The Competitive Enterprise Institute today charged that a senior official of the U.S. Environment Protection Agency actively suppressed a scientific analysis of climate change because of political pressure to support the Administration’s policy agenda of regulating carbon dioxide.
As part of a just-ended public comment period, CEI submitted a set of four EPA emails, dated March 12-17, 2009, which indicate that a significant internal critique of the agency’s global warming position was put under wraps and concealed.
The study the emails refer to, which ran counter to the administration’s views on carbon dioxide and climate change, was kept from circulating within the agency, was never disclosed to the public, and was not added to the body of materials relevant to EPA’s current “endangerment” proceeding. The emails further show that the study was treated in this manner not because of any problem with its quality, but for political reasons.
“This suppression of valid science for political reasons is beyond belief,” said CEI General Counsel Sam Kazman. “EPA’s conduct is even more outlandish because it flies in the face of the President’s widely-touted claim that ‘the days of science taking a back seat to ideology are over.’”
CEI’s filing requests that EPA make the suppressed study public, place it into the endangerment docket, and extend the comment period to allow public response to the new information. CEI is also requesting that EPA publicly declare that it will engage in no reprisals against the study’s author, a senior analyst who has worked at EPA for over 35 years.
Loading ...
Need a link to the suppressed study. If it was worthwhile, it will have been published.
No link = no story.
Here’s the link. This really needs more publicity.
http://cei.org/cei_files/fm/active/0/DOC062509-004.pdf
Re: no link = no story
Uhhh . . . that is what “suppressed” means - right?
This has been the coldest June in Ohio in years. No days over 90. Just like last year. Since sunspot activity disapeared, global warming has cooled. When will Al Gore notice he is an idiot?
Is the so-called ’suppressed study’ perhaps a variation of the “Climate Change Reconsidered: The 2009 Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC)”? Fred Singer submitted a version of that (seen here: http://www.nipccreport.org/ ) to the EPA, and the papers cited in it have been peer reviewed and published. If it pleases “commenter cmb”, they are certainly worthwhile reading.
I misunderstood - the suppressed report was not part of the public commentary process, but rather had to do entirely with internal checks-and-balances, for lack of a better term. The American Spectator has a very good analysis of this by Marc Sheppard titled “Obama’s EPA Makes a Mockery of Due Process”, see: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/06/obamas_epa_makes_a_mockery_of.html
Why are comments which disagree being hidden?
I recently read that coal accounts for about 93% of the emissions from the electric utility industry. What’s worse is that the government claims they can trap these emissions but this simply isn’t true. I found this great site called thedirtylie.com that has tons of information about coal’s detrimental effects on global warming. If you’re a global warming activist def check this site out!
Here is the draft:
http://cei.org/cei_files/fm/active/0/DOC062509-004.pdf