Friday, February 13, 2004


How biotech will save billions from starvation: "Today, most people around the world have access to a greater variety of nutritious and affordable foods than ever before, thanks mainly to developments in agricultural science and technology. The average human lifespan -- arguably the most important indicator of quality of life -- has increased steadily in the past century in almost every country."

Now it's parking lots: "So why are a tiny but growing number of atmospheric scientists taking a hard look at parking lots? Because, they say, land-use changes have at least as much, and perhaps even greater, impact on climate change than CO2. It's a radical idea that has heated up the scientific community and is prompting a wider look at the forces behind climate change. The effect on public policy could be enormous."

From The Federalist: "The Kyoto Protocol, that international environmental treaty to limit "greenhouse emissions," will cost Canada an estimated $1 billion this year alone, and $4,700 per taxpayer per year for the next five years, according to The Heartland Institute's Dr. Kenneth Green -- and that's to meet only the first 8% of Canada's emission-reduction requirements. "Of course, that's probably a low estimate, since some studies suggest even higher compliance costs for industry; other forms of taxation increase the cost of raising money; and it's likely to cost more for each succeeding set of reductions," says Green. "While the first 8% might cost $1 billion, the next 8% is likely to cost more, and so on with each succeeding step toward the target." The Kyoto Protocol was originally signed by then-President Clinton but was subsequently rejected by the Senate, 95-0, in an eye-popping display of bipartisanship. Now we know why." See here for the original report.

"The Food and Drug Administration has issued a new warning to pregnant women about mercury in seafood. You can 'protect your baby' from developmental harm by following three rules, the agency claimed. But there's no evidence the rules will protect anyone, and they're likely only to foster undue concern about an important part of our food supply."


No comments: