Quantcast
Channel: climate change denier
Viewing all 74 articles
Browse latest View live

Lewis Page

$
0
0

Lewis Page

Credentials

  • Cambridge University (Engineering degree 1988-91, St John's College) Islington Green Comprehensive. 
  • Royal Navy Officer 1993 - 2004. 
Source: [1]
 

Background

Lewis Page served as an officer in the Royal Navy from 1993 to 2004, and is now an author and authority on military matters. His books include Lions, Donkeys and Dinosaurs: Waste and Blundering in the Military which was published in 2006. He is a regular contributor to The Registerand Prospect magazine. In 2007, Page started a full-time staff position at The Register, and in 2011 he became the editor and the man "running the show."Page has published a large number of articles promoting science that is skeptical of climate change. [2], [3]

Stance on Climate Change

Based on a large number of articles published by Lewis Page in The Register, Page has promoted a range of views regarding climate change including that:

  • Global warming may actually be caused by the sun. 
  • Global warming is part of a natural cycle. 
  • Reducing soot is more important than curbing CO2 emissions. 
  • Global warming may be beneficial. 
  • Sea ice is not melting. 
  • If sea ice is melting, it may absorb CO2, which would be a good thing. 
  • Geo-engineering is an easier method of curbing global warming than reducing emissions.
  • We need to fight an impending ice age by releasing as much CO2 into the atmosphere as possible

 

Key Quotes

"With the recent gradual scientific acceptance - even among scientists who have spent their whole lives studying the subject - that global warming is simply much less significant than had been thought, the chance of anyone caring enough to take action is now even lower."[4]

"A vote for that politician [a climate change skeptic] is a vote against this sort of vicious price rise, this sort of stealth tax targeted on ordinary folk who find their energy bills a significant cost - the sort of hit that most of us will find pretty painful, given the current economic climate."[5]

"It would seem that this is highly unlikely [that the Antarctic ice sheet might melt due to global warming] given current and near-future levels of atmospheric CO2: at current rates of increase it will take a century at least to reach 600 ppm, the level at which the ice sheet formed itself, and higher levels would be needed to actually start it melting."[6]

"All the carbon-spewing machinery the human race now possesses - powerplants, transportation, boilers, the lot - can be kept running for its entire designed life without any significant ill effects on the planetary ecosystem [...]"[7]

Key Deeds

January 25, 2013

Writing for The Register, Lewis Page promotes a study by Norwegian researchers that indicates "humanity's carbon emissions produce far less global warming than had been thought: so much so that there is no danger of producing warming beyond the IPCC upper safe limit of 2°C for many decades."

The title of Page's article ("Climate shocker: Carry on as we are until 2050, planet will be FINE") suggests that climate change action is unnecessary. 

According to Page, while "the argument will still be made that carbon emissions should be reined in sooner or later, [...] global warming is simply much less significant than had been thought."  [4]

January 24, 2013

In an article for The Register, Lewis Page promotes research that suggests the Greenland ice sheet will not melt. According to Page, "the models are evidently wrong and another IPCC doom warning has been consigned to the dustbin of history." [8]

March 11, 2013

Published an article for The Register suggesting that "at the time of the Pharaohs the world's climate was significantly hotter than it now is for thousands of years." [9]

January 16, 2013

In an article for The Register, Page claims that global warming is "stalled" and that "global warming has failed to occur for approximately the fourteenth year running."[10]

November 29, 2012

Page published an article suggesting that "planetary warming, which effectively stalled around 1998, has yet to resume at the levels seen in the 1980s and early 1990s."[11]

November 28, 2012

In an article in The Register, Page suggests that "one of the main factors predicted to drive rising sea levels in future has been seriously overestimated." [12]

November 17, 2012

Lewis Page suggests that "there has in fact been no measurable increase in droughts over the past 60 years."[13]

November 9, 2012

Lewis Page promoted a study suggesting that carbon emissions may save humanity from an ice age: "spreading peatlands are inexorably driving planet Earth into its next ice age, and the only thing holding back catastrophe is humanity's hotly debated atmospheric carbon emissions."[14]

October 26, 2012

Lewis Page blames renewable energy as the cause for energy price hikes, and actively encourages voters to support climate change skeptics:

"A vote for that politician [a climate change skeptic] is a vote against this sort of vicious price rise, this sort of stealth tax targeted on ordinary folk who find their energy bills a significant cost - the sort of hit that most of us will find pretty painful, given the current economic climate."[5]

October 3, 2012

According to Lewis Page's article in The Register, "there is little to fear from rising sea levels driven by global warming."[15]

August 29, 2012

Lewis Page writes in The Register about research that "might indicate an upcoming 'mini Ice Age'" due to a "statistical link between periods of low solar activity and very cold winters in Europe."[16]

August 21, 2012

Page suggests that "geo engineering" could be "hugely less costly and traumatic for humanity than the efforts required to seriously cut carbon emissions - and thus, that geo-engineering might be politically feasible, which so far doesn't seem to be the case for global carbon cuts."[17]

June, 2012

Page published a number of articles in The Register (here, and here) where he promotes the Medieval Warm Period theory which suggests that because climate was warmer in the past that man-made CO2 emissions will have little influence. See this theory debunked at Skeptical Science. Page also published an article in March 2012 where he suggests that the warm period in "medieval times was not limited to Europe, or the northern hemisphere: it reached all the way to Antarctica."

January 30, 2012

Lewis Page promoted a widely-debunked letter that first appeared in the Wall Street Journal suggesting there is "No Need to Panic About Global Warming." The signatories to the letter, which Page describes as "eminent scientists and engineers," have all been found to have either (or both) significant connections to the oil and gas industry or no scientific experience related to climate change. [18], [19]

November 12, 2010

According to Lewis Page's interpretation of the science, "Global warming is actually good for rainforests" and that "even if temperatures do climb as many forecasters predict, the consequences may not be disastrous after all."[20]

October 7, 2010

Lewis Page suggests that global warming may be caused by the sun, which "downplays the influence of human-driven carbon emissions." [21]

March 3, 2010

Page suggests that global warming may be "normal at this point in [the] glacial cycle."[22]

Affiliations

  • The Register — Contributor and Editor. [23]

  • Prospect Magazine — Contributor. 

Publications

Lewis Page has published a large number of articles for The Register as well as Prospect magazine. A full list of his publications at The Registeris available here

Resources

  1. "About Lewis Page," lewispage.blogspot.ca, November 12, 2006.

  2. Tuesday, December 13, 2011 post at http://lewispage.blogspot.ca/

  3. "Lewis Page," The Guardian. Accessed March 17, 2013. 

