US Biofuel Production Should Be Suspended, UN Says

The United Nations (UN) food agency has called on the United States to suspend its production of biofuel ethanol. Under US law, 40% of the corn harvest must be used to make biofuel, a quota which the UN says could contribute to a food crisis around the world. A drought and heatwave across the US has destroyed much of the country's corn crop, driving up prices. The US argues that producing much of its own fuel, rather than importing it, is good for the country. --BBC News, 10 August 2012

The most promising renewable energy of all is making pro-renewable Greens frightened and angry. It’s geothermal energy, which taps into the natural warmth below Earth's surface, providing an abundant heat source. The problem? New geothermal techniques requires hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, and environmental crusaders have convinced themselves that fracking is evil. --Andrew Orlowski, The Register, 11 August 2012

Anyone impressed by the efficient way in which Britain has organised the Olympic Games might consider the stark contrast provided by the shambles of our national energy policy – wholly focused as it is on the belief that we can somehow keep our lights on by building tens of thousands more wind turbines within eight years. At one point last week, Britain’s 3,500 turbines were contributing 12 megawatts (MW) to the 38,000MW of electricity we were using. (The Neta website, which carries official electricity statistics, registered this as “0.0 per cent”). --Christopher Booker, The Sunday Telegraph, 12 August 2012

MPs are plotting to overthrow the Conservative chairman of the energy and climate change committee because of his links to the green power industry. Tory MP Tim Yeo rakes in almost £140,000 a year from the controversial industry while juggling his role as chairman of the select committee. --Gary Peev, Daily Mail, 14 August 2012

In the ongoing debates (to use a generous description) over climate change, global warming, call it what you will, much emphasis has been placed on ‘peer review’. In my view this emphasis is misplaced. Myself, I have had published over 130 peer-reviewed research papers, and I have been the peer-reviewer for a larger number, as one might expect. In inspecting a paper submitted for consideration of publication by any journal my three main aims are to identify any errors (if I can) in order to save others from being misled, to save the authors and the editor/journal from any embarrassment, and to make constructive (although sometimes necessarily harsh) criticisms regarding how I think the paper might be improved. What I do not and cannot do is to guarantee that the scientific content of the paper is entirely valid and correct.  --Duncan Steel, The Global Warming Policy Foundation, 13 August 2012