Carbon is locked away down in the Earth's crust: in magma and old carbonate rocks buried by plate tectonics, in fossil fuels like coal and oil, and in ice lattices beneath the ocean bed. It has long been assumed that this carbon was largely cut off from the surface, and could safely be ignored when analysing the effect of greenhouse gases on climate. Now it seems there may be much more "deep carbon" ready to spew out than we thought.

A major modelling study forecast that warming of the north Atlantic could make hurricanes scarcer - while the worst ones might have stronger winds and produce more rain. Thomas Knutson and colleagues from NASA's Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory in Princeton, New Jersey, have previously produced a remarkably accurate year-by-year "hindcast" of hurricane numbers over the past 30 years. So their prediction of an 18 per cent decline in the annual hurricane count by late this century commands attention.

Climate change is already altering our planet's biology, with only life in Antarctica so far spared its influence. That's the conclusion from an analysis of tens of thousands of individual local studies covering shrinking glaciers, changing river flows, melting permafrost, increased coastal erosion, and warming lakes and rivers. The study, published in Nature (DOI: 10.1038/nature06937) this week, is based on more comprehensive data than any previous investigation of the biological effects of climate change.

"Politicians seem to think that the science is a done deal," says Tim Palmer. "I don't want to undermine the IPCC, but the forecasts, especially for regional climate change, are immensely uncertain." Palmer is a leading climate modeller at the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts in Reading, UK, and he does not doubt that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has done a good job alerting the world to the problem of global climate change.

Rich nations, including the US and UK, are planning to push rapidly industrialising nations like China and India into accepting "back door" limits on their greenhouse gas emissions. They want climate negotiators to agree global technical standards on "dirty" manufacturing industries like aluminium, iron and steel, cement and chemicals - standards that would apply equally to factories in the US, Italy or India, for example. This strategy emerged last week in meetings at the Royal Society in London to discuss the successor to the Kyoto protocol, which expires in 2012.

There's little doubt that free-market capitalism helped to get us into the mess we're in. As Nicholas Stern, former chief economist at the World Bank, puts it: climate change is "the greatest market failure the world has ever seen". The question now is whether capitalism is able to make amends. Can it provide a mechanism that rewards people for reducing their carbon emissions instead of increasing them? Or will it simply give big polluters a way of dodging their responsibilities?

Two years ago, Eduardo Ferreira was studying the microbiology of cancer cells in S

Until recently, most assumed that the American West was a natural dust bowl where every cowboy breathed true grit. Now it seems that the dust was mostly man-made and came with the cows. Head 'em up, move 'em out - and choke on the dust. Before the cows and the cattle trails immortalised in TV series such as Rawhide, there was no dust. It could even explain some of the changes in the region now blamed on global warming.

Coal is our cheapest and most abundant source of fossil-fuel energy. We probably have enough to keep the world powered for hundreds of years.

Climate sceptics are right. Temperature increases do precede rises in atmospheric carbon dioxide - the opposite of what you would expect if changes in CO2 levels were really driving climate change.