  4. Lewis Page. "Climate shocker: Carry on as we are until 2050, planet will be FINE," The Register, January 25, 2013.

  5. "EDF: We'll raise bills 11% - but only 2% is due to energy costs!", The Register, October 26, 2012.

  6. "Antarctic ice formed at CO2 levels much higher than today's," The Register, December 2, 2011.

  7. "All CO2-spewing kit now in existence is OK for the planet," The Register, September 10, 2010.

  8. "Greenland ice SIMPLY WOULD NOT MELT in baking +8°C era 120k years ago: Scratch off yet another IPCC doom warning," The Register, January 24, 2013.

  9. Lewis Page. "Era of the Pharaohs: Climate was HOTTER THAN NOW, without CO2," The Register, March 11, 2013.

  10. "Climate watch: 2012 figures confirm global warming still stalled," The Register, January 16, 2013.

  11. "Global warming still stalled since 1998, WMO Doha figures show," The Register, November 29, 2012.

  12. "New science upsets calculations on sea level rise, climate change," The Register, November 28, 2012. 

  13. "Climate NON-change: No increase in droughts since 1950, say boffins," The Register, November 17, 2012.

  14. "Swedish boffins: An ICE AGE is coming, only CO2 can save us," The Register, November 9, 2012.

  15. "New science: SEAS WILL RISE due to CO2 ... but not for centuries," The Register, October 3, 2012.

  16. "Low sunspot activity linked to rivers freezing: Mini Ice Age on way?", The Register, August 29, 2012.

  17. "Cloud engineering could SAVE HUMANITY, suggests boffin," The Register, August 21, 2012. 

  18. Peter Sinclair. "The Wall Street 16 – Hapless Happer Leads Clueless Geriatrics in WSJ Fiasco," Climate Denial Crock of the Week, January 31, 2012.

  19. "SpaceShipOne man, Nobel boffins: DON'T PANIC on global warming," The Register, January 30, 2012.

  20. "Global warming is actually good for rainforests, say boffins," The Register, November 12, 2010.

  21. "Much of recent global warming actually caused by Sun," The Register, October 7, 2010.

  22. "Global warming may be normal at this point in glacial cycle," The Register, March 3, 2010.

  23. Tuesday, December 13, 2011 post at http://lewispage.blogspot.ca/


Gerrit Cornelis van Kooten

$
0
0

Gerrit Cornelis van Kooten

Credentials

  • Ph.D. Agricultural and Resource Economics, Oregon State University (1982) 
  • M.A. (Economics), University of Alberta (1974)
  • B.Sc. (with distinction), Geophysics, University of Alberta (1972) — Thesis Topic: "The Canadian Coal Industry"

Source: [1], [2]

Background

G. Cornelis van Kooten teaches climate change economics at the Department of Economics at the University of Victoria, Canada. Cornelis van Kootan has previously held positions at the Department of Agricultural Economics at the University of Saskatchewan, School of Management at Groningen University in the Netherlands, Departments of Agricultural Economics and Forest Resources Management and Agricultural Economics at the University of British Columbia and at the Department of Applied Economics and Statistics at the University of Nevada. 

As Canada Research Chair in Environmental studies, Cornelis van Kooten claims that "Climate science often ignores economic considerations, and climate models do not usually include interactive economic sectors, making it difficult to explore cost-effective policy responses to climate change and its consequences." He is described as a leader in "devising effective economic measures for analyzing various aspects of the environment." [3]

According to his CV, van Kooten's professional experience is in the field of natural resource economics including non-market valuation, bio-economic modeling of wildlife populations, economics of carbon sequestration, managing lands for multiple tradeoffs, and the economics of renewable energy. [1]
 

Van Kooten is a climate change skeptic affiliated with a number of groups that actively dispute the existence of man-made climate change. He has been an "Expert" at the Heartland Institute and is currently a senior fellow of both the Fraser Institute and the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation.

Stance on Climate Change
 

"It might come as a surprise to many, but there is no consensus regarding global warming. The science underpinning the view that anthropogenic emissions of CO2 are leading to runaway global warming is unsettled. There never was a consensus. Nor does science operate on the basis of consensus. If anything, the scientific evidence has sharply turned against the idea that catastrophic anthropogenic global warming is underway."[4]

Key Quotes

"[Carbon dioxide] has no relation to temperature rises." 

"Using the U.S. weather rating system, only 8,000 of the 22,000 weather stations [used to document global temperature rises] are reliable." 
 
"[Gross domestic product] is a non-climactic factor that causes temperature to go up. There is no statistical relationship between CO2 and temperature." 
 
"You can't do policy without reading the other side. [... ] I'm becoming a denier more and more, the more I listen to these guys [climate scientists in agreement about global warming]. It’s a religion to them."[5]
 

"I am more convinced that changes in solar activities (whether sunspots, various types of cycles, etc.) are a better explanation of changing temperatures and possible global warming than CO2."[6]

"If anything, it is [David] Suzuki who has abandoned science, not the scientists who question the IPCC, whether of the religious right or not. Suzuki has become post modern."[7]

Key Deeds

March 27, 2013

B.C. Auditor General John Doyle released a report (PDF) damning B.C.'s carbon trading system. The only academic paper mentioned in the audit was on page 27, and was a study done by Cornelis van Kooten that related to forest carbon credits. The report pulls the following quote form van Kooten's 2012 report, titled "Rent Seek and and the Smoke and Mirrors Game in the Creation of Forest Sector Carbon Credits: An example from British Columbia" (PDF)

Because commercial exploitation was the counterfactual used to justify the Nature Conservancy of Canada (NCC) carbon offsets, offsets were subsequently sold to non-arms-length buyers, and numbers of carbon offsets are highly sensitive to assumptions, one can only conclude that the carbon offsets generated by this (and probably many other) forest conservation projects are simply spurious. [8]

Cornelis Van Kooten's study is listed as "working paper" at research group Resource Economics and Policy Analysis (REPA) where van Kooten is Director. Van Kooten's report criticized international climate negotiators for allowing certified emissions-reduction credits. These credits were designed to maintain biodiversity and improve indigenous standard of living. 

John Doyle's report examined two projects that the government had purchased to achieve carbon neutrality (the Darkwoods Forest Carbon project and the Encana Underbalanced Drilling project), and he concluded that "this claim of carbon neutrality is not accurate, as neither project provided credible offsets."

Vancouver's Georgia Straight reports how Doyle criticized Pacific Carbon Trust, a Crown corporation, for buying carbon credits and claimed that both projects would have succeeded had there been no offsets. [9]

The Government rejected Doyle's report, saying that it was not valid due to the fact that the auditor general's office is not an accredit expert in carbon offsets. [10]

August 2012/2013

Cornelis van Kooten published a book titled Climate Change, Climate Science and Economics (Springer, 2013). His book includes a chapter on "Alternative Explanations" of climate change that include cosmological origins, as well as a chapter on implementing policy ("government intervention [...] worsens rather than helps the situation.") and a chapter on the possibility of "avoiding emissions reduction" by using carbon sinks. 

