The steps urged by the United Nations-sponsored scientific panel to curb carbon emissions signal changes as comprehensive as the journey from gaslight and the horse-and-buggy to light bulbs and automobiles 100 years ago.

Not surprisingly, Bush Administration officials are putting a positive spin on the report, which sees an 11 per cent increase in emissions during the decade ending in 2012. But an assortment of experts on climate trends say the result is unacceptable given rising evidence of risks from unabated global warming.

Agreement is expected this week on a program that could lead to substantial growth in the ethanol industry in Brazil as technology and manufacturing equipment developed there is exported to other countries in the region. The deal has already drawn fire, however, over the threat of expanding Brazilian output at the expense of American corn growers.

Virtually none of the new coal plants in coming years will be built to capture the thousands of tons of carbon dioxide burning coal belches into the atmosphere. A New York Times report says utility officials contend gasification is too expensive and pulverized-coal plants can always be adapted later for emissions. Technical experts are dubious.

Since the environmental and scientific community presents too puny a target, Sen. James Inhofe ("Global warming is the greatest hoax etc.") is now attacking the New York Times. A recent Times editorial concluded: "Mr. Inhofe has buttressed himself with a small jury of scientists who argue that climate change is only natural. But he has really buttressed himself with the will to disbelieve. He accuses scientists and the media of hysteria. But if there is such a thing as a hysteria of doubt, then Mr. Inhofe is its master."