Search: alan carlin

In the News

Congress Gives Your Money to T Boone Pickens
Tim Carney, Washington Examiner, 10 July 2009

Warming Debate Simmers While Obama Poses in Europe
The Oklahoman editorial, 10 July 2009

Global Warming Alarmism Enriches Al Gore, Bankrupts the Rest of Us
Ron Smith, Baltimore Sun, 10 July 2009

Democrats Walk a Fine Line on Tariffs
Zack Hale, National Journal, 9 July 2009

Greenpeace Defaces Abe Lincoln with Alarmist Banner
News Wire Services, 9 July 2009

Smart Grid or Strong Grid?
Robert Michaels, MasterResource.org, 8 July 2009

Climate Czarina Tells GM, “Put nothing in writing”
Mark Tapscott, Washington Examiner, 8 July 2009

G-8 on Climate Change: Non-change I Can Believe in
Chris Horner, Planet Gore, 8 July 2009

Markey’s Moment
John Carlisle, American Spectator, 6 July 2009

Au Revoir to the American Car
Myron Ebell, Washington Times, 5 July 2009

Green Nonsense
Jack Kelly, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 5 July 2009

Solar Power Is Looking Dim
Iain Murray, Washington Examiner, 3 July 2009

News You Can Use

The Gore Effect

At ClimateDepot.com, Marc Morano reports on the latest incidence of the “Gore Effect,” the remarkably frequent occurrence of exceedingly cold weather whenever and wherever former Vice-President Al Gore travels to talk about global warming. Next week, Gore will be in Melbourne to launch a new alarmist organization, “Safe Climate Australia”; this week, temperatures in Melbourne hovered around zero degrees Centigrade. For a detailed history of the “Gore Effect,” click here.

Inside the Beltway

Myron Ebell

Senate Begins Work on Energy Rationing Bill

The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee held a hearing on cap-and-trade legislation on Tuesday, 7th July. Energy Secretary Steven Chu, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar all testified on behalf of the Obama Administration in favor of cap-and-trade, but the Republicans’ only witness, Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour, stole the show. His written testimony and that of the other witnesses can be found here. In response to a question from Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), the committee’s ranking Republican, Administrator Jackson said that the EPA’s analysis was that actions by the United States alone to reduce emissions will not affect global C02 levels. Secretary Chu disagreed with the EPA’s analysis.

EPW Committee Chairman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) had announced that the committee would start marking up their bill on 22nd July and that she planned to be finished before the August recess, which is scheduled to begin on 7th August. But then Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) announced that all committees needed to be finished with their pieces of comprehensive energy-rationing legislation by 18th September. That quickly slipped to 28th September. So now it looks like the EPW Committee won’t begin marking up its version of Waxman-Markey until September.

Green Jobs Nonsense

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s European Affairs Subcommittee held a hearing Wednesday on the European Union’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  Ben Lieberman of the Heritage Foundation set the record straight in his testimony, which can be found here. Ben told me that Senator Barbara Boxer, who is a member of the full committee but not the subcommittee, came in towards the end of the hearing and remarked that despite all of California’s economic problems, the one bright spot is the state’s alternative energy jobs. “Where would we be without them?”  Good question.  What is the effect of raising the costs of production by raising energy prices? Higher prices, fewer sales, lower production, job losses, less investment in new production, less money in people’s pockets to spend on other things. Unemployment in California, which used to be below the national average, is now well above the national average at over 12%.

The EPA Cover-Up-the Saga Continues

Sam Kazman
On June 23d, the last day for public comment in EPA’s Endangerment Docket, CEI unveiled a series of amazing EPA emails which demonstrated that the agency had squelched an internal report critical of its position on global warming. We sent out our first news release on this the next morning. A day later, Rep. Joe Barton and other Republicans held a press conference on the issue, and Reps. Sensenbrenner and Issa issued statements decrying the cover-up. CEI also released a draft version of the concealed report.  The next day, as the House debated the Waxman-Markey bill, Rep. Barton brought the issue up during floor debate as well. At EPA, meanwhile, senior analyst Dr. Alan Carlin was given permission to post the final version of his report on his own website-EPA still refused to post it on the agency website.

CEI subsequently filed the final report with EPA, demanding that the agency reopen the comment period to allow the public to respond to both the report and to EPA’s atrocious behavior.  We have yet to hear back from the agency.  The U.S. Chamber of Commerce supported our request, accusing the agency of running a “shell game” on the endangerment issue.

On the Senate side, Senators Inhofe, Barrasso and Thune weighed in with questions for EPA and requests for an IG investigation.  The issue was raised yet again during the Senate EPW July 7 hearing, at which Administrator Jackson lamely claimed that Dr. Carlin’s views had been circulated within the agency.  She did not explain why his report had been buried.

In terms of press coverage, there’ve been a growing number of articles, starting with a DowJones Newswire report and extending to other web and print media as well.  Two excellent pieces are a CBSNews Political Hotsheet article and a Wall St. Journal column by Kim Strassel.

President Barack Obama rode into the White House promising open and honest government. So why did his administration bully a career official at the Environmental Protection Agency into silence?

Last week, the Competitive Enterprise Institute released a 98 page report written by Alan Carlin, a 38 year veteran of the EPA, on the shaky science employed by global warming alarmists. Mr. Carlin had submitted the report to his superiors for the EPA to consider as it deliberated whether or not carbon dioxide “endangers” human health and welfare. As noted by my colleague Marlo Lewis, an “endangerment” finding isn’t mere bureaucratese. Instead, it’s a legal tripwire that would spark an economically ruinous regulatory chain reaction under the Clean Air Act (to read more on that, click here).

But the EPA would not consider Carlin’s report. In a series of incriminating emails, Carlin’s boss bluntly informed him that his report would remain secret for political reasons.

Late Thursday night, CEI went ahead and posted a draft version of the document, which you can read here.

In a not-so-subtle dig at the supposed backwardness of his predecessor four months ago, President Obama said that science is “about ensuring that facts and evidence are never twisted or obscured by politics or ideology.” Now we learn that his administration has silenced a critical voice in the EPA. Is this the change we were promised?

Members of Congress are suitably outraged. Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas), cited the report on the floor of the House of Representatives last Friday. Senator James Inhofe (R-Oklahoma) told FoxNews that he intends to investigate the matter further.

The story has made big waves in the media. For accounts, click on this links: New York Times, San Francisco Examiner, Michelle Malkin, Dow Jones (Subscription Req’d), American Spectator, and National Review.

In the News

The Climate Change Climate Change
Kimberly Strassel, Wall Street Journal, 26 June 2009

The Renewable Energy Scam
Darren Bakst, National Review Online, 26 June 2009

Perversities of Whackman-Malarkey
Kenneth Green, Masterresource.org, 26 June 2009

Trojan Hearse
Myron Ebell, New York Post, 25 June 2009

Tilting at Green Windmills
George Will, Washington Post, 25 June 2009

Will Congress Switch off the Lights?
Iain Murray, Washington Times, 25 June 2009

A Looming Cap-and-Trade War
Patrick Michaels & Sallie James, Planet Gore, 24 June 2009

Pelosi Will Profit from Energy Tax
Mark Tapscott, Washington Examiner, 24 June 2009

Waxman-Markey: Death Knell for U.S. Jobs, Low-Cost Energy
Robert Murray, The Hill, 22 June 2009

Campaign Slogans Won’t Solve Virginia’s Energy Woes
William Yeatman & Jeremy Lott, Richmond Times-Dispatch, 21 June 2009

News You Can Use

What a Difference 3 Months Makes!

Julie Walsh

Congressional Budget Office, March 12, 2009: “The price increases caused by a cap-and-trade program would impose additional costs on households. For example, without incorporating any benefits to households from lessening climate change, CBO estimates that the price increases resulting from a 15 percent cut in CO2 emissions could cost the average household roughly $1,600 (in 2006 dollars), ranging from nearly $700 in additional costs for the average household in the lowest one-fifth (quintile) of all households arrayed by income, to about $2,200 for the average household in the highest quintile.”

Congressional Budget Office, June 20, 2009: “CBO estimates that the net annual economy wide cost of the cap-and-trade program in 2020 would be $22 billion-or about $175 per household.”

Inside the Beltway

The Moment of Truth

Myron Ebell

The House Democratic leadership rushed the Waxman-Markey bill to final passage by a narrow vote on Friday afternoon. It’s been a busy week. Late Monday night, House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Beverly Hills) sent a substitute version of H. R. 2454 to the Rules Committee. The 946-page bill passed by his committee on 21st May had become a 1201-page bill. Then early Friday morning the House Rules Committee sent the 1201 pages to the floor with an additional 309 pages released around 3:09 AM. The Rules Committee provided for three hours of debate and allowed only one of the 200-odd amendments that had been filed to be offered.

Such a short debate on major legislation is almost unprecedented. They have had to rush because they realized that the bill is such a turkey that the only way to get it through is to force members to vote and then find out later what’s in it. What they are going to find out is that it’s full of little payoffs to scores and scores of Members.

Even though there was only three hours of debate (as Rep. Joe Barton [R-Tex.] remarked, the House had spent nearly that much time on some commemorative bills), there were several priceless moments.  More on those next week. I expect that campaign operatives at the House Republican Campaign Committee are licking their lips at all the video clips they are going to have to run in teevee ads of Democrats saying that Waxman-Markey will create jobs, boost the economy, and only cost each of us a postage stamp a day.

But just as the debate was winding down at around 5:40 PM and moving to votes on the amendment and then final passage, Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) gave one of the closing speeches. The Speaker, Majority Leader, and Minority Leader traditionally are not limited by the clock and can speak as long as they want. After about twenty minutes, Chairman Waxman made a parliamentary enquiry as to whether there were any limits on how long the minority leader could speak. The Chair ruled that it was the custom of the House to listen to the Leader.

So the Digest is going to press as Minority Leader Boehner continues to speak. The Republican leadership has put out a statement that he plans to read the all 309 pages of the bill that appeared early Friday morning. It appears, though, that he’s not reading it, but summarizing each section. Rather than finishing in time for dinner or even in time to catch a flight out of town for the Fourth of July recess, it might be a long night. I expect that the House will pass Waxman-Markey on a close vote, something like 224 to 207. If it goes very late, the vote totals on both sides will go down as Members give up and go home. As people begin to dig into and see what’s in it, my guess is that it will become a sick joke, suitable fodder for late night comedians.

The Science

EPA Suppresses Internal Memo on Climate Science

Sam Kazman

In his closing remarks on Waxman Markey, Rep. Barton discussed the recent revelations of EPA squelching an internal report that criticized the agency’s stance on GW. Those revelations were made by CEI three days earlier, when it disclosed a series of EPA emails in which a senior career analyst at the agency was bluntly informed by his boss that his report would remain secret for political reasons. CEI filed the emails in EPA’s Endangerment Docket, and demanded that EPA produce the full report, extend the time for public comment, and pledge to take no reprisals against the analyst.  EPA’s press people went into spin mode, but as of Friday had not produced the final report.  Late Thursday night, CEI went ahead and posted a draft version of the document, which you can read here.

To read media accounts of the memo, click on the following links: New York Times, San Francisco Examiner, Michelle Malkin, Dow Jones (Subscription Req’d), American Spectator, and National Review