January 28, 2011

The Martlet, An independent newspaper at the university of Victoria, reported on one of Cornelis van Kooten's regular lectures on the "Economics of Climate Change." During his lecture, van Kooten said that "CO2 has no relation to temperature rises," and also pointed to a case study of two rooftop weather stations on Victoria Elementary schools that he said were examples of the Urban Heat Island affect. In the case study, van Kooten suggested that the hot air vents and nearby woodworking shop influenced the accuracy of the weather stations. [11]

Cornelis van Kooten also claimed that "Using the U.S. weather rating system, only 8,000 of the 22,000 weather stations [used to document global temperature rises] are reliable." A similar claim has been made by climate change skeptic and founder of SurfaceStations.org Anthony Watts. These claims were recently examined and proven to be false by the Berkeley Earth project.

Near the end of van Kooten's lecture, Tom Pederson (director of the Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions) interjected and challenged van Kooten's methods:

"If one is going to draw deductions based on global warming trends, one needs to be very familiar with expert literature and speak to experts, many of whom are on this campus," he said. 

Rob McDonald, a student who had previously dropped out of van Kooten's Climate Economics class, also disagreed with van Kooten's teaching methods. He had this to say to The Martlet:

"An economics professor should not be trying to dispute science in an economics class. Also, he shows little academic integrity by using a book that he wrote that has not been reviewed as the textbook, and also by giving his very one-sided and narrow view of climate change without letting people know all the different things scientists are saying on the issue."

April 2006

Cornelis van Kooten was a signatory to a 2006 open letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper. The letter, titled "Open Kyoto to Debate" was signed by "accredited experts in climate and related scientific disciplines." According to the letter, "Global climate changes all the time due to natural causes" and "allocating funds to 'stopping climate change' would be irrational." 

2006

G Cornelis van Kooten is a signatory to the "Evangelical Declaration on Global Warming," a document put forth by the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation of which he is a Senior Fellow. The declaration describes Earth as "created by God's intelligent design," and as such is "robust, resilient, self-regulating, and self-correcting" and that "Earth's climate system is no exception."[12]

Here are some key points of the declaration [emphasis added]:

  • "We believe Earth and its ecosystems—created by God's intelligent design and infinite power and sustained by His faithful providence —are robust, resilient, self-regulating, and self-correcting, admirably suited for human flourishing, and displaying His glory. Earth’s climate system is no exception. Recent global warming is one of many natural cycles of warming and cooling in geologic history."
  • "We believe mandatory reductions in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions, achievable mainly by greatly reduced use of fossil fuels, will greatly increase the price of energy and harm economies."
  • "We deny that Earth and its ecosystems are the fragile and unstable products of chance, and particularly that Earth’s climate system is vulnerable to dangerous alteration because of minuscule changes in atmospheric chemistry. Recent warming was neither abnormally large nor abnormally rapid. There is no convincing scientific evidence that human contribution to greenhouse gases is causing dangerous global warming."
  • "We deny that alternative, renewable fuels can, with present or near-term technology, replace fossil and nuclear fuels, either wholly or in significant part, to provide the abundant, affordable energy necessary to sustain prosperous economies or overcome poverty."
  • "We deny that carbon dioxide—essential to all plant growth—is a pollutant. "
  • "Reducing greenhouse gases cannot achieve significant reductions in future global temperatures, and the costs of the policies would far exceed the benefits."
  • "We deny that such policies, which amount to a regressive tax, comply with the Biblical requirement of protecting the poor from harm and oppression."

 

The declaration also leaves a call-to-action for Christian leaders to "embrace Biblical thinking, sound science, and careful economic analysis in creation stewardship" and for political leaders "to adopt policies that protect human liberty, make energy more affordable, and free the poor to rise out of poverty, while abandoning fruitless, indeed harmful policies to control global temperature."

Affiliations

Publications

According to his C.V., van Kooten has published 180 peer-reviewed journal articles and 40 book chapters and is the author or co-author of four books on land and forest economics, two books on climate change, and co-editor of three books. According to a search of peer-reviewed literature, most of his peer-reviewed articles are in the area of economics (his books also appear to focus on the Economics of climate change). 

A full list of his peer-reviewed literature is availabe on Google Scholar. 

Resources

  1. "Curriculum Vitae," vkooten.net. Accessed March 31, 2013.

  2. "Curriculum Vitae: G. Cornelis van Kooten" (PDF), retrieved from the University of Victoria website.

  3. "G. Cornelis van Kooten," Canada Research Chairs (chairs-chaires.gc.ca). Accessed March 31, 2013.

  4. "Climate Change and Poverty," G Cornelis van Kooten, September 20, 2011.

  5. "Prof raises eyebrows for contesting climate change," Canadian University Press, February 2, 2011.

  6. "Climate Confusion," G Cornelis van Kooten, December 10, 2012.

  7. "Response to David Suzuki Critique of Scientists," G Cornelis van Kooten, April 9, 2012.

  8. "An Audit of Carbon Neutral Government" (PDF), bcauditor.com, Report 14 (March, 2013)

  9. Charlie Smith. "Climate skeptic's research laid foundation for B.C. auditor general's report on carbon trading," The Georgia Straight, April 1, 2013. 

  10. "Auditor general delivers damning report on B.C.'s carbon trading system, Crown corporation that managed funds," Vancouver Sun, March 27, 2013.

  11. Mark Worthing. "Professor raises eyebrows for contesting climate change," Martlet, Volume 63, Issue 21 (February 3, 2011).

  12. "Prominent Signers of An Evangelical Declaration on Global Warming," Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation, January 14, 2010.

  13. "Cornwall Alliance Scholars," Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation. Accessed March 31, 2013. 

  14. "About the REPA Research Group," Resource Economics & Policy Analysis. Accessed March 31, 2013.

Judith Curry

$
0
0

Judith Curry

Credentials

  • PhD, Geophysical Sciences, University of Chicago (1982).
  • B.S., Geography, Northern Illinois University (1974).
Source: [1]
 

Background

Judith A. Curry is the chairman of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology and has held this position since 2002. Judith Curry writes and speaks prolifically on the climate change issue, and runs the blog Climate Etc.

Judith Curry has been invited by Republicans to testify at climate change hearings regarding alleged uncertainties regarding man-made climate change. She has also participated in a variety of blogs in the skeptical community including Climate Audit, the Air Vent and the Black-board. 
 

Curry has been criticized by climate scientists for her climate outreach in the blogosphere based on assertions not necessarily supported by the evidence: particularly that the "climate always changes."[6] Scientist Mark Serreze, director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center at the University of Colorado at Boulder, points out that "Climate doesn't change all by itself for no good reason. Something has to force it."[6]

When she was questioned about potential conflicts of interest, this was her response to the Scientific American: [2]
 
"I do receive some funding from the fossil fuel industry. My company...does [short-term] hurricane forecasting...for an oil company, since 2007. During this period I have been both a strong advocate for the IPCC, and more recently a critic of the IPCC, there is no correlation of this funding with my public statements."
 

Stance on Climate Change

Key Quotes

"The manufactured consensus of the IPCC has had the unintended consequences of distorting the science, elevating the voices of scientists that dispute the consensus, and motivating actions by the consensus scientists and their supporters that have diminished the public’s trust in the IPCC."[3]

"If all other things remain equal, it is clear that adding more carbon dioxide to the atmosphere will warm the planet. However the real difficulty is that nothing remains equal, and reliable prediction of the impact of carbon dioxide on the climate requires that we understand natural climate variability properly. Until we understand natural climate variability better, we cannot reliably infer sensitivity to greenhouse gas forcing or understand its role in influencing extreme weather events. [...] While 20th century climate change is most often explained in terms of external forcing, with natural internal variability providing high frequency ‘noise,’ the role of large multidecadal oscillations is receiving increasing attention."[4]

Key Deeds

April 25, 2013

Judith Curry testified before the Senate Subcommittee on Environment in a hearing titled "Policy Relevant Climate Issues in Context." According to her testimony, there is still uncertainty whether carbon dioxide impacts the climate until "we better understand natural climate variability."[4]

Prominent climate change skeptic Bjorn Lomborg also testified at the hearing.

October, 2012

Judith Curry is the co-author of a paper titled "Climate change: no consensus on consensus" which provides an overview of critiques of the IPCC consensus process.

According to the paper's introduction, "It is difficult to avoid concluding that the IPCC consensus is manufactured and that the existence of this consensus does not lend intellectual substance to their conclusions." [3]

Affiliations

  • Climate Forecast Applications Network (CFAN) — President and Co-Founder. [5]

Publications

Resources

  1. "JUDITH A. CURRY," CV at the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Georgia Institute of Technology. Accessed April 27, 2013. 

  2. Michael D. Lemonick. "Climate Heretic: Judith Curry Turns on Her Colleagues," Scientific American, October 25, 2010.

  3. Judith Curry. "Climate change: no consensus on consensus," Climate Etc., October 28, 2012.

  4. Judith A. Curry. "Hearing on 'Policy Relevant Climate Issues in Context'" (PDF), Committe on Space, Science and Technology, April 25, 2013.

  5. "About," Climate Forecast Applications Network. Accessed April 27, 2013.

  6. Joe Romm, “Judith Curry Abandons Science,” Climate Progress, November 11, 2010.

  7. Judith Curry and Peter J. Webster, “Thermodynamics of Atmospheres and Oceans,” International Geophysics Series: Volume 65, February 13, 1999.

  8. Judith Curry, “FIRE Arctic Clouds Experiment,” Journal of Geophysical Research Volume 106, Part 14, 2001.

  9. "Judith Curry," SourceWatch.

  10. "Judith Curry," Wikipedia. 

Alain Préat

$
0
0

Alain Préat

Credentials

  • MSc., 1974, Free University of Brussels, Ph.D., 1985, Free University of Brussels [1]

Background

    • "2000-present Professor at the Free University of Brussels

    • 1990-1999 Lecturer at the Free University of Brussels

    • 1988-1989 First Assistant, Senior Lecturer at the Free University of Brussels

    • 1986-1988 Director of the "Laboratorio de Pesquisas" of Angola in Luanda for PETROFINA (Belgium), Laboratory Staff: 22 persons (biostratigraphy, petrophysics, sedimentology, geochemistry and logs)

    • 1980-1985 Assistant in sedimentary geology at the Free University of Brussels

    • 1979 Coordinator at the Geological Survey of Belgium of a multi-university(UCL, ULB, FPMs) EEC program R & D of uranium exploration in the Paleozoic of Belgium (radiometric gamma bedrock, fluorimetry water, soil geochemistry)

    • 1978 Researcher at the Free University of Brussels, Contract with the European Commission, for uranium exploration in eastern Belgium (3 months)

    • 1978 Free University of Brussels, Expert on behalf of GEOMINES Society, research of tungsten bearing minerals in Precambrian sandstones and shales of Rwanda (9 months)

    • 1976-1977 Assistant, Free University of Brussels (bilateral agreements Algeria-Belgium) at the University of Constantine (Algeria), Mining Geology"[1]

Stance on Climate Change

Alain Préat, a known climate skeptic, has been quoted saying [climate] science lost its 'capital S' in the 1990s when it became a politicized and "economic issue."[2] He also believes that unanimity in science, results in a lack of credibility in the scientific community. [2] Préat believes that the scientific community is divided on the issue of climate change [3], when in fact 97% of climate scientists agree humans are the "forcer."

Key Quotes

“All sectors of our society are affected and affect both demographics, industries, energy choices, biodiversity, etc.. Faced with this complexity related to too many players operating in very remote disciplines, the issue of climate change is present today in the form of a clear message. In addition, the scientific community is divided and throws a disorder in the media and political connections that do not have the skills to resolve peacefully. Climate change has become familiar to many people who identify as a major current issues. Why so much passion?” [3]
"I find it very surprising that already in the work of the IPCC, we ask scientists to reach consensus on the texts. Scientists lose all credibility if they are unanimous."[2]
“The "climate skeptics" do not belong to any international organization (they are not subsidized), it is many university professors or high schools, who argue their studies through scientific articles rank -A ("peer-to-peer"), books and interviews. According to them another source of climate change should be considered and the current change, they do not deny, is fleeting.” [3]

Key Deeds

April 13, 2013 

Alain Préat publishes his co-authored paper entitled, "Double Standards in Climate Change" on the Global Warming Policy Foundation's website. The journal claims, "Questioning the impact of mankind on climate change is evidently still a taboo in the French-speaking world."[4]

Affiliations

Publications

  1. TAIT J, DELPOMDOR F, PREAT A, TACK L, STRAATHOF G & KANDA V 2011. Neoproterozoic Sequences of the West Congo and Lindi/Ubangi supergroups in the Congo Craton, Central Africa. In: Arnaud, E., Halverson, G. P. & Shields-Zhou, G.A. (eds) The Geological Record of Neoproterozoic glaciations. Geological Society of London, Memoir, 00, 000-000 (in press).

