Reconstructing Climatic and Environmental Changes" FOIA Email 5.3.03 (a)

1. ~~~~~~~~- ~~~~~~~~~~~~Page 1 of 37
RECORD TYPE: FEDERAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: "S. Fred Singer" <singerfisepp crg> ( "S. Fred Singer" <singer~sepp.org>F UN
CREATION DATE/TIME: 3-MAY-2003 17:07: 5.00
SUBJECT:: The Week That Was, May 3, :003
TO:comments~sepp.org Ccomments~sepp.crg [ OSTP
READ :UNKNOWN
BCC:Kenneth L. Peel CN=Renneth L. P el/OU=CEQ/O=EOP [ CEQ I
READ:EJNKNOWN
TEXT:
THIS NEWSLETTER IS SENT IN PLAIN TEXT. VIEW THE FORMATTED VERSION
(ATTACHED) OR HTML VERSION AT http://vw.sepp.org
New on the Web
Earth Day 2003--- A Satire
Tuesday, April 22, was Earth Day, and I missed it. And I had such wonderful
plans to mark the occasion, too.
I was going to rearrange the solar pa els on my roof in the shape of a
peace symbol, and make everyone in oux household bathe in the same tub full
of water, then scoop out a big pot an~ boil it for soup -- reduce, reuse,
regurgitate, I always say.
'I was going to implant microchip tran mitters in the squirrels in our
spruce trees to harness the energy fr m their scampering to power the grow
lamps over my organic sprout garden. d I was going to while away the
afternoon listening to world music on my hand-cranked CD player. (if you
don't know what world music is, think Peruvian herdsman playing the
recorder superimposed over sperm whalE mating calls.)
I was going to read an ode to Oaia, tle Earth spirit, while our children
danced around holding candles they hac formed themselves from the
honeycombs of free-range bees. And I was going to collect the sparrow guano
from underneath our winter bird feede s to use as fertilizer in our Victory
garden -- victory over red-meat consu ption, genetically modified foods and
corporate agribusiness, that is!
Drat, now all that is going to have tc wait until next Earth Day. I only
hope my wife -- sorry, co-equal life partner -- will forgive me for not
buying her those woolen tights and Bimkenstock sandals she's been wanting.
Thank God -- sorry -- thank goddess, Edmonton's main celebrations won't
take place until May 4. That'll give me time to handcraft all my presents
and wrap them (in recycled newspapers I'll decorate myself with
native-berry paints, of course).
Actually, I did commemorate Earth Day the best way possible -- by reading
yet another scholarly study that deburks the notion our current climate is
unusually hot, and getting hotter due to manmade greenhouse emissions.
The latest study, from the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics,
carries the vernacular title 20th-Cen ury Climate Not So Hot. Co-authored
file://D:SEARCH-7tO-3•EQ048 00aogO3..ceq.txt 8/14/2003

2. Page 2 of 37
by Smithsonian astrophysicists Sallie Baliunas and Willie Soon, Craig Idso
and Sherwood Tdso of the Center for tle Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global
Change, and David Legates of the Cent r for Climate Research at the
University of Delaware, it notes: "20h Century temperatures were generally
cooler than during the medieval warmt .
The 20th century, contrary to the ala mism of environmentalists, was
neither the warmest century in the pa t millennium, nor the one marked by
the most severe weather. Belief that the globe is warming faster than ever
before, and so fast that the rise thr atens the environment, is the result
of examining variations in temperature over too short a time span.
The Medieval Warn Period, from approx mtely 800 to 1300 AD, was as much as
4 C warmer on average than today, wor dwide, nearly as warn as the upper
extreme of U.N. climate projections f r the coming century. And the natural
world did not implode, far from it. G eenland sustained agricultural
colonies through much of this period. The seas teemed with fish. Wars were
less common in Europe than during the later Middle Ages, in part, because
harvests were plentiful and less pres ure existed for campaigns of conquest
to acquire new lands and resources. CE thedral construction on a grand scale
(a sign of relative affluence) boomed across Europe. Mesoamerica also
flourished.
Remarkable in the Harvard-Smithsonian study is the depth of analysis it
contains of the historical temperature record and its finding that the
Medieval Warm Period was global, not rherely confined to the North Atlantic
region, as some have argued.
The study, funded in part by NASA and the National (U.S.) Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration -- two organizations known for their
enthusiastic support of the manmade wArning theory -- examined the results
from more than 240 scientific reports on temperature "proxies," biological,
cultural and geological fingerprints That indirectly reveal temperatures
centuries, millennia or even eons, agcl.
"For example, tree-ring studies can yield yearly records of temperature and
precipitation trends, while glacier ide cores record those variables over
longer time scales ... Borehole data, cultural data, glacier advances or
retreats, geomorphology, isotopic analysis from lake sediments, ice cores,
peat moss, corals, stalagmites and fo sils, even dust and pollen, can
provide clues to-past climate, even sometimes, very detailed indicators.'
No study to date has been as thorough or wide-ranging as the
Harvard-Smithsonian study, and few haye taken as much advantage of the
"research advances in reconstructing ncen cimtes" that has occurred in
recent years.
Why then, do other scientists and environmentalists claim temperature
records of the past century-and-a-halt show such potentially catastrophic
warming? Because the Little Ice Age f~llowed the end of the Medieval Warm
Period. This nearly 600-year-period o abnormally cold climate was ending
just as modern, reasonably scientific wather records were beginning.
If 1850 is used as year zero -- as t baseline against which current
temperatures are compared -- it is go ~ng to look dramatically warmer today
than a century ago, because the Little Ice Age was just ending in 1850. But
if 1850 is seen for the anomaly it isj and the past 1,000 or more years are
placed in context, then today's heat Is hardly that striking, and certainly
not cause for alarm.
file://D:SEARCH_7_9_O3-CEQ048-fL~yao4I OO3seq.txt 8/14/2003

