The Age - Global oil supply 'far worse than admitted'

THE world is much closer to running out of oil than official estimates admit, says a whistleblower at the International Energy Agency who claims it has been deliberately underplaying a looming shortage for fear of triggering panic buying.

The senior official claims the United States has played an influential role in encouraging the watchdog to underplay the rate of decline from existing oilfields while overplaying the chances of finding new reserves.

Scoop.co.nz - International Energy Agency’s World Energy Outlook

It is now clear that an unchanged energy policy - the IEA’s ‘business as usual’ scenario - will lead to catastrophic climate impacts and a temperature rise of about 6°C. While the IEA’s rhetoric on climate change improves every year, it still offers no solution. The proposed energy mix in the IEA’s ‘climate scenario’ - the 450ppm scenario - continues to rely on unproven technology, such as carbon capture and storage (CCS) for coal-fired power stations, and nuclear power.

The Australian - Clean coal strategy not viable for 20 years

CLEAN coal power stations are not viable until the carbon price reaches a minimum of $60 a tonne - a level the Australian government does not anticipate until almost 2030 - according to an audit by the Rudd government's own global carbon capture and storage institute.

Scoop.co.nz - AECT Election: The Power is With the Community

Grey Lynn 2030 is part of the international, grassroots Transition Towns movement. The goal of Transition Towns is to bring people together to explore how we – as communities - can respond to the challenges and opportunities of climate change and peak oil. Transition Towns works on the belief that communities have within themselves the innovation and ingenuity to create positive solutions to the converging crises of our time. It encourages local communities to step into leadership positions.

Here's a guest post from kiashu, in the form of a "Letter to the Editor" (or in this case, a journalist at The Age) about a review of Ian Plimer's pseudo-academic novel, "Heaven and Earth".

Gidday James Kirby,

You write in today's Age,

"Heaven and Earth is absurdly long - 500 pages, 2000 footnotes - with enough factual inconsistencies and ill-advised references to some ''loopy'' thinkers to give his critics plenty of ammunition." [http://www.theage.com.au/business/going-against-the-current-climate-20091024-he2t.html]

You then express surprise that he found it difficult to get his book published. As I understand it, you are primarily a financial journalist. Let's imagine then that someone who was not qualified in economics wrote a book critiquing modern economics, and it was full of "factual inconsistencies and ill-advised references to some "loop" thinkers", do you think that person would have difficulty in getting the book published?

Would that difficulty truly be a result of the author's "radical" views, or a result of their poor writing and research?

From your article, it does not appear that you've actually read his latest book. In your Age article, you are careful to note that you are not a scientist. However, you are a journalist, and a good journalist checks facts and references. That is after all the purpose of footnotes in any work with at least pretensions to academic worth: it lets you check for yourself.

The Australian - Peter Beattie warms to nuclear energy

Speaking in Brisbane, Mr Beattie warned that Australia was "missing the boat" in developing the alternative energy sources that were at the centre of a research and development onslaught bankrolled in the US.

"By 2030 you are going to have a mixed bag of energy," he said. "You will have some nuclear, but you will have algae, solar, you will have geothermal and you will also have clean coal. If clean coal doesn't clean itself up, then it's going to be a smaller part of the equation."

Asked to what extent nuclear would be a part of Australia's energy future, he said he doubted it would amount to much. "There is an argument for nuclear," he said. "But I think, frankly, the new energies will leave nuclear behind.

Stuff.co.nz - Taxpayers "Susidize Big Polluters"

Big polluters would get unlimited taxpayer subsidies through changes to the emissions trading scheme (ETS), says the country's top environmental watchdog.