  2. PREAT A, DELPOMDOR F, KOLO K, GILLAN D & PRIAN JP 2011. Stromatolites and cyanobacterial mats in peritidal evaporitive environments in the Neoproterozoic of Bas-Congo (Democratic Republic of Congo) and South Gabon. J Seckbach and VC Tewari (Eds) Stromatolites : Interaction of microbes with sediments, Series : Cellular Origin, Life in Extreme Habitats and Astrobiology, Springer Verlag, DOI 10.1007/978-94-007-0397-1_3, pp.43-63.

  3. PREAT A, DE JONG J, DE RIDDER C & GILLAN D 2011 Possible Fe isotope fractionation during microbiological processing in ancient and modern marine environments. J. Seckbach and VC Tewari (Eds) Stromatolites : Interaction of microbes with sediments, Series : Cellular Origin, Life in Extreme Habitats and Astrobiology, , Springer Verlag, DOI 10.1007/978-94-007-0397-1_29, pp.651-673.

  4. THIÉBLEMONT D., PRIAN J.P., GOUJOU J.C., GOUIN J., TEGYEY M., COCHERIE A., GUERROT C., PRÉAT A., BOULINGUI B., EKOGHA H., KASSADOU A.B. 2009. Notice explicative de la Carte géologique de la République du Gabon à 1/200 000, feuille Fougamou. Editions DGMG - Ministères des Mines, du Pétrole, des Hydrocarbures. Libreville.

  5. BOUTON P., THIEBLEMONT D., SIMO NDOUNZE S., GOUJOU J.C., KASSADOU A. B., WALEMBA A., BOULINGUI B., EKOGHA H., MOUSSAVOU M., LAMBERT A., ROBERTS D., DESCHAMPS Y., PREAT A. 2009. Carte géologique de la République du Gabon à 1/200 000, feuille Franceville - Boumango. Editions DGMG - Ministères des Mines, du Pétrole, des Hydrocarbures. Libreville.

  6. BOUTON P., THIEBLEMONT D., GOUIN J., COCHERIE A., GUERROT C., TEGYEY M., PREAT A., SIMO NDOUNZE S., KASSADOU A. B., BOULINGUI B., EKOGHA H., MOUSSAVOU M. 2009. Notice explicative de la Carte géologique de la République du Gabon à 1/200 000, feuille Franceville - Boumango. Editions DGMG - Ministères des Mines, du Pétrole, des Hydrocarbures. Libreville.

  7. BOUTON P., THIEBLEMONT D., SIMO NDOUNZE S., AGENBACHT A., WALEMBA A., MOUSSAVOU M., LAMBERT A., DESCHAMPS Y., PREAT A. 2009. Carte géologique de la République du Gabon à 1/200 000, feuille Okondja. Editions DGMG - Ministères des Mines, du Pétrole, des Hydrocarbures. Libreville.

  8. BOUTON P., THIEBLEMONT D., GOUIN J., COCHERIE A., GUERROT C., TEGYEY M., PREAT A., SIMO NDOUNZE S., MOUSSAVOU M. 2009. Notice explicative de la Carte géologique de la République du Gabon à 1/200 000, feuille Okondja. Editions DGMG - Ministères des Mines, du Pétrole, des Hydrocarbures. Libreville.

  9. PRIAN J.P., THIEBLEMONT D., PREAT A., WALEMBA A., SIMO NDOUNZE S., GOUJOU J.C., EKOGHA H., KASSADOU A. B. 2009. Carte géologique de la République du Gabon à 1/200 000, feuille Ndendé. Editions DGMG - Ministères des Mines, du Pétrole, des Hydrocarbures. Libreville.

  10. PRIAN J.P., THIEBLEMONT D., PREAT A., COCHERIE A., GUERROT C., GOUJOU J.C., EKOGHA H., SIMO NDOUNZE S. 2009. Notice explicative de la Carte géologique de la République du Gabon à 1/200 000, feuille Ndendé. Editions DGMG - Ministères des Mines, du Pétrole, des Hydrocarbures. Libreville.

  11. THIEBLEMONT D., CASTAING C., BILLA M., BOUTON P., PREAT A., ET COLLABORATEURS 2009. Notice explicative de la Carte géologique et des Ressources minérales de la République gabonaise à 1/1 000 000. Editions DGMG, Ministère des Mines, du Pétrole, des Hydrocarbures. Libreville, 384 p.

  12. MAMET B & PREAT A 2007 Eifelian-Givetian stromatoporoid-coral reefs, Belgium. Chapter Devonian, p.191-193, in Facies from Paleozoic reefs and bioaccumulations, Vennin E, Aretz M, Boulvain F, Munnecke A eds. Mémoire du Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris, 195 : 341p.

  13. PREAT A, KOLO K, MAMET B, GORBUSHINA A & GILLAN D 2003 Fossil and subrecent fungal communities in three calcretes series from the Devonian of the Canada Rocky Mountains, Carboniferous of northern France and Cretaceous of Central Italy,Chapter 19, 307-323. In Krumbein WE, Paterson DW, Zavarzin, GA eds: Fossil and recent Biofilms A natural History of Life on Earth. Kluwer, Dordrecht, 480p

  14. MAMET B & PREAT A 1997 Geology of Belgium. In: Encyclopedia of Earth Science Series, European and Asian Regional Geology. E.M. Moores & R.W. Fairbridge (Eds) Chapman & Hall:78-83

  15. RAVENNE C, GALLI & PREAT A 1994 Reservoir modeling: Poulseur/CBA, the Reference Model. In: K. Helbig (Ed.) "Modeling the Earth for Oil Exploration", Commission of the European Communities, DGXII, Science, Research and Development, Pergamon (795pp.), p. 91-96

  16. PREAT A & MENNIG JJ 1994 Reservoir modeling: Poulseur/CBA, Data Acquisition and Digitization. In: K. Helbig (Ed.) "Modeling the Earth for Oil Exploration", Commission of the European Communities, DGXII, Science, Research and Development, Pergamon, (795pp), p. 56-60

  17. PREAT A & MENNIG JJ 1994 Reservoir modeling: the Poulseur/Bois d'Anthisnes quarries. In: K. Helbig (Ed.) "Modeling the Earth for Oil Exploration", Commission of the European Communities, DGXII, Science, Research and Development, Pergamon (795pp), p. 39-43 [1]

Resources

  1. "Alain R.Y. Préat," http://biogeomod.net/preat.html. Accessed on May 1, 2013.

  2. Laurence Van Ruyumbeke, "Global Warming: The underside of controversy." Accessed May 1, 2013.

  3. Alain Préat, "Climate "proxies" of the Current geological time state of affairs. Accuracy and representativeness of temperature anomalies (and other climate indicators). Accessed May 1, 2013.

  4. István E. Markó, Alain Préat, Henri Masson and Samuel Furfari, "Belgian Scientists: Double Standards in Climate Change." Accessed May 1, 2013.

