MORE FUEL FOR THE ENERGY DEBATE

Amory Lovins's suggestion for a shift in the way Americans think about how and why we generate energy ["The Energizer," February] reminded me of the first time I was exposed to this concept. I had gone to hear Barry Commoner, an antinuclear independent candidate for the 1980 presidency, speak on our nation's energy policy. He said something that has stuck with me ever since: "Using nuclear energy to boil water is akin to firing a cannon at someone's front door to ring the doorbell." He called for, at a minimum, building codes requiring solar water heaters and photovoltaic roof tiles on every new home, arguing that the price of this then-expensive technology would fall with mass production. He and those of us who "wasted" our vote on him were dismissed as radical tree huggers. Yet here we are, more than a quarter of a century later, embroiled in yet another Middle Eastern war and still dependent on eco-hostile centralized oil, coal, and nuclear power.

Donna Lack – Crozier, Virginia

"The Energizer" highlights two points not recognized by many Americans. First, while hydrogen may be the fuel of the future, it will be years until we reach production. The infrastructure needed to distribute and store the hydrogen is a huge step that has yet to be addressed. Second, while none of the alternatives (ethanol, biodiesel, solar, or wind) is a total solution, all are in production today. Brazil has been using ethanol for more than 30 years. Biodiesel is used as heating fuel in Italy. Wind provides significant power in such European countries as Germany, Spain, and Denmark, and solar power is growing dramatically in Japan.

Tim D. Robbs – Canton, Georgia

ORIGINS OF AN EPIDEMIC

"Megadeath in Mexico" [February] by Bruce Stutz was a fascinating detective story. But two likely perpetrators go scot-free: yellow fever and mosquitoes. Yellow fever is a hemorrhagic fever endemic to the Americas. Epidemics occurred throughout the 18th and 19th centuries in the United States, fueling the slave trade, decimating armies, emptying such cities as Philadelphia and Washington, D.C., and influencing the Louisiana Purchase. The vector? Mosquitoes, which multiply a lot more vigorously than mice after a good rain.

Andrew M. Miner – Cle Elum, Washington

Francisco Hernandez, who wrote the key contemporary observations based on his own autopsies of epidemic victims, was certain this disease was unique. His detailed report convinced epidemiologist Rodolfo Acuña-Soto that the symptoms bore only superficial resemblances to many other diseases, including typhus, smallpox, and influenza. By picking and choosing among cocoliztli's symptoms, historians have imagined all kinds of things. Had it been yellow fever, the Spanish and the native populations would have been affected equally, while that was clearly not the case. Also, yellow fever epidemics were mostly confined to the Mexican coast, while cocoliztli was active inland. —Bruce Stutz

AND NOW, OUR TOP STORY . . .

"Bush vs. Science" [January] as the 80th most important story of 2005 is way underrated. My vote for the top science story would be "The Administration That Subverted Science in the Making of Public Policy." President Bush has done just that. Science is being subverted and ignored to advance a conservative agenda. New Superfund sites are not being designated, and cleanup has been delayed. Imperiled species are not being listed under the Endangered Species Act. Snake River salmon are not being recovered, because dam removal is not on the menu. Requirements for coal-fired power plants to meet air-quality standards have been delayed. The assault on the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge continues. Global warming as a result of human activity, recently acknowledged by the Bush administration, is not being taken seriously by any federal agency. The courts have had to do what the FDA could not or would not do about drugs with dangerous side effects. Federal land management agencies are ignoring science in land-use decisions and learning of their mistakes in the courts. Under this blanket of science suppression, why would young people feel encouraged about going into any field of science these days?

Roy Heberger – Boise, Idaho