News

 In this week's Science magazine editor Donald Kennedy opines that Not only is the New Orleans damage not an act of God; it shouldn't even be called a natural disaster. Could it be that he sees the significance of millions of people and trillions of dollars of property in locations exposed to repeated strikes from catastrophic storms? Unfortunately, not at all.

More and more people believe we must quickly wean ourselves from fossil fuels oil, natural gas and coal to save the planet from environmental catastrophe, wars and economic collapse. Professor Jaccard argues that this view is misguided. We have the technological capability to use fossil fuels without emitting climate-threatening greenhouse gases or other pollutants. The transition from conventional oil and gas to unconventional oil, unconventional gas and coal for producing electricity, hydrogen and cleaner-burning fuels will decrease energy dependence on politically unstable regions. In addition, our vast fossil fuel resources will be the cheapest source of clean energy for the next century and perhaps longer, which is critical for the economic and social development of the world's poorer countries. By buying time for increasing energy efficiency, developing renewable energy technologies and making nuclear power more attractive, fossil fuels will play a key role in humanity�s quest for a sustainable energy system.

A sudden drop in Russian gas deliveries to southeastern Europe yesterday provoked an energy crisis in Italy as Gazprom struggled to meet domestic demand in the face of intense frost in Russia. The gas export squeeze, which reduced supplies by 25 per cent in Hungary and Bosnia and by 5 per cent in Austria, emerged after Gazprom had cut off Ukraine on New Year's Day in a row over prices and will aggravate concern about Europe's growing dependence on Russian gas.

 Either the original forecasts were not unbiased, a rare event did indeed occur, or, more likely, the interpretation and reporting went a bit over the top that is, the press (and to some degree the researchers themselves) only like to hype the more extreme results.

It is astonishing to find a review article in Nature (Patz, J.A., et al., Nature 438, 310; 2005), henceforth "the Review", whose major conclusion is taken from an analysis whose authors themselves acknowledge did not "accord with the canons of empirical science".

Are coal and oil the Earth's dirty, dwindling foes or humanity's loyal friends? Mark Jaccard argues for fossil fuels' zero-emission future. The reign of King Coal - and his royal cousins, crude oil and natural gas - is coming to an end, we are told, and the threat of climate change will finally terminate our on-off relationship with fossil fuels. It is a message that has become common currency nearly everywhere - but you write off fossil fuels at your peril, because there is life in the old king yet.

 Could it be that celebrities are planting the forests that are causing the global warming that is growing the bacteria that are wiping out the frogs? Global warming alarmists may be compelled to consider that chain of causation this week thanks to two new studies just published in the Jan. 12 issue of the journal Nature.

We adopted a Charter that sets out a framework to implement the Vision Statement of the Partnership announced in Vientiane on 28 July 2005. At the core of this vision is our conviction of the urgent need to pursue development and poverty eradication. By working together we will be better able to meet our increased energy needs and associated challenges, including those related to air pollution, energy security, and greenhouse gas intensity.

 While Nature still may be the best for certain biochemical and genetic topics, it surely has lost it on global warming. My antennae went up on this one in 2003 when my colleague, Robert Davis, and I submitted a paper to Nature showing that, as our cities have warmed, heat-related mortality declined significantly as people adapted to the change. They declined to even send it out for review; but after it was accepted in International Journal of Biometeorology it was awarded "paper of the year" by the Climate Section of the Association of American Geographers. Something is clearly amiss. Nowhere is that more clear than in a paper, "Widespread Amphibian Extinctions from Epidemic Disease Driven by Global Warming," by J. Alan Pounds, that appeared in their January 12 issue. We'll put it simply: with regard to global warming papers, the review process at Nature is dead. Gone. Kaput.