rice productivity was increased and methane emissions reduced through intermittent draining of the paddies. The project was launched in 2007, and by 2011 more than one million farmers were using the approach on 185,000 hectares, increasing yields by 9 to 15 percent and farmer income by $95 to $260 per hectare per crop season [pdf]. These initiatives are all successful, but the problem lies in their scale. Only 10 percent of Vietnamese rice farmers are served by that countrys program; a sizable increase in capital is needed to expand the programs reach. It is unclear whether Vietnam, Niger and other developing countries will ever have sufficient funds accessible to farmers that can be used to tackle adaptation. This is where the shortcomings of the international efforts hurt most. In the absence of a global treaty that provides incentives for farm adaptation there is often no choice but to continue with traditional methods. New approaches are desperately needed so that all the worlds farmers can keep pace with the changing weather. Bruce Campbell is the director of the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security, based in Copenhagen.
A version of this op-ed appeared in print on December 13, 2012, in The International Herald Tribune.

RANJIT NAGAR, India When the United Nations wanted to help slow climate change, it established what seemed a sensible system.

Multimedia

Graphic

Subsidies for a Global Warming Gas

Chilling Effect
Articles in this series describe the impact of the rising demand for coolant gases, a growing contributor to global warming.

Past Articles in the Series

In a Factorys Shadow, Fears About Health (August 9, 2012) Relief in Every Window, but Global Worry Too (June 21, 2012)

Connect With Us on Twitter

Follow@nytimesworldfor international breaking news and headlines. Twitter List: Reporters and Editors

Readers Comments
Readers shared their thoughts on this article.

Read All Comments (167)

Greenhouse gases were rated based on their power to warm the atmosphere. The more dangerous the gas, the more that manufacturers in developing nations would be compensated as they reduced their emissions. But where the United Nations envisioned environmental reform, some manufacturers of gases used in air-conditioning and refrigeration saw a lucrative business opportunity. They quickly figured out that they could earn one carbon credit by eliminating one ton of carbon dioxide, but could earn more than 11,000 credits by simply destroying a ton of an obscure waste gas normally released in the manufacturing of a widely used coolant gas. That is because that byproduct has a huge global warming effect. The credits could be sold on international markets, earning tens of millions of dollars a year.

That incentive has driven plants in the developing world not only to increase production of the coolant gas but also to keep it high a huge problem because the coolant itself contributes to global warming and depletes the ozone layer. That coolant gas is being phased out under a global treaty, but the effort has been a struggle. So since 2005 the 19 plants receiving the waste gas payments have profited handsomely from an unlikely business: churning out more harmful coolant gas so they can be paid to destroy its waste byproduct. The high output keeps the prices of the coolant gas irresistibly low, discouraging air-conditioning companies from switching to less-damaging alternative gases. That means, critics say, that United Nations subsidies intended to improve the environment are instead creating their own damage. The United Nations and the European Union, through new rules and an outright ban, are trying to undo this unintended bonanza. But the lucrative incentive has become so entrenched that efforts to roll it back are proving tricky, even risky. China and India, where most of the 19 factories are, have been resisting mightily. The manufacturers have grown accustomed to an income stream that in some years accounted for half their profits. The windfall has enhanced their power and influence. As a result, many environmental experts fear that if manufacturers are not paid to destroy the waste gas, they will simply resume releasing it into the atmosphere. A battle is brewing. Disgusted with the payments, the European Union has announced that as of next year it will no longer accept the so-called waste gas credits from companies in its carbon trading system by far the largest in the world essentially declaring them counterfeit currency. That is expected to erode their value, but no one is sure by how much. Consumers in Europe want to know that if theyre paying for carbon credits, they will have good environmental effects and these dont, Connie Hedegaard, the European commissioner for climate action, said in an interview. Likewise, the United Nations is reducing the number of credits the coolant companies can collect in future contracts. But critics say the revised payment schedule is still excessive and will have little immediate effect, since the subsidy is governed by long-term contracts, many of which do not expire for years.

Even raising the possibility of trimming future payments was politically hard, said Martin Hession, the immediate past chairman of the United Nations Clean Development Mechanisms executive board, which awards the credits. China and India both have representatives on the panel, and the new chairman, Maosheng Duan, is Chinese. Carbon trading has become so essential to companies like Gujarat Fluorochemicals Limited, which owns a coolant plant in this remote corner of Gujarat State in northwest India, that carbon credits are listed as a business on the company Web site. Each plant has probably earned, on average, $20 million to $40 million a year from simply destroying waste gas, says David Hanrahan, the technical director ofIDEAcarbon, a leading carbon market consulting firm. He says the income is largely pure profit. And each plant expects to be paid. Some Chinese producers have said that if the payments were to end, they would vent gas skyward. Such releases are illegal in most developed countries, but still permissible in China and India. As the United Nations became involved in efforts to curb climate change in the last 20 years, it relied on a scientific formula: Carbon dioxide, the most prevalent warming gas, released by smokestacks and vehicles, is given a value of 1. Other industrial gases are assigned values relative to that, based on their warming effect and how long they linger. Methane is valued at 21, nitrous oxide at 310. HFC-23, the waste gas produced making the worlds most common coolant which is known as HCFC-22 is near the top of the list, at 11,700.
1 2

NEXT PAGE

Elisabeth Rosenthal reported from Gujarat State, India, and Andrew W. Lehren from New York. This article has been revised to reflect the following correction: Correction: August 10, 2012 Because of an editing error, an article on Thursday about carbon credits issued for the destruction of a harmful byproduct from the manufacture of the worlds most common coolant referred incorrectly to that coolant, chlorodifluoromethane. It is known as HCFC22, not as HFC-22.

A version of this article appeared in print on August 9, 2012, on page A1 of the New York editionwith the headline: Carbon Credits Gone Awry Raise Output of Harmful Gas.