Joe Fone

$
0
0

Joe Fone

Credentials

[Pending Further Investigation]

Background

Joe Fone works as a Computer Aided Design (CAD) Engineer at Enatel [7].  Previously he worked at Tait Electronics from 1977- 2002 [8]. He perceives manmade global warming as just one among many fads supported by scientists and eagerly promoted by the media, but he asserts that this is one that ‘has become a Frankenstein monster and seems to be out of control’.

Stance on Climate Change

“The climate science community has been hijacked by vested interest groups, from politicians to environmentalist extremists, who are more concerned with advocacy for their causes than true unbiased scientific endeavor.  We can only hope to have begun here to redress the balance, and to ask the questions which vested interests do not want asked.” [5]

Key Quotes

“Truth has nothing to do with it. To the politicians, it’s about power; to the AGW scientists, it’s about funding; to the media, it’s a marketable commodity and to the environmentalists, it’s a religious conviction and a need to impose socialist controls. The only people who care about the truth are the sceptics."[5]

Despite oft-repeated claims by the IPCC and its fawning apologists that the planet is heading for some kind of apocalyptic meltdown, the actual empirical evidence suggests precisely the opposite. Europe and the United States are buried in record amounts of snow every year, but somehow the alarmists manage to twist even this into “evidence” of manmade global warming.” [3]

“Everything it seems can be attributed to global warming, everything from acne and declining bat populations to deaf fish and zoonotic diseases (www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm). And in order to dilute growing public scepticism and suspicions that the science is not stacking up, the alarmists shift the goal posts so that “global warming” tends to be downplayed while promoting “climate change” or “climate disruption” and now “climate challenges” to account for the obvious contradictions.” [3]

“Epicurus understood more about how the earth behaves than the IPCC does two millennia later.” [4]

Key Deeds

June 15, 2013

Fone teamed up with Tom Harris, Executive Director of International Climate Science Coalition to attack Bill McKibben’s presentation while on tour in New Zealand. [1]

2012

Authored the book “Climate Change: Natural or Manmade” which argued that humans have no effect on climate change and it is a political scam to get money and attention from the public. 

Affiliations

 

Publications

No peer-reviewed journals or research papers have been found for Joe Fone. 

He’s contributed to Investigate Magazine[5], Stuff Nation[1], and New Zealand Climate Science Coalition[6].

Resources

1. Joe Fone and Tom Harris. “Climate change math doesn’t add up,”Stuff Nation, 15/06/2013

2. Joe Fone. “Political Feed in the Cancun Mire,” Climate Conversation Group, 10/12/2010. 

3. Joe Fone. “Filthy Political Lucre,” Scoop Independent News, 09/09/2011.

4. John Shade. “Book Review: Climate Change: Natural or Manmade?” Bishop Hill, 12/03/2013. 

5. Joe Fone. “A Legacy of Vested Interests,” Investigate Magazine, 23/06/2009.

6. Joe Fone and Tom Groser. “ Coalition Member Challenges NZ Minister to look at both sides,” New Zealand Climate Science Coalition, 03/08/2012. 

7. Joe Fone. LinkedIn 

8. Joe Fone. Facebook

Citing DeSmogBlog Series, "FrackNation" Screening Cancelled by MN Film Festival

$
0
0

FrackNation,” the documentary film about hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) with close conservative movement ties, recently had its showing cancelled at Winona, Minnesota's annual Frozen River Film Festival (FRFF).

Citing DeSmogBlog's two-partinvestigative series published in May 2013 on “FrackNation,” FRFF Director Mike Kennedy told the Winona Post his rationale for cancelling the film is that it was, “pretty apparent they were paid to make these movies to counter Gasland [Part II].”

“DeSmogBlog.com appears to be the main source of allegations that 'FrackNation' was industry-funded,” wrote the Post. “DeSmogBlog claims connections between [film Co-Director Phelim] McAleer and conservative groups, industry groups help[ing] promote the film after its was made, and the fact that McAleer directed an industry-funded documentary in the past, as proof that 'FrackNation' is cut from the same cloth.”

The cancellation has caused a major kerfuffle in conservative media circles, covered by outlets ranging from Fox News, Fox BusinessThe Blaze TVTown Hall, Watchdog.orgHot Air and others. McAleer was a featured guest on “Fox and Friends” on January 23. 

FrackNation issued a press statement in response to the cancellation, spawning the conservative media backlash. 

“The film festival organizers seem to hate alternative points of view, they seem to want to quash diversity. They seem to be scared of the truth,” McAleer said in the press statement. “Basically the Frozen River Film Festival organizers have given in to bullying and taken the easy way out and censored a film that might offend environmental elites who think they know best.”

But an email exchange** provided by film festival organizers to DeSmogBlog shows, far from a case of censorship, “FrackNation” did not agree to the standard operating procedure for screening the film. In turn, festival organizers decided they wouldn't screen it.

“FrackNation” Rises to Prominence

Co-Directed by Magdalena Segieda, Ann McElhinney and McAleer, “FrackNation” came out a few months before the release of Josh Fox's “Gasland: Part II” and around the same time as Gus Van Sant's Hollywood film critical of fracking, “Promised Land,” starring Matt Damon. 

Since its release, “FrackNation” has done many screenings nationwide for state-level Americans for Prosperity (AFP) groups. AFP is a front group founded and bankrolled by the Koch Brothers, David and Charles Koch. It's also done many screenings for oil and gas industry trade associations. 

“FrackNation” also played in front of the U.S. House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology in February 2013, which Dave Weigel of Slate reported “around 40 Republican staffers and members of Congress” attended. 

In contrast, Josh Fox was arrested at the same Committee's hearing a month earlier while filming for his then upcoming film for “unlawful entry.”

Missing Context: “FrackNation” Snubs Festival Screening Terms

McAleer's claim is that “FrackNation” has been bludgeoned into silence by the FRFF organizers. 

“What country am I living in?,” he asked rhetorically in an interview with the Winona Post. “I thought that this was America. I thought that people actually appreciated dissent.” 

But that's not the whole story, according to FRFF organizers, who said it's the festival's standard operating procedure that film representatives come for post-film discussions and question-and-answer sessions. 

“Upon original acceptance we stated that a filmmaker attend with the film and join in a moderated public forum, as engagement is an important part of our mission,” reads a press release they posted on Facebook about canceling the film's screening. “We offered to pay travel and lodging to anyone from the film who could attend. They declined to send someone, so we will not be screening the film.”

FRFF provided DeSmogBlog the email exchange between Festival Director Crystal Hegge and “FrackNation” co-director Magdalena Segieda outlined in FRFF's press release.  

“Is there anyone associated with the film that could come to the festival?,” Hegge asked in a December 19 email. “If no one from the film can come to the festival I may have to rethink my arrangement because there will be a lot of dead time in this particular theater without a Q&A or panel.”

Segieda responded, but didn't address the possibility of the “FrackNation” screening being canceled if a film spokesperson couldn't attend the festival.  

“Unfortunately, no one from the FrackNation team would be able to come,” wrote Segieda in a December 20 email. “Let me know when you set the the time, I will wait for your laurel to start promoting the screening.”

FRFF told DeSmogBlog it had a local frac sand industry sponsor give $1,000 to the film festival to support a member of the “FrackNation” team coming to the film festival.

But after Segieda informed Hegge that “FrackNation” couldn't comply with FRFP's request that they participate in a post-screening panel and after “FrackNation” asked for $10,000 from the sponsor according to Kennedy, the sponsor pulled out. From there, it was game over for screening the film at FRFF

Initially, Kennedy envisioned a “Super Bowl” of fracking documentaries to take place at FRFF, with a debate between to ensue between McAleer and Fox. Fox couldn't make it out.

But in his place, Calvin Tillman the former Mayor of Dish, Texas featured in the second “Gasland” — will be on-site as a representative and speaker for the film, according to Kennedy. 

Film Fest Organizers Not Backing Down

Despite the backlash by the “FrackNation” team, FRFF organizers say they won't back down. 

They told the Winona Post, “true documentaries are independently funded,” pointing out that its role model film festivals, Telluride Mountain Film Festival and Sundance Film Festival have both also snubbed “FrackNation” and concluded, “there is a growing national consensus that the film does not qualify as a documentary.”

In place of screening “FrackNation,” FRFF is hosting a forum titled “Documentaries Today: My Fact Your Fiction,” which will center around the fine line between factual documentary film and propaganda documentary-style film.

Asked if he thought the post-cancellation was manufactured and deceptive, Kennedy told DeSmogBlog, “let's just say it was likely well thought out and coordinated and leave it there.”

**Update**: In an email interview with “FrackNation” Co-Director Magdalena Segieda, DeSmogBlog has learned additional emails were exchanged (published here with Segieda's permission) after December 20 between the film festival coordinators and Segieda.

These emails weren't included in the initial batch sent to DeSmogBlog by the festival organizers. In a January 7 email, Film Festival Director Crystal Hegge informed Segieda the film screening would be at 10:00 AM on January 26.

“Thanks - do you have a laurel by any chance so I can start promoting the screening on our social media?,” Segieda wrote in response to Hegge's email.

After Hegge told Segieda all she had was a “generic laurel,” on January 10, a week passed. Then, according to the email exchange provided to DeSmogBlog by Segieda, Hegge emailed Segieda to say they had to cancel the screening a week later on January 17.

“I am writing to inform you that we will not be showing FRACKNATION during our 2014 festival,” Hegge wrote. “Due to the high quantity of films at the festival we have decided not to show this feature film without a filmmaker attendant. Thank you for your submission and please consider us in the future.”

It didn't take long for Segieda to respond. 

“But we have already published and promoted the screening with time and address to thousands of our fans on our social media,” Segieda wrote less than ten minutes later in a response email. “I have also just finished create (sic) a promo poster attached here and was going to push it out over the next couple of days.”

Asked about the discrepency in the story versions between the two camps, Phelim McAleer provided this statement to DeSmogBlog:

It is unfair that the Frozen River Film Festival has cancelled the FrackNation screening and misrepresented the true situation in the media. I think its clear that they have caved to political pressure and as a result there will not be diversity of opinion and ideas at the festival. This is not what a film festival should be about.

Gulf Stream: Williams Suspends Bluegrass Gas Export Pipeline, Announces New Export Line

$
0
0

Right before the champagne bottles began popping for activists engaged in a grassroots struggle to halt the construction of Williams Companies' prospective Bluegrass Pipeline project — which the company suspended indefinitely in an April 28 press release — Williams had already begun raining on the parade.

The pipeline industry giant took out the trash on Friday, April 25, announcing its intentions to open a new Louisiana pipeline named Gulf Trace.

Akin to TransCanada's ANR Pipeline recently reported on by DeSmogBlog, Gulf Trace is not entirely “new,” per se. Rather, it's the retooling of a pipeline system already in place, in this case Williams' Transco Pipeline system

The retooling has taken place in the aftermath of Cheniere's Sabine Pass LNG export facility receiving the first ever final gas export permit from the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) during the fracking era.

Williams' Transco Pipeline System; Photo Credit: William Huston

Both ANR and Gulf Trace will feed into Sabine Pass, the Louisiana-based LNG export terminal set to open for business in late 2015Also like ANR, Transco will transform into a gas pipeline flowing in both directions, “bidirectional” in industry lingo.

Bluegrass, if ever built, also would transport fracked gas to the Gulf Coast export markets. But instead of LNG, Bluegrass is a natural gas liquids pipeline (NGL)

“The project…is designed to connect [NGLs] produced in the Marcellus-Utica areas in the U.S. Northeast with domestic and export markets in the U.S. Gulf Coast,” it explained in an April 28 press release announcing the project's suspension. 

With Bluegrass tossed to the side for now, Williams already announced in a press release that the company has launched an open season to examine industry interest in Gulf Trace. It closes on May 8, 2014.

“Although we recognized the suspension of the Bluegrass could impact non-conventional drilling here in Western Pennsylvania, we should all know better than to get too excited about this announcement,” Carrie Hahn, a Pennsylvania-based activist told DeSmogBlog. “There is too much at stake here for them to give up that easily.”

The announcement follows in the aftermath of the flurry of federal-level lobbying activity by Williams during the first quarter of 2014. 

Williams Spends Big Lobbying for Exports

First-quarter lobbying disclosure forms indicate Williams spent $450,000 lobbying at the federal level for both shale gas exports and pipeline permitting issues. It has done so utilizing both its in-house lobbyists and outside lobbying firms.

In-House Lobbyists 

In-house, Williams spent $410,000 on its own to advocate for gas exports and pipeline permitting issues during the first quarter. Williams' lobbying efforts were headed by its vice president for governmental affairs, Deborah Lawrence and director of governmental affairs, Glenn Jackson.

Outside Lobbying Firms

No smart corporation makes a big announcement of this sort without first greasing the skids and Williams is no different in that regard, utilizing the age-old government-industry revolving door to curry favor.

In that vein, meet Ryan, MacKinnon, Vasapoli and Berzok, LLP, which Williams paid $40,000 to lobby on its behalf during the first quarter.

Lobbyist Thomas Ryan formerly served as chief counsel for the U.S. House Energy & Commerce Committee. That committee has pushed forward shale gas exports in a big way so far in 2014. Ryan is one of the lobbyists listed on the firm's first-quarter disclosure form on the Williams file.

Jeffrey MacKinnon, another lobbyist listed on the firm's lobbying disclosure form, also has close ties to the Energy & Commerce Committee. MacKinnon formerly served as legislative director for U.S. Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX), the climate change denier and former chairman of the Energy & Commerce Committee.


U.S. Rep. Joe Barton: Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons

Add Joseph Vasapoli to the list, as well. 

Vasapoli, who helped write the Energy Policy Act of 2005 that transformed fracking into a widespread practice in the U.S., formerly served as Republican Counsel for the Energy & Commerce Committee. He also has spent time working at both FERC and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the two federal agencies responsible for overseeing the LNG export permit process.

The other three lobbyists listed on Ryan, MacKinnon, Vasapoli and Berzok, LLP's disclosure form for the work it did on behalf of Williams — Matthew Berzok, Nick Kolovos and Jeffrey Mortier — also passed through the revolving door as former staffers for congressional members who were on the Energy & Commerce Committee.

“Empire State of Mind:” New York Connection

Burgos and Associates, also registered to lobby on behalf of Williams at the federal level, is a New York City-based firm at the center of a February 2013 investigation published on DeSmogBlog on the New York Fracking Scandal.

The episode earned the unflattering name because New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, who has the final say over whether the floodgates will be opened for fracking the Marcellus Shale in his state, has a powerful aide named Larry Schwartz.

Schwartz, DeSmog revealed, has thousands of dollars worth of investments in Williams Companies and other companies standing to gain if fracking goes forward in New York.

And in New York, like at the federal level, Burgos and Associates lobbies on behalf of Williams.

Not coincidentally, the powerful Tonio Burgos owns Burgos and Associates and is the former aide to Andrew Cuomo's father, Gov. Mario Cuomo.

Burgos was described by the Chicago Tribune in a 1993 article as Mario Cuomo's “patronage chief.” He was also identified in 2012 by The Wall Street Journal as “one of [Andrew] Cuomo's closest outside advisers and top fund-raisers.”

A reminder: Williams' Transco runs from New York and the northeast down to the Gulf.

Transco is connected to fracked gas produced in Marcellus Shale via the company's Springville Pipeline and its proposed Constitution Pipeline, which is set to connect to Springville when if and when it opens for business in 2015 or 2016.

Williams' Constiution Pipeline and Springville Pipeline; Photo Credit: William Huston

In short, New York — a state geographically distant from Louisiana, Gulf Trace and Sabine Pass LNG—is directly connected to Williams' latest export pipeline announcement both via its lobbyists and Williams' gas pipeline empire.

And so while fracking has yet to commence in the Empire State, that doesn't mean the shale gas industry doesn't have an increasingly heavy footprint there, as it proceeds with business as usual by using an “empire state of mind.” 

Photo Credit: ShutterstockOleksandr Kalinichenko

Revealed: Former Energy in Depth Spokesman John Krohn Now at U.S. EIA Promoting Fracking

$
0
0

For those familiar with U.S. Energy Information Administration's (EIA) work, objectivity and commitment to fact based on statistics come to mind. Yet as Mark Twain once put it, “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.”

That's where John Krohn comes into play. A former spokesman for the gas industry front group Energy in Depth (EID), Krohn now works on the Core Team for EIA's “Today in Energy!“ 

Krohn has been at EIA since at least January 2014, when his name first appeared on the EIA website. On his Twitter account, he describes himself as an EIA communications manager.

As DeSmog revealed in February 2011, Energy In Depth was launched with a heavy injection of funding from oil and gas industry goliaths such as BP, Halliburton, Chevron, Shell and XTO Energy (now owned by ExxonMobil).

With its public relations efforts conducted by FTI Consulting, EID now serves as a key pro-industry front group promoting unfettered hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) to the U.S. public.

Krohn follows in the footsteps through the government-industry revolving door of the man President Barack Obama named to head the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for his second term, former Massachusetts Institute of Technology “frackademic,” Ernest Moniz. DOE is the parent agency for EIA

Further, EIA Administrator Adam Sieminski, another second-term appointee of President Obama, also passed through the same revolving door as Krohn and Moniz in his pathway to heading EIA. He formerly worked in the world of oil and gas finance. 

“From 1998 to 2005, he served as the director and energy strategist for Deutsche Bank's global oil and gas equity team,” his EIA biography explains. “Prior to that, from 1988 to 1997, Mr. Sieminski was the senior energy analyst for NatWest Securities in the United States, covering the major U.S. international integrated oil companies.”

Adam Sieminski, U.S. Energy Information Administration Administrator; Photo Credit: U.S.EIA

The revolving door, though, is as American as apple pie. What makes the Krohn appointment more alarming to some observers: what this means in the context of the potential looming shale gas and oil bubble.

This revelation comes after EIA downgraded its Monterey Shale oil reserves estimate from 13.7 billion barrels to 600 million barrels, a 96-percent decrease

EIA: “Seriously Exaggerating Shale Gas Production”

In February 2013, Post Carbon Institute fellow David Hughes authored the report, “Drill Baby, Drill.” The report sounded the alarm about a potential looming bursting bubble if fracking proceeds at break-neck speed in order to meet investors' expectations — as promoted by the oil and gas industry — of 100 years of recoverable shale gas and a “Saudi America” of oil

Hughes, 40 years of experience as a geoscientist, says the productivity numbers coming out of wells around the country point to a far less rosy picture about the future of fracked oil and gas in the United States. The industry must maintain a constant “drilling treadmill” to ensure steady amounts of oil and gas come out of the ground. 

David Hughes; Photo Credit: Post Carbon Institute

In an April article, Hughes said he believes EIA is “seriously exaggerating shale gas production.” His piece critiqued EIA's April “Drilling Productivity Report.”

“Production in February 2014, is stated to be more than 7.8 bcf/d higher in the EIA Drilling Productivity Report than it actually is…equivalent to more than 10 percent of the total gas production of the U.S,” wrote Hughes.

“Real production data usually lags two months behind, and the most recent months are subject to revisions. Yet the EIA’s Drilling Productivity Report confidently reports production for the current and following month.”

Krohn has also co-authored two articles for “Today in Energy!” painting a rosy picture of shale gas and oil production numbers — one a summary of EIA's March Drilling Productivity Report and the other a summary of EIA's Annual Energy Outlook 2014. In line with the rosy numbers and figures published by EIA, Krohn's articles served to echo those findings.

“The productivity of oil and natural gas wells is steadily increasing in many basins across the United States because of the increasing precision and efficiency of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing in oil and natural gas extraction,” reads the March article. “Many resource-producing basins are experiencing an increasing yield