1. IN THEIR ESSAY, NATALIE AND GERALD SIRKIN EXPOSE THE FRAUDS OF SCIENTIFIC IDEOLOGUES
http://www.sepp.org/NewSEPP/scientific_ideologues_sirkin.htm

2. THE STATE OF THE KYOTO PROTOCOL: ALL WORDS AND NO ACTION; EVERYONE LAGS BEHIND

3. IPCC'S INDIAN CHIEF TALKS TOUGH; PROMISES TO LISTEN TO CRITICS

4. SHELL URGES UK GOVERNMENT TO SUPPORT RENEWABLE ENERGY WITH "FISCAL INCENTIVES." BUT FRENCH NUCLEAR PLANTS MARCH ON

5. GLIMMERS OF HOPE IN ASBESTOS-LIABILITY SWAMP

6. EXTRAVAGANT CLAIMS BY NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL TRUST CANNOT BE TRUSTED

************************************************************************

2. The State Of The Kyoto Protocol

The ninth meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP-9) convenes in New Delhi in Nov 2002 to discuss implementation of the Kyoto Protocol

Where do we stand on Kyoto: The US and Australia have opted out. Canada is split; its federal government plans to submit Kyoto for ratification but there is strong opposition. Russia will ratify - after having extracted all the economic concessions it can from Europe. Japan is in but there will be no enforcement. In Europe and everywhere else, CO2 emissions are rising and proposed policy steps (ecotaxes and enforced targets of uneconomic renewables) are not likely to work.

Meanwhile, in India, business proceeds as usual. Coal contributes 72% of electric power generation (vs. 52% in the US). Its poor quality with 5 -50% ash and inadequate pollution control creates local health hazards from toxic trace elements (As, Cd, Cr, Ni, Co, Cu, and Sb) and high levels of radioactivity, as well as regional pollution that contributes to the Asian Brown Cloud and may even cause climate disturbances http://www.sepp.org/NewSEPP/CrazyWeatherFromBrownCloud.htm

************************************************************************

3. IPCC Gears Up For Fourth Assessment Report

GENEVA - The new chief of a U.N. panel probing the effects of greenhouse gases on the global climate said on Thursday it would consult the oil and coal industries, but pledged that its advice would be independent. Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), also said that the panel's reports would put more emphasis on assessing regional impacts of carbon dioxide and other gases in the atmosphere. The Indian scientist was elected in April, ousting American Robert Watson at the helm of the 192-state body that advises governments. Watson advocated action against global warming and was a strong supporter of the Kyoto Protocol aimed at reducing industrial nations' emissions of greenhouse gases created by burning fossil fuels such as coal, oil and gas.

Environmentalists said the U.S. administration engineered Watson's defeat after announcing it would not back him for another six -year term to lead the IPCC. Washington has walked away from the Kyoto pact, calling it flawed and costly. Pachauri, a longtime member, was asked about the influence of the private sector on the panel, set up in 1988 and due to come up with its fourth assessment of climate change in 2007.
"We listen to everyone but that doesn't mean that we accept what everyone tells us...While we may listen to all elements of society, including the oil and coal industry and so on, we don't necessarily have to subscribe to any set of views that is put forward to us," he told a news briefing held in Geneva.

"Ultimately this has to be an objective, fair and intellectually honest exercise," Pachauri said. "But we certainly don't prescribe any set of actions. That is for the decision-making community." Geoff Love, secretary of the IPCC, said: "The panel is seen, I think, as the authority on climate-change issues.

"What we have to do is produce assessment reports that remain credible and relevant," the Australian scientist said.

Love added: "In the fourth assessment, we will be trying to encourage the critical community as well as the community that believes that greenhouse is a major problem."

************************************************************************

4. Renewable energy requires subsidies

Saeed Shah
The Independent - London - September 16, 2002

SHELL HAS warned the Government that new tax and planning policies must be put in place if the country is to make the transition towards renewable energy.

In its submission to the Department of Trade and Industry's Energy Review, Shell threw its weight behind a target suggested by the Government's think-tank, the Performance and Innovation Unit, that renewable sources should provide 20 per cent of our energy needs by 2020.

Shell said wind was the most promising source of such energy for the UK, given Britain's weather. However, getting planning permission for wind farms was a major constraint.

Clive Mather, Shell's UK chairman, told The Independent that the other major obstacle was the poor economics of wind power. He said fiscal incentives were needed to get the technology established.

"The return on wind turbines is nothing like good enough. It requires external assistance. We are committed to play our part but it needs the right stimulation. We are all investing [in wind] without any sort of subsidy," he said.

On Friday, the deadline passed for the consultation process that will feed into a White Paper from the DTI due early next year, which will plan the country's long-term energy needs, out to 2050.

Shell said it was "concerned" that the PIU's report, published in February, stated that, where environmental objectives conflict with other aims, the environment should take preference.

"We believe that security of supply is as important as environmental objectives and these objectives should be balanced within the context of sustainable development," the energy giant said.

Meanwhile, all 34 French nuclear plants of 900 MW-received a 10-year extension of their operating licenses.

************************************************************************

5. Glimmers Of Hope In Asbestos-Liability Swamp

The asbestos-liability mess has already cost the economy more than 9/11, Enron and WorldCom put together -- upward of $200 billion.

According to a new report from the Rand Institute for Civil Justice:

· Some 85 percent of U.S. industry is now in the sights of asbestos-plaintiffs' lawyers.

· Indirect costs so far total $10 billion in investments that will never be made, and 138,000 jobs, which will never be created.

· In just two years, 20 companies have been driven into bankruptcy -- even though 90 percent of plaintiffs aren't medically impaired.

· Half or more of all claims are leveled at companies with only a nodding relationship with asbestos -- including the entire auto industry, simply because it employed asbestos in brake linings.

Congress hasn't responded. Now, however, the courts may.

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to review a West Virginia verdict awarding $5.8 million to six plaintiffs who claimed emotional suffering from the fear they might one day get asbestos-related cancer.

· In another West Virginia case, some of the 250 corporate defendants in a case involving 8,000 plaintiffs -- exhibiting every degree of illness or good health -- have asked the U.S. Supreme Court for an emergency stay to stop the trial.

· In Pennsylvania, the state Supreme Court will soon consider the constitutionality of a state law that limits one type of a "successor" liability -- in other words, the responsibility of a company that buys another company with a former asbestos tie.

Observers are also encouraged that the Senate Judiciary Committee has agreed to hold an "informational" hearing on the crisis this fall.

Source: Editorial, "Lawyers for Asbestos Reform," Wall Street
Journal, September 17, 2002. As reported by NCPA

************************************************************************

6. L.A. Babies Get Lifetime's Toxic Air in 2 Weeks, Says NET Study (Reuters, Sept. 17) -

A two-week-old baby in the Los Angeles area has already been exposed to more toxic air pollution than the U.S. government deems acceptable as a cancer risk over a lifetime, according to a report Monday by an environmental campaign group.

The study of air pollution in California by the National Environmental Trust also said that even if a young child moved away from California, or if the air had been cleaned up by the time he or she reached adulthood, "the potential (cancer) risk that a child rapidly accumulates in California from simply breathing will not go away."

SEPP Comment: This remarkable report by the activist National Environmental Trust invites several possible conclusions:

1. All babies born in the LA area are doomed to die of cancer (unless they are killed in road accidents, riots or gang warfare first). That one should be easy to check out.

OR

2. US government figures on what constitutes cancer risk are way off and should be corrected.

OR

3. The National Environmental "Trust" cannot be trusted.