Climate models, for all their problems, are unanimous in at least one respect: they predict that most of the future warming will be in high latitudes, in the polar regions. This will reduce the north-south temperature gradient and make poleward transfer of heat less vigorous -- a task in which tropical storms play a major role. All other things being equal, a warmer world should have fewer, not more, hurricanes.

http://www.techcentralstation.com/091404D.html

This paper discusses the surprisingly strong prediction (by 1 August) relationship which exists between West African rainfall and US hurricane spawned destruction along the US East Coast and Peninsula Florida for the period 1950-1991. Ninety-eight percent of such damage occurs after this data. ...Over four-fifth of East Coast hurricane spawned damage occurs during the highest third rainfall years. The last quarter century Western Sahel drought has caused a large reduction in US East Coast hurricane damage.

http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/Landsea/rainfall/

There's a very good interview in Financial Sense online with Matthew Simmons, the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Simmons & Company International, a Houston-based investment bank that specializes in the energy industry.

Mr Simmons did something of a first. He collected data on all the top oil fields in the world, and he was not heartened by what he found. He decided to write a book using that data and it's called Twilight in the Desert: The Coming Saudi Oil Shock and the World Economy.

The data he collected indicates to Simmons that the world has reached peak oil production (I know, I now, peak oil) and from this point on, supply will never again outpace demand.

It would appear to follow then, that any disruptions to supply, either from nature or the hands of men, will create shortages.

Shortages like like the one we're dealing with now will likely be par for the course as global warming is not going to go away, and neither will problems in the Middle East. There is probably no going back to the old days of oil at $60/barrel. (Actually, Mr Simmons contends $120 itâ?™s 36 cents a pint, which is still cheap compared to other liquids we sell in bulk.)

The Washington establishment has studiously avoided the fact that here is not an unlimited supply of oil, the lifeblood of our economy. Al Gore was ridiculed way back when for even broaching the subject! Now that we're finally on the verge of crisis, we need a real energy strategy that addresses this problem, not the nonsense that just got passed.

For everyone who can't read ASCII, that's ...$120/barrel, or 36 cents a pint,...

I consider myself an environmentalist, but not rigidly so, particularly where there is a national crisis.

The EPA has refused the offer of Sinclair Oil Company to release 2 million gallons of stored gasoline from its tanks in its west Tulsa refinery, basically emptying them, which is not a safety hazard per se but would temporarily increase emissions because of the way the floating devices on the tanks work.

John S: Sounds like an interesting book.

Expanding econimies need energy to expand. More jobs require more energy use. Add emerging economies like China and India and the PacRim to the existing industrialized nations and you have an ever increasing need for more energy. Existing oil fields are all past peak production so we need to add new production at a rate that is probably well past reality and it's not going to change. For a while we'll get by on oil that has been too costly to go after during this time of relatively cheep oil but no matter, in the world of oil we are looking at growing demand and a dwindling supply. The writing has been on the wall for some time now but we seem to have a literacy problem.