3. Page 3 of 37
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - …--- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-
This article appeared in the Edmonton Journal, April 23, and is reprinted
with permission from Lomne Gunter, who is a Columnist for the Edmonton
Journal, and an Editorial Board Member of the National Post.
Prime time fiction about Alaska Warmil grvdn iey odrntol
The urban legends of global warming a~epoiiglvl odrntol
for NBC's The West Wing, but also Davild Suzuki
By Ross McKitrickI
Financial Post (Canada), April 16, 2003
One of the current sub-plots in NBC's The West Wing concerns a glacier in
Alaska, which melted and deluged a downstream village. The White House
suddenly found itself dealing with th4 "first casualties of global
warming." Chief of Staff Leo McGarry ~at enthralled as a
"hydroclimatologist" from the U.S. Gedlogical Survey told him that mean
temperatures in Alaska have soared seven degrees (Fahrenheit) in the past
30 years, creating unstable lakes thad are prone to overflowing, wiping out
downstream villages.
Last week's show ended with the adxnin stration calling for massive cuts in
so-called greenhouse gas emissions. T is would, we're to suppose, somehow
help drowning Alaskans. West Wing is political drama that relishes
high-stakes battles of good-versus-evil, so maybe tonight we'll see some
obnoxious, cigar-chomping oil executieI(or Republican senator) derail
President Jed Bartlett's idea. Then c~t to an SUV commercial.
It is a fictional show, of course, so it's only appropriate that it relies
on fictional issues to captivate the l.udience. Nor should it surprise us
that the whole scenario is fictional. If some "hydroclimatologist" from the
Geological Survey stood in the Chief 4f Staff's office and claimed Alaska
had warmed seven degrees in 30 years, the response would not be to upend
the nation's energy policy. The respo~ise would be to pick up a phone and
call the Alaska State Climatologist f~r confirmation, who would have
quickly put the story on ice.
It is an urban legend that Alaska has warmed so much, so fast. No matter
how much the Alaskans try to debunk i I,itlve Inmost recently in the
fevered imagination of West Wing scri~twriters.
Last summer, The New York Times ran a story quoting unnamed "federal
sources" that said Alaska had warmed ;even degrees in 30 years. Then it ran
an editorial denouncing the U.S. govetninent's apparent indifference to this
calamity.
The Alaskan Climate Research Center (kCRC) contacted the paper and gave it
data showing no such warming had take~ place. The mean temperature rose
about 2.4F (about 0.4C per decade) i the 1971-2000 period. The entire
increase occurred in one jump in 1976 L77, probably due to a circulation
realignment in the Pacific ocean. A t merature index formed using data
from Fairbanks, Anchorage, Nome, and barrow (the "FANB" index) shows, if
anything, a slight cooling trend sinch 1979.
The Times was never able to identify asource for its claim, and it printed
a retraction, sort of. It did find a scientist who figured that if you look
in the right places and pick an earliler start and end date you could get a
file:/D:SEARCH_7_9 03CQ08fa403_ceq.txt 8/14/2003

4. Page 4 of 37
mean increase of maybe 5.4 degrees over- a 30 year span. In its retraction,
went up
the Times' fudged the point a bit, saytng Alaska's mean temperature
5.4 degrees, rather than seven, over ti~e past 30 years.
The ACRC responded again saying that n4, this is still wrong. It posted a
their
map (http://climate.gi.alaska.edu/chanpe) showing the record of all
weather stations for the 1971-2000 interval. In the accompanying text it
of
states: "There is not a single first-class weather station in all
decades."
Alaska, which reported 5F temperature increase for the last three
The highest increase, 4.2 degrees, wash at Barrow. One of the lowest (1.7F)
was at nearby Kotzebue.
Wing,
The Times dropped the story, but it hab now resurfaced on the West
where earnest White House staffers will no doubt run with it for a few
jobs in
weeks, hoping to bludgeon the oil induistry and kill a few thousand
oil-producing states like, say, Alaska'. Once they've moved past this plot
again
line, the seven-degree-warminlg-in-30i-ears claim will surely pop up
somewhere, but hopefully riot in the real West Wing.
The same
That wasn't the only bit of global warming fiction on TV recently.
night as the fictional glacier melted, TVOntario interviewed David Suzuki
on its current affairs show, Studio 2.1 Apparently some scientists,
report
sponsored in part by the David Suzuki Foundation, have put out a
arguing that global warming will cause the Great Lakes to boil dry, or
yet
overflow, or do something or other a dew decades from now. Ho-hum
another apocalyptic enviro-scare: It's starting to drag on like a secular
Left Behind series.
was Mr.
I didn't watch much of the interview, but what caught my attention
Suzuki's claim that when he was a boy growing up in London, Ontario, winter
winter
used to set in at the end of October, but now it's warmed up so much
arrives a lot later. Global warming, you see. It's not the ups and downs
but these rapid warming trends we need to worry about.
station
So the next day I looked up the tempetature records for the weather
at London's airport. The data are spo ty prior to the Second World War, but
at Dr.
there's a continuous record after 194 i, ending at 1990. I'm guessing
S's vintage but I figure this is earl{ enough.
data
I don't think much of running trend lines through averaged temperature
as a way of measuring "climate," but this is how the debate often gets
London
framed. And it shows the October-Novefibr average temperature in
fell from 1940 to 1990 at a rate of -9.2 degrees Celsius per decade.
on
"Fell," as in cooling. As in, October and November are now colder,
average, than when Mr. Suzuki was a lid awaiting winter in London. The
annual average also shows cooling, at about 0.1 degrees C per decade.
least not
Unfortunately the temperature data arh not posted after 1990, at
at the NASA collection where I was lopking
across
(http: //www.giss.nasa.gov/data/update gistemp/station data/) . But
the lake at Erie, Penn., there is a wather station that continues to post
0.26
its data. The October-November temper ture average there fell by
degrees C per decade from 1940 to 2001 (see chart) . The annual average fell
the
by about 0.13 degrees C per decade from 1940 t& 2001. In other words
area has gotten colder, not warmer.
Incidentally, it is a real annoyance that Environment Canada no longer
gives its temperature data away. Alm tal th aaian weather stations
reporting into the NASA database stopped releasing the post-199O numbers
is a
for free use by the public. You are exected to pay for it now. This
8/14/2003
file:/ID:SEARCH_7_9_03_CEQ048..f..yao4gOO3seq.txt

5. Page 5 of 37
dollars on climate change
government that brags about spending birllions of
budget for its
initiatives, including $350-million in the most recent
slush fund, not to mention
so-called "Sustainable Development Tec iology"
and however many
tens of millions for the Climate Chang& Action Fund,
hundreds of thousands to put those asi~ine commercials on TV telling people
will stop global
that sealing their windows and turningi down the heat that
warming. Yet it won't spend the money vo make available the basic data
of local
would allow people to see long term, u~-to-date records
people to know.
temperatures. Makes you wonder what it doesn't want
of the public eye for a
Global warming and Kyoto have, merciful ly, been out
while. Some commentators who never grasped the issue in the first place
anti-Kyoto concerns were
have triumphantly used this as evidencp that the
in Canada because the
all overblown. In reality, the story is quiet here
Kyoto. How that
feds have all but abandoned any intention of implementing
the global warmers are
came about is a story for another day. Stateside,
and are laying the
still sore about Bush's decision to reject Kyoto,
groundwork for a new political push to' bring it back. Since the idea that
always a fiction, it is
Kyoto would somehow benefit the global~ climate was
the lead.
only fitting that the entertainment injdstry is taking
at the University of
Ross McKitrick is an associate professor of economics
Science, Policy and
Guelph, and coauthor of Taken By Storir: The Troubled
. A big seller in Canada
Politics of Global Warming (www.takenlhystorm.info)
and up for a Donner Prize, it is also short listed for the Canadian Science
Writers Association award.
The Week That Was (May 3, 2003) bogtto you by SEPP
FROM
1. New on the Web: A DOUBLE FEATURE ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING
CANADA: Lorne Gunter's satire of Earth Day and Ross Mcxitrick's skewering
of the NY Times, "West Wing," and David Suzuki.
http: //www~sepp.org/NewSEPP/EarthDay~,unter- html
http: //www. sepp.org/NewSEPP/PrimeTime laska Mc::'itrick.html
BILLION BARRELS: That's
2. CANADA'S OIL SANDS RESERVES APPRAISED AT 180
sufficient to cover all US oil importt for 45 years.
3. DEBATE ABOUT NATURAL GAS RESERVES NEW STUDY CLAIMS AT LEAST 65-YEAR
SUPPLY
4. DEBATE ABOUT NATURAL GAS RESERVES: GAS WON'T BE CHEAP
5. DEBATE ABOUT PLUTONIUMT: CANCER RIS' HIGHER AT ROCKY FLATS PLANT?
6. DEBATE ABOUT PLUTONIUM -- CONTINU3D
7. SWEDEN PREFERS NOT TO FREEZE IN T E DARK: Won't close nuclear reactor
billion barrels by Oil and
2. Canada's Oil sands reserves apprised at 180
Gas Journal.
to 180 billion barrels
Estimates of Canada's oil reserves jumped from 4.9
in the world, acc. to
this year, making it the second-largjst oil reserve
an annual survey by the authoritativd O&GJ. While the resource had been
recoverable and
known for some time, it has now beconk economically
therefore included as "reserves."
with sand and
The Alberta oil sands contain tar-like bitumen mixed
Thanks to technology
clay. Hot water is used to separate the bitumen.
8/14/2003
filel/D ASEARCH_7_9_03..CEQ048..tyao goo3sreq~xt

6. Page 6 of 37
are now estimated at around $8 a barrel.
e Kyoto Protocol, the outlook is
But because of Canada's adherence to t
from a C$3.5-billion investment and
Cloudy. Koch industries has withdrawn
-billion plan. [Financial Post
Petro-Canada is reconsidering its C$5.
what Ottawa plans to do after 2012
4/29/033 . There is great concern about has offered no guarantees,
in follow-ups to Kyoto. The federal government adding to costs.
nts and
so uncertainty is discouraging investm
tled, "Oilsands' promise may
A May 02, 2003 National Post article t
Ls becoming too expensive to produce"
evaporate: This fabled lode of wealth
ng or holding off on their oilsands
described how many companies are dropp
ated uncertainties, some are citing
developments. Most are citing Kyoto-re
g projects, but either way, the
increasing costs from numerous competi
dwindling.
number of active oilsands projects is
prospects for lowering
On the other hand, there are technologlical
production costs. Atomic Energy Canada Limited (AECL), the developer of
has long espoused the
the highly successful CANlDU nuclear reactor,
reactor that supplies hot water
'Slowpoke" concept, a 10 MW (thermal) The Advanced
rather than steam for electric power generation.
wter moderation, but light water
CANDU (using enriched uranium, heavy being physically
cooling) can be built with a cost sav ~g of 40%,
source for the hot water needed for
smaller. It might be the ideal energy
producing oil from Canadian tar sandsi
itarrels per year, much of it from
With US oil imports now at 4 billion interest in seeing to it
unstable sources, there should be considerable
developed. If the US goes along with
that the Canadian oil reserves can be
for Alaskan natural gas through
Canada in supporting the single pipeline
the MacKenzie Delta, a deal could be thde that will save billions for US
win-win situation. It may have to
taxpayers and make Canadians richer --la - perhaps in 2004.
from Ottawa
wait until the Chretien government departs
Committee says that the levels of
3. A new survey by the Potential Gas
natural gas are larger than previouslf thought.
ves from the natural gas industry,
The committee, made up of representat says that 1,311 trillion
government agencies and academic instbtutions,
existed as of the end of 2002 in
cubic feet (Tcf) in natural gas reso(rces
of a 65-year supply of natural gas
the United States. That's the equivallent
size of the base actually increased
at current rates of consumption. The
since the committee's last report in 12000, even though 39 Tcf of natural
gas has been withdrawn.I
to promote greater use of
"It makes no sense for laws and regulations
independence and environmental
natural gas for increased national e ergy regulations hamper the ability
reasons, while at the same time conflicting
ugh supply to market to meet this
of natural gas producers to bring en
of the American Gas Association.
growing demand," says David Parker, ~EO
creates price volatility, he adds.
The mismatch between supply and demad
to industrial operations to
That hurts all users from apartment dwelers
for lawmakers to adopt an energy
electric generators. The time is right
and environmental benefits of
bill that considers the projected dem'and
that make drilling less
natural gas, as well as the new techhologies
invasive, Parker says.
file://D:SEARCH_7_9_0 E4jyo103cqtt8/14/2003

7. Page 7 of 37
contend that such studies are
opponents of new exploration,~ however,
res~ults are therefore suspect. Resource
generally industry financed and the
that added drilling would be
levels are exaggerated, which means
environmentally harmful. Supplies are adequate through 2025, they
sources.
say-enough time to develop alternativelenergy
has passed a measure to allow
The debate rages in Congress. The Hous
Refuge (ANqWR) but the Senate has
drilling in the Alaska National wildlife
get pshed through in any Conference
voted nay, although the item could have
two versions. Republican lawmakers
Committee bill that reconciles the to promote
qovernment mandates
said that they might agree to support
renewable energy if Senate Democrats would give in on ANWR. The
Aserves from ANWR at 35 Tcf (and
Administration estimates natural-gas
Siope).
perhaps up to 100 Tcf from the North
(From Issue Alert by Ken Silverstein)
* * ** * * ** * ** * ** * ** k***********
* * * * ** * * ** * **
* * * * * * **
4. Gas won't be cheap
gas in a big way because it is
We have turned as a country to natural
4ow, as we become dependent upon it,
perceived as clean, cheap, and ample.
it will become especially
it is neither inexpensive nor abundand. as
s~ ortage of power in this country,
noticeable the next time there is a h aetm hr xs
ation a
we try to turn on more gas-power gene point, $5 gas will
shortage of gas to store away for wint~er season. At that
headed for a potential major
become a very cheap memory. We are alto
weather patterns merely approximate
shortage this coming winter, if the
historical trends.
However, as you might expect, I take
~ssue with your attempt to be balanced
some housekeeping: You refer to
in your approach to the subject. Firs,
s ~plies. I am quite sure you meant
depletion rates of 29% for existing
amount by which reserves are reduced
decline rates. Depletion refers to th~
and we are not losing reserves at
through a given amount of productions
refer to the amount by which
anywhere near that rate. Decline rated
or set of wells decreases from one
periodic production from a given well by about 29%, and the rate is
period to the next. New wells are dec~lining
heading north of 30% quickly.
to do with the natural gas. The
Second, the ANWR debate has very little
fro Alaska and/or Canada's MacKenzie
decision to bring natural gas down We could pipe natural gas from
Delta is a separate issue with opening ANWR.
evn consider ANWR as a possible source.
Alaska for years without having to
ANR is mostly about oil.r
of
u the difference in our shortfall
You mentioned that Canada has made
you failed (probably for lack of
natural gas production until now, but
is starting to fall off also.
space) to mention that Canadian prodiction
has fallen, this is doubly bad.
Coming at a time when our own production is starting to import more
Mdxico
You might also have mentioned that unless the U.S. is
natural gas from the U.S., a trend that should continue
opened up to more exploration.
studies showing a 65± year supply
You also neglected to mention that tliese viability for much of those
do virtually nothing to consider commiercial
Ideposits in our back yard, and deposits
estimates. You and I may have some
estimates of gross availability. But
such as those are figured into these off
days environment than gas deposits
they are no more accessible under to
8/14/2003
file:/DASEARCH_7_9_03 CEQ048__f..yao~gOO3..ceq.txt

8. Page 8 of 37
do a
the into reserve estimates is to
the coast of Florida. And to include
mak ng restricted areas accessible.
great disservice to the debate over
drilling is environmentally evil have
People who continue to claim that as
many ~times, Such efficient advances
watched the movie "Giant" one too along with the
impr yed the productivity
directional drilling have greatly for the
clean activity of newer wells, a fact hat is inconvenient
to get the environmentalists to
"greens". it will take a lot of effort never will, since reality
accept this, and many of the current gdneration
threatens their raison d'etre.
supportive of our need to expand
You say some environmentalists are to
The tact is it only takes one group
exploration and drilling efforts. expand our hydrocarbon asset
effotrt to
close down, or greatly impede, any efforts to expand
base. Various groups have successfully blocked numerous
prodIucing now.
drilling into areas that should be
of i.ndustry in the US because of higher
We have already lost a huge amount has
tiat industrial use of natural gas
gas prices, as evidenced by the fact 7.2 Bcf/day in 2003. Even
to al estimated
dropped from 17.2 Bcf/day in 2000 this next winter
with that decline, we run a very real -isk of entering
season at any cost.
without enough gas to last the heating
James R. Halloran
Energy Analyst, National City Bank
Plant (By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS (AP)-
5. Cancer Risk Higher At Rocky Flats
n clear weapons components and inhaled
Rocky Flats employees who assembled
risk of lung cancer, a new study
radioactive particles had an increase~
that workers who dealt with plutonium
found. The $2.5 million study found who
to d velop lung cancer than workers
were about two times more likely of Colorado Health
4y the University
were not exposed. The study was done Health and
Sciences Center and the Colorado Depaitment of Public
Environment.
who died of lung cancer with 720
Researchers compared 180 former workejrs
heaithy. Those who died of lung cancer
other workers who were considered
on average. Dr. James Ruttenber,
had higher levels of radiation exposufe
offers the first concrete information
who led the study, said the research
is linked to plutonium
in the United States that lung cancer along
"We have supporting evidence from other studies that,
ingestion. exposure causes
that plutonium
with our findings, support the hypothesis data to
lung cancer,'' Ruttenber said. He sai.d researchers will study the
plutonium should be changed. ''One
determine if standards for handling > have
'' he said. "~'We need to make sure that we
case study is not enough, changes.''
robust findings before we make sweeping
health department, said other factors
Doug Benev'ento, director of the state 'You have to put it
a r Isk of cancer.
have been shown to cause more of likely to develop lung
seven times as
into context: If you smoke, you're link
cancer,'' he said. He also said the study did not definitively factors,
the plant, noting other
worker's cancers to their employmentl~at or pure chance
such as exposure to chemicals at hom4, lifestyle differences
could explain the elevated risk results.
wh4 worked at Rocky Flats for 26 years,
Arvada resident Wally Gulden, 65, or satisfied with the
said he wasn't surprised by the findings cancers not related to the
study. ''There are more of us out there with
8/14/2003
file://D:SEARCH_7_9_OXCEQ048f_LyaoLgOO3sceq.txt

9. Page 9 of 37
'
who has non-Hodgkin's lymphomna.
ones that were studied,'' said Gulden, to know if
I ingest ed plutonium, and I want
worked in a hot spot and I know has f iled a claim under the Radiation
it's related to my work.' ' Gulden people suffering from
Exposure compensation Act program, whi dhcompensates War-era
a result of their work on Cold
cancer and other illnesses as there aren't any,'
weapons projects. "'I hoped for more answers, but
Gulden said.
The lung cancer findings were
part of 4
broader study that tracked 16,303
also found
between 11952 and 1989. The study
people who worked at the plant brain
2.5 times more likely to develop
that Rocky Flats workers were p an to examine those findings
tumors than other people. Researches
further.
for almost
tri gers for nuclear warheads
Rocky Flats manufactured plutonium of safety and environmental
40 years. It closed in 1989 because
uD and will become a wildlife
problems. The site is being cleaned Occupational
by the N tional Institute for
refuge. The study was funded
Safety and Health
studI
On the Net: Rocky Flats workers
erstudy/idxhm
http: //Www.cdphe.state.co.us/rf/rfpwo
But
Plutonium is one of the ost dangerous poisons known ---
6. Myth:
"Tonticological Profile for Plutonium,"
Reality: Three studies in report,
for Toxic Substances and Disease
prepared for and issued by Agency collaboration
Control) Atlanta, Georgia, in
Registry, Centers for Disease show just the
Agency, December 1990,
with U.S. Environmental Protection
opposite:
plutonium
the yeah of this report) of 26
**A 37-year study(as of 1990,
duni g World War II with plutonium
workers at Los Alarnos laboratory a mean of
95,0 0 picocuries plutonium with
deposition ranging from 2,000 to number of
of 2.0 vs. 6.6 in a comparable
26,000 picocuries showed mortality have occurred
the general population. In addition, no malignant neoplasms
f llow-up.
in this group during this extensive
224 LOS Alamos workers with average
**Study begun in 1974 of an adtoa picocuries plutonium showed 43 deaths
whole body deposition of 19,000 The
number of the general population.
compared to 77 in a comparable the general
neqplasms was 8 vs. 15 in
number of deaths due to malignant
lung dancer vs. five in the general
population, including only one
population.
at the Rocky Flats plutonium facility
**Study of 7,112 workers employed
rksults. Observed deaths of workets
during 1952-1979 showed comparable
i4 comparable numbers of general
were significantly less than those vs.
neoplasms were also less (107
populations (452 vs. 831) . Malignant
167).
By Clinton *Bastin* <clintonbastin~emhilmsn.com> *
** * ****
** * * ** ** ** ** ** ** k* ***** * * ** * * * ** * ** *
Sweden changes its mind: Won't close nuclear reactor
7.
(with support from the Left and
7. The socialist-democratic government
file:/D:SEARCH_7_9_OCQ08fYJgOSqtt8/14/2003

10. Page 10 of 37
as
not to~ close B,,rsebeck 2 in 2003,
from Center parties) has decided during
guarantee adequacy of supply
originally planned. It could not
half its electric power from nuclear
extreme cold weather. Sweden obtains
reactors.
~~ * **; ~~ ~ ***************** ~~~~…AT
TEXT:
]SREOP0l300G4OAY.001 to ASCII,
Unable to convert NSREOP01O2U[ATTACH-D
The following is a HEX DUMP:
00 0
OoOO0000O3EO00300FEFF090006000000000
DOCF11EOAlBIlAElOOOOOOOOOOOOQOOOOOOOoo 00o soooooooloOOOOOFEFFFFFFQOOOQOO00750
7
0oooooo0oo01OO00OQ76000000000000000010
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFPFFFF
OOOOFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFEFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFEFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFEFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFEFFFFFFFFFFFF FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFEFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFEFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFPFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFEFFFFFFFFVFFFFF FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFEFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFEFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFEFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF~FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
0010 000 o00 0000 04 0
000897600000E0O
FFFFFFFFFFECA5ClQO372009040000OF812BFQC 0000 0000
000 Oooooooo00000904l600229000003770000037
626A626A551655160000000000000000000 0 0 Q
00 000000000FFFFOFOO
0 0 0 Q0 0 Q0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7C000089720000000000000000000000
30000
OOOOOOOOOOOOoOOOFFFFOFOOOOQOO~oOOOOQOOO(FFFFOFOOQOOOOOOOOOQQOOOQOOOOOOOQOOOOOO0
3 0 0 0 DA0
3 0 0 0000000000DA03000000000000D0A 400
006 Co~O0000000DA03000000000000DA0 4 0 0 0
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOEE03000000000000B88
OOOOOOOQDAO3000000000000DA030000l Cl4000044000000EE03
14 00ool4 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
ooooooOOOO88l400000000000088l40000000 0 0 0 0 8 8 AI5OOOOOOOO0OOO4Al50000000000004 A
0 0 5S 00OOOO
4
ooooooooOOOO2B2200007401000OECl400
150000000004A5OO~ooooOO4AI000OOOOOOOO4A150000000000004A15OOOOOOOOOOOO
0 0 AC2 1O)O0000A2000000A20000o
A.AlOOOOO2000000AC210000000000
2 0 9 F2 3oooo
2 0 0 2 0000BF250000ACOOOOOODO2100001500
OOAC21000000000000AC2100002400000 3 0 00000000004Al5OOOOOOOooOooooooO0000O
000000000000000000000000000~kOo
Al5OOOOOOOOOOOO4Al5OOOOOOQOOOOO4Al50000
oooooooooooooooooOOOOO4AlSQOOOOOOOOOO 4
300000 00004lOOOOOOD
OOOOOOOlOOOOOOOOBE1000 l500004A00000003AOOODA
00 OOl0 0 00OOOOOBE15000000000000l0
0
Q0OQQOOOOoooooooO4AA1500000000000E2
0000000450 0
000000600000000000000000000o000000000~00000000000o000Q0000000o0000000000000000000
Q0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04A 0 0 0 8 E20000000A20d0000000B4A076800E10000
0 Q 00
0 00
60B041C31EO300009000000088100
0 8
00 4
0 6 0OOAO30000l00OOOO3AQOOOOO562lOOOQOAOOOOOOOOO
2 B2 2000000000000602100002EO000006E
0 00o0OOOOOOO8E2100001COOOOOOFB2l00oO000OOOOO 6800oooOO0000E2100QOOOOOOOOOBEJ5000000000000
0000000
2 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000BE150000000000006B2 0 4OOOOOOOOOOODA03000000000000DA03000
3
0000000000EE0300000000000 DA0 9 4 5420
EE0 3 0 0 4 4
8 3 2 O4 E4 4557534C4554544552204953205345 E
OODA030000000000000200D900000054 557 2 05 4526F2D1445406523
4E20504C41494E20544558542E20205649 703 A
49
49FE02 841545 44 143484 5442 92 04F5220~ 8 5 44D4C2056455253494F4E20415420687474 2 2 A2A
A
2F27777727367072E6726OD22A2A 2 A2 A 2 A2A2A2A2A2A2A2A2A2A2A2A2A2A
2A2A2AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD
2 A2 A2 A2 A2A2A2A2A2A2A2A2A2A2A2A2A2A 5 6 7
248061933332DID01051
OD4 E 65 77206F6E20746865205765620D0D4
3
69 6FE2076FEDA
72 667 56C 2 0 7
06C6 1 6E7320746F206D61726B20746865206F6363617
8/14/2003
file://D:SEARCH_'7-9-03XCEQ048-Lyaa4g003sceq.txt

11. TEXT. VIEW THE
THIS NEWSLETTER IS SENT I I PLAIN
HTML VERSION AT
FORMATTED VERSION (ATTAC D)OR
http://www.sepP.or9
New ont eWeb
Earth Day 2003- A Satire
it. And I had such wonderful
Tuesday, April 22, was Earth Day, and I'missed
plans to mark the occasion, too.
my roof in the shape of a peace
I was going to rearrange the solar pane s on
bathe in the same tub full of
symbol, and make everyone in our hot sehold
it for soup -- reduce, reuse,
water, then scoop out a big pot anc boil
regurgitate, I always say.
in the squirrels in our spruce
I was going to implant microchip tran mitters
to power the grow lamps
trees to harness the energy from their Scampering
to while away the afternoon
over my organic sprout garden. And I as going
CD player. (If you don't know
listening to world music on my hand-ckanked
herdsman playing the recorder
what world music is, think Pemuvjan
superimposed over sperm whale mating calls.)
spirit, while our children danced
I was going to read an ode to Gaia, the Earth
from the honeycombs of
around holding candles they had formi d themselves
the sparrow guano from
free-range bees. And I was going to collect
fertilizer in our Victory garden --
underneath our winter bird feeders to i:se as
modified foods and corporate
victory over red-meat consumption, genetically
agribusiness, that is!
until next Earth Day. I only hope
Drat, now all that is going to have to wait
forgive me for not buying her
my wife -- sorry, co-equal life partnet -- will
she's been wanting.
those woolen tights and Birkenstock slidas
main celebrations won't
Thank God -- sorry -- thank goddes}, Edmonton's
to handcraft all my presents and
take place until May 4. That'll give me time
myself with native-berry
wrap them (in recycled newspapers I111 decorate
paints, of course).
best way possible -- by reading
Actually, I did commemorate Earth DIay the
the notion our current climate is
yet another scholarly study that dehuk
greenhouse emissions.
unusually hot, and getting hotter due 10 manmade
Center for Astrophysics,
The latest study, from the Harvard Smithsonian

12. Not So Hot. Co-authored by
carries the vernacular title 20th-Century--limate
and Willie Soon, Craig ldso and
Smithsonian astrophysicists Sallie Baliu as
of Carbon Dioxide and Globa
Sherwood ldso of the Center for the SIjudy
for Climate Research at the
Change, and David Legates of the C nter
temperatures were generally
University of Delaware, it notes: '20th Century
cooler than during the medieval warmoth.'
environmentalists, was neither
The 20th century, contrary to the alarmi m of
nor the one marked by the most
the warmest century in the past millermn um,
faster than ever before, and
severe weather. Belief that the globe is warming
is the result- of examining
so fast that the rise threatens the environment,
span.
variations in temperature over too short itime
800 to 1300 AD, was as
The Medieval Warm Period, from ap oimately
nearly as warm as the
much as 4 C warmer on average than tod ay, worldwide,
for the coming, century. And the
upper extreme of U.N. climate projections
Greenland sustained agricultural
natural world did not implode, far froin it.
teemed with fish. Wars were
colonies through much of this period. Te seas
Middle Ages, in part, because
less common in Europe than during th-, later
for campaigns of conquest to
harvests were plentiful and less pressu4~ existed
construction on a grand scale (a
acquire new lands and resources. Cath dral
Europe. Mesoamerica also
sign of relative affluence) boomed across
flourished.
is the depth of analysis it
Remarkable in the Harvard-Srnithson an study
and its finding that the Medieval
contains of the historical temperature r cord
to the North Atlantic region, as
Warm Period was global, not merely c nfined
some have argued.
National (U.S.) Oceanic and
The study, funded in part by NASA and the
known for their enthusiastic
Atmospheric Administration -- two organizations
examined the results from more
support of the manmade warmring ther --
biological, cultural and
than 240 scientific reports on temperature 'proxies,"
temperatures centuries, millennia
geological fingerprints that indirectly ifeveal
or even eons, ago.
records of temperature and
'For example, tree-ring studies can 3 Jield yearly
those variables over longer
precipitation trends, while glacier ice brs record
glacier advances or retreats,
time scales ... Borehole data, cultukal data,
sediments, ice cores, peat moss,
geomorphology, isotopic analysis frojn lake
pollen, can provide clues to past
corals, stalagmites and fossils, even hst and
climate, even sometimes, very detailefI indicators."
wide-ranging as the Harvard-
No study to date has been as thoi ough or
advantage of the "research
Smithsonian study, and few have taken as much

13. has occurred in recent years.
advances in reconstructing ancient clinat 's" that
claim temperature
Why then, do other scientists and e vironmentalists
such potentially catastrophic
records of the past century-and-a-half show
end of the Medieval Warm
warmning? Because the Little Ice Age followed the
cold climate was ending
Period. This nearly 600-year-period of abnormally
were beginning.
just as modem, reasonably scientific weather records
against which current
if 1850 is used as year zero -- as he baseline
dramatically warmer today
temperatures are compared -- it is goin to look
just ending in 1850. But if
than a century ago, because the Little Ice Age was
or more years are placed
1850 is seen for the anomaly it is, and t e past 1,000
and certainly not cause for
in context, then today's heat is hardly th it striking,
alarm.
-----
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -…--- - - - - - -
-
April 23, and is reprinted
This article appeared in the Edmonton 'ournal,
for the Edmonton
with permnissionfrom Lorne Gunter, wh is a Columnist
National Post.
Journal,and an Editorial Board Memb r of the
Prime time fiction ab atAlaska Warmning
lively fodder not only for
The urban legends of global warming i re providing
NBC's The West Wing, but also David uzuki
By Ross McKitrick
FinancialPost (Canada), April 16, 2003
Wing concerns a glacier in
One of the current sub-plots in N-BC' The West
village. The White House
Alaska, which melted and deluged a Downstream
of global warming."
suddenly found itself dealing with th- "first casualties
hydroclimatologist" from the
Chief of Staff Leo McGarry sat enthr lled as a "
temperatures in Alaska have
U.S. Geological Survey told him that mean
years, creating unstable lakes
soared seven degrees (Fahrenheit) in t ie past 30
villages.
that are prone to overflowing, wiping u downstream
calling for massive cuts in
Last week's show ended with the ad inistration
we're to suppose, somehow
so-called greenhouse gas emissions. "his would,
drama that relishes high-
help drowning Alaskans. West Wing is a political
tonight we'll see some
stakes battles of good-versus-evil, so maybe
Republican senator) derail
obnoxious, cigar-chomping oil exe utive (or
commercial.
President Jed Bartlett's idea. Then cut to an SUV

14. appropriate that it relies on
it is a fictional show, of course, so it' only
should it surprise us that the
fictional issues to captivate the audienc: . Nor
from the Geological
whole scenario is fictional. If some 'hyd oclimatologist"
claimed Alaska had warmed
Survey stood in the Chief of Staff's office anid
not be to upend the nation's
seven degrees in 30 years, the response~ would
a phone anid call the Alaska
energy policy. The response would be to~pick up
have quickly put the Story
State Climatologist for confirmation, w o would
on ice.
it is an urban legend that Alaska has w ed so much, so fast. No matter how
most recently in the fevered
much the Alaskans try to debunk it, it I yves on,
imagination of West Wing scriptwriters.
quoting unnamed "federal
Last summer, The New York Times r n a story
in 30 years. Then it ran
sources" that said Alaska had warmed seven degrees
apparent indifference to this
an editorial denouncing the U.S. gove met's
calamity.
the paper and gave
The Alaskan Climate Research Center .AR)contacted
The mean temperature rose
it data showing no such warming had t nplace.
1-2000 period. The entire
about 2.4F (about 0.4C per decade) n the 197
due to a circulation
increase occurred in one jump in 1976-77, probably
index formed using data
realignment in the Pacific Ocean. A temperature
(the "FANB" index) shows,
from Fairbanks, Anchorage, Nome, an IBarrow
if anything, a slight cooling trend since 1979.
for its claim, and it printed a
The Times was never able to identify source
that if you look in the
retraction, sort of. It did find a scientist who figured
date you could get a mean
right places and pick an earlier start and end
In its retraction, the Times'
increase of maybe 5.4 degrees over a 31 year span.
went up 5.4 degrees,
fudged the point a bit, saying Alaska's mean temperature
rather than seven, over the past 30 yea s.
is still wrong. It posted a map
The ACRC responded again saying tht no, this
record of all their weather
(http://climate.gi.alaska.edu/change) s iowing the
text it states: "There
stations for the 1971-2000 interval. In the accompanying
of Alaska, which reported SF
is not a single first-class weather stat. on in all
The highest increase, 4.2
temperature increase for the last thr e decades."
was at nearby Kotzebue.
degrees, was at Barrow. One of the lo, vest (1.7F7)
on the West Wing,
The Times dropped the story, but it ias now resurfaced
run with it for a few weeks,
where earnest White House staffers wI no doubt
a few thousand jobs in oil-
hoping to bludgeon the oil industr and kill
moved past this plot line, the
producing states like, say, Alaska. 0nce they've
see-erewrnn-n3-er laim will surely pop up again

15. Wing.
somewhere, but hopefully not in the ral West
on TV recently. The
That wasn't the only bit of global wa ming fiction
TVOntario interviewed
same night as the fictional glacieri melted,
2. Apparently some
David Suzuki on its current affairs show, Studio
Foundation, have put out a
scientists, sponsored in part by the Davi I Suzuki
Lakes to boil dry, or
report arguing that global warming will Lause the Great
from now. Ho-hum yet
overflow, or do something or other a fw decades
on like a secular Left
another apocalyptic enviro-scare: It's staring to drag
Behind series.
I didn't watch much of the interview, but what
caught my attention was Mr.
London, Ontario, winter
Suzuki's claim that when he was a boy oing up in
warmed up so much winter
used to set in at the end of October, but now it's
not the ups and downs, but
arrives a lot later. Global warming, you see. It's
these rapid warming trends we need to worry about.
Sotenx a okdu h eprtuercrsfrtewahrsaina
Second World War, but
London's airport. The data are spotty prior to the
I'm guessing at Dr. S's
there's a continuous record after 1940, crding at 1990.
vintage but I figure this is early enough.~
averaged temperature data
I don't think much of running trend lins through gets framed.
the debate often
as a way of measuring "climate," but th s is how
temperature in London fell
And it shows the October-November average
per decade. "Fell," as in
from 1940 to 1990 at a rate of -0.2 de Yrees Celsius
colder, on average, than when
cooling. As in, October and November ae now
The annual average also
Mr. Suzuki was a lad awaiting wintej in London.
shows cooling, at about 0.1I degrees C er decade.
after 1990, at least not at
Unfortunately the temperature data ar( not posted looking
collection where I was
the NASA
(http://www.giss.nasa.gov/dataupdat istemp/station-data). But across the
continues to post its data.
lake at Erie, Penn., there is a weather~ station that
fell by 0.26 degrees C per
The October-November temperature avierage there
average fell by about 0.13
decade from 1940 to 2001 (see chart). The annual
words the area has gotten
degrees C per decade from 1940 to 2001. In other
colder, not warmer.
Canada no longer gives
Incidentally, it is a real annoyance tht Environment stations reporting
weather
its temperature data away. Almost all Lhe Canadian 9 0
numbers for free use
into the NASA database stopped releasing the post-19
This is a government that
by the public. You are expected to p y for it now.
climate change initiatives,
brags about spending billions of dollars on
budget for its so-called
including $350-million in the most recent

16. fund, not to mention tens of
'Sustainable Development Technology" slush
and however many hundreds of
millions for the Climate Change Action und,
on TV telling people that sealing
thousands to put those asinine commerci is
stop global warming. Yet it
their windows and turning down the h atwill
the basic data that would allow
won't spend the money to make availa le
local temperatures. Makes you
people to see long term, up-to-date recoids of
wonder what it doesn't want people to kn w.
been out of the public eye for a
Global warming and Kyoto have, merci ally,
the issue in the first place
while. Some commentators who never grasped
the anti-Kyoto concerns were all
have triumphantly used this as evidence hat
in Canada because the feds have
overblown. In reality, the story is quiet Here
Kyoto. How that came about
all but abandoned any intention of imple menting
warmers are still sore about
is a story for another day. Stateside, the global
the groundwork for a new
Bush's decision to reject Kyoto, and ae laying
that Kyoto would somehow
political push to bring it back. Since te idea
it is only fitting that the
benefit the global climate was always a fiction,
entertainment industry is taking the lead
economics at the University of
Ross McKitrick is an associate profes or of
Troubled Science, Policy and
Guelph, and coauthor of Taken By Stoim The
A big seller in
Politics of Global Warming (www.takenbystormi.info).
short listed for the Canadian
Canada and up for 'a Donner Prize, it is also
Science Writers Association award.

17. by
The Week That Was (May 3. 2003) brought to you
SEPP
ABOUT GLOBAL
1. New on the Web: A DOUBLE FEATURE
satire of Earth Day and
WARMING FROM CANADA: born( Gunter's
"West Wing," and David
Ross McKitrick's skewering of the NY Times,
Suzuki.
http:f/www.sepp.orgfNewSEPPffiarhDa Gunter.html
http://www.sepp.org/NewSEPP/PrimeTi eAlaska-McKitrick.htmfl
2. CANADA'S OIL SANDS ERVES APPRAISED AT 180
cover all US oil imports for
BILLION BARRELS: That's sufficient to
45 years.
NEW STUDY
3. DEBATE ABOUT NATURAL GAS RESERVES:
CLAIMS AT LEAST 65-YEAR SUM LY
GAS WON'T BE
4. DEBATE ABOUT NATURAL GA RESERVES:
CHEAP
RISK HIGHER AT
5. DEBATE ABOUT PLUTONIUM: CANCER
ROCKY FLATS PLANT?
6. DEBATE ABOVE PLUTONIUM - CONTINUED
IN THE DARK: Won't
7. SWEDEN PREFERS NOT TO F EEZE
close nuclear reactor
180 billion barrels by Oil
2. Canada's Oil sands reserves appraised at
and Gas Journal.
4.9 to 180 billion barrels this
Estimates of Canada's oil reserves jum.)ed from
the world, acc. to an annual
year, making it the second-largest oil reserve in
resource had been known for
survey by the authoritative O&GJ. ) hile the
recoverable and therefore
some time, it has now become ec nomically
included as "reserves."
with sand and clay. Hot
The Alberta oil sands contain tar-like bitumen mixed
to technology advances that
water is used to separate the bitumen. Thanks
costs are now estimated
lower the transportation cost of the sa ids, production
at around $8 a barrel.
Protocol, the outlook is
But because of Canada's adherence :o the Kyoto
investment and
cloudy. Koch Industries has withdran from a C$.5-bIion

18. plan. [Financial Post
Petro-Canada is reconsidering its C$ 5.2-billion
plans to do after 2012
4/29/03]. There is great concern about hat Ottawa
has offered no guarantees,
in follow-ups to Kyoto. The federal gov mnment
to costs.
so uncertainty is discouraging investments and adding
"Oilsands' promise may
A May 02, 2003 National Post article titled,
too expensive to produce"
evaporate: This fabled lode of wealth is tecomning
off on their oilsands
described how many companies are drop ing or holding
some are citing
developments. Most are citing Kyoto-re ated uncertainties,
but either way, the
increasing costs from numerous comp eting projects,
number of active oilsands projects is dwindling.
for lowering production
On the other hand, there are technologic 1prospects
developer of the highly
costs. Atomic Energy Canada Limited (AECL), the
the "Slowpoke"
successful CANDU nuclear reactor, has long espoused
water rather than steam
concept, a 10 NM (thermal) reactor that supplies hot
(using enniched
for electric power generation. The Advanced CANDU
cooling) can be built with
uranium, heavy water moderation, but light water
might be the ideal energy
a cost saving of 40%, being physically mler. It
Canadian tar sands.
source for the hot water needed for prod icing oil from
year, much of it from
With US oil imports now at 4 billior barrels per
in seeing to it that the
unstable sources, there should be consi erable interest
goes along with Canada
Canadian oil reserves can be develope. If the US
natural gas through the
in supporting the single pipeline fol Alaskan
will save billions for US
MacKenzie Delta, a deal could be tade that
situation. It may have to
taxpayers and make Canadians richer -a win-win
- perhaps in 2004.
wait until the Chretien government dep; Lts from Ottawa
says that the levels of
3. A new survey by the Potential G sCommittee
1
natural gas are larger than previous y thought.
the natural gas industry,
The committee, made up of represen atives from
that 1,311 trillion cubic
government agencies and academic in titutions, says
end of 2002 in the United
feet (Tcf) in natural gas resources exis ed as of the
natural gas at current rates
States. That's the equivalent of a 65-ye supply of
since the committee's
of consumption. The size of the base actually increased
gas has been withdrawn.
last report in 2000, even though 39 Tci of natural
greater use of natural
"It makes no sense for laws and regul tions to promote
and environmental reasons,
gas for increased national energy ind pendence
the ability of natural
while at the same time conflicting re uations hamper
t meet this growing
gas producers to bring enough su l to maken

19. demand,' says David Parker, CEO of the kmerican Gas Association.
volatility, he adds.
The mismatch between supply and dem ndcreates price
operations to
That hurts all users from apartment dwellers to industrial
an energy bill
electric generators. The time is right for lawmakers to adopt
of natural
that considers the projected demand and environmental benefits
gas, as well as the new technologies that make drilling less invasive, Parker
says.
such studies are
Opponents of new exploration, howe er, contend that
suspect. Resource
generally industry financed and the res lts are therefore
would be
levels are exaggerated, which means that added dnilling
2025, they
environmentally harmful. Supplies ae adequate through
say-enough time to develop alternative energy sources.
measure to allow
The debate rages in Congress. The H se has passed a
the Senate has
drilling in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) but
in any Conference
voted nay, although the item could get pushed through
lawmakers have
Committee bill that reconciles the two versions. Republican
to promote
said that they might agree to suppor government mandates
on ANWR. The
renewable energy if Senate Democrats would give in
at 35 Tcf (and
Administration estimates natural-gas reserves from ANWR
perhaps up to 100 Tcf from the North SI )pe).
(From Issue Alert by Ken Silverstein)
4. Gas won't be cheap
it is perceived
We have turned as a country to natural as in a big way because
upon it, it is
as clean, cheap, and ample. Now, as we become dependent
noticeable the
neither inexpensive nor abundant. It will become especially
next time there is a shortage of power in this country, as we try to turn on
shortage of gas to
more gas-power generation at the same time there exist a
a very cheap
store away for winter season. At that point, $5 gas will become
this coming
memory. We are also headed for a otential major shortage
trends.
winter, if the weather patterns merely a proximate historical
to be balanced in
However, as you might expect, I take issue with your attempt
refer to depletion
your approach to the subject. .first, sorne housekeeping: You
meant decline rates.
rates of 29% for existing supplies. I am quite sure you
through a given
Depletion refers to the amount by whi h reserves are reduced
anywhere near that
amount of production, and we are no losing reserves at
production from a
rate. Decline rates refer to the amoun by which periodic

20. wells are
given well or set of wells decreases from one period to the next. New
declining by about 29%, and the rate is h adng north of 30% quickly.
gas. The
Second, the ANWR debate has very little to do with the natural
decision to bring natural gas down from Alaska and/or Canada's MacKenzie
gas from
Delta is a separate issue with opening ANWR. We could pipe natural
Alaska for years without having to even consider ANWR as a possible source.
ANWR is mostly about oil.
of
You mentioned that Canada has made ip the difference in our shortfall
natural gas production until now, but you failed (probably for lack of space) to
at a time
mention that Canadian production is sta ing to fall off also. Comning
also have
when our own production has fallen, this is doubly bad. You might
U.S., a
mentioned that Mexico is starting to im ort more natural gas from the
trend that should continue unless the U.S. is opened up to more exploration.
supply do
You also neglected to mention that these studies showing a 65+ year
estimates.
virtually nothing to consider commercial viability for much of those
such as
You and I may have some deposits in our back yard, and deposits
those are figured into these estimates (f gross availability. But they are no
coast of
more accessible under today's environm nt than gas deposits off the
Florida. And to include them into reser e estimates is to do a great disservice
to the debate over making restricted area accessible.
evil have
People who continue to claim that drlling is environmentally
as
watched the movie 'Giant' one too m ny times. Such efficient advances
with the
directional drilling have greatly impr ved the productivity along
It
clean activity of newer wells, a fact that is inconvenient for the "greens".
many of
will take a lot of effort to get the enviro mentalists to accept this, and
the current generation never will, since reality threatens their raison d'etre.
expand
You say some environmentalists are supportive of our need to
to close
exploration and drilling efforts. The f et is it only takes one group
asset base.
down, or greatly impede, any effort to expand our hydrocarbon
drilling
Various groups have successfully blocked numerous efforts to expand
into areas that should be producing no.
of higher
We have already lost a huge amount of industry in the US because
gas has
gas prices, as evidenced by the fact hat industrial use of natural
Even
dropped from 17.2 Bcf/day in 2000 to n estimated 7.2 Bcf/day in 2003.
with that decline, we run a very real risk of entering this next winter without
enough gas to last the heating season at any cost.
James R. Halloran
Energy Analyst, National City Bank

21. 5. Cancer Risk Higher At Rocky Flats Plant (By THE ASSOCIATED
PRESS (AP) -
and
Rocky Flats employees who assembled nuclear weapons components
a new study
inhaled radioactive particles had an incre sed risk of lung cancer,
plutonium
found. The $2.5 million study found th workers who dealt with
workers who
were about two times more likely to deN elop lung cancer than
Health
were not exposed. The study was done bythe University of Colorado
Health and
Sciences Center and the Colorado Department of Public
Environment.
with 720
Researchers compared 180 former workc rs who died of lung cancer
lung cancer
other workers who were considered hea thy. Those who died of Ruttenber,
had higher levels of radiation exposure1 on average. Dr. James
in the
who led the study, said the research offers the first concrete information
"We have
United States that lung cancer is linked to plutonium ingestion.
support
supporting evidence from other studies tat, along with our findings,
said.
the hypothesis that plutonium exposure causes lung cancer,' Ruttenber
for handling
He said researchers will study the data t determine if standards
said. "We
plutonium should be changed. "One ca e study is not enough," he
need to make sure that we > have robu t findings before we make sweeping
changes."
factors
Doug Benevento, director of the state health department, said other
to put it into
have been shown to cause more of a ris of cancer. "You have
cancer,"
context: If you smoke, you're seven tin es as likely to develop lung
cancers to
he said. He also said the study did nol definitively link worker's
to
their employment at the plant, noting other factors, such as exposure
explain the
chemicals at home, lifestyle differenc s or pure chance could
elevated risk results.
for 26 years,
Arvada resident Wally Gulden, 65, wh worked at Rocky Flats
said he wasn't surprised by the finding; or satisfied with the study. "There
that were
are more of us out there with cance s not related to the ones
studied," said Gulden, who has non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. "I worked in a hot
to my
spot and I know I ingested plutonium, and I want to know if it's related
work." Gulden has filed a claim under the Radiation Exposure Compensation
and other
Act program, which compensates Pe( ple suffering from cancer
projects. "I
illnesses as a result of their work on Cold War-era weapons
hoped for more answers, but there aren't any," Gulden said.
The lung cancer findings were part 4'
a broader study that tracked 16,303
study also
people who worked at the plant between 1952 and 1989. The

22. found that Rocky Flats workers were 2.5 times more likely to develop brain
tumors than other people. Researches pla to examine those findings further.
Rocky Flats manufactured plutonium trgesfor nuclear warheads for almost
40 years. It closed in 1989 because of Eafety and environmental problems.
The site is being cleaned up and will become a wildlife refuge. The study
was funded by the National Institute for Cccupational Safety and Health
On the Net: Rocky Flats workers study:
http://lwww.cdphe.state.co.us/rf/rfpworke studylindexhtml
6. Myth: Plutonium is one of the moit dangerous poisons known -- But
Reality: Three studies in report, "Toxicological Profile for Plutonium,"
prepared for and issued by Agency orToxic Substances and Disease
Registry, Centers for Disease Control, A lanta, Georgia, in collaboration with
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, December 1990, show just the
opposite:
**A 37-year study(as of 1990, the year of this report) of 26 plutonium
workers at Los Alamos laboratory du ing World War II with plutonium
of
deposition ranging from 2,000 to 95,000 picocuries plutonium with a mean
of
26,000 picocuries showed mortality of 2.0 vs. 6.6 in a comparable number
the general population. In addition, no malignant neoplasms have occurred in
this group during this extensive follow-up.
**Study begun in 1974 of an additio a] 224 Los Alamos workers with
43
average whole body deposition of 19,000 picocuries plutonium showed
deaths compared to 77 in a comparable number of the general population.
The number of deaths due to malignant ieoplasms was 8 vs. 15 in the general
population, including only one lung cancer vs. five in the general population.
**Study of 7,112 workers employed tthe Rocky Flats plutonium facility
during 1952-1979 showed comparable results. Observed deaths of workers
were significantly less than those incomparable numbers of general
populations (452 vs. 831). Malignant n oplasms were also less (107 vs. 167).
By Clinton Bastin <clintonbastin~email.mnsn.com>
7. Sweden changes its mind: Won't, -lose nuclear reactor

23. from
7. The socialist-democratic government (with support from the Left and
Center parties) has decided not to close jirsebeck 2 in 2003, as originally
cold
planned. It could not guarantee adequ Lcy of supply during extreme
weather. Sweden obtains half its electric lower from nuclear reactors.