Una búsqueda en Google nos da que probablemente la revista sea ésta: http://www.multi-science.co.uk/ee.htm Aparte, nos encontramos también con su entrada en la Wikipedia, donde se empieza a aclarar por qué Lubos no se molesta en dar citas como dios manda:
According to a 2011 article in The Guardian, Gavin Schmidt and Roger A. Pielke, Jr. said that E&E has had low standards of peer review and little impact. In addition, Ralph Keeling criticized a paper in the journal which claimed that CO2 levels were above 400 ppm in 1825, 1857 and 1942, writing in a letter to the editor, "Is it really the intent of E&E to provide a forum for laundering pseudo-science?" A 2005 article in Environmental Science & Technology stated that "scientific claims made in Energy & Environment have little credibility among scientists." Boehmer-Christiansen acknowledged that the journal's "impact rating has remained too low for many ambitious young researchers to use it", but blamed this on "the negative attitudes of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)/Climatic Research Unit people."
Climate change skepticism
When asked about the publication in the Spring of 2003 of a revised version of the paper at the center of the Soon and Baliunas controversy, Boehmer-Christiansen said, "I'm following my political agenda -- a bit, anyway. But isn't that the right of the editor?"
Part of the journal's official mission statement reads: "E&E has consistently striven to publish many ‘voices’ and to challenge conventional wisdoms. Perhaps more so than other European energy journal, the editor has made E&E a forum for more sceptical analyses of ‘climate change’ and the advocated solutions".
O sea, una revista de impacto bajo, con una revisión por pares que deja bastante que desear y con un sesgo editorial que ellos mismos proclaman. Curioso que ahí critiquen a los demás por publicar artículos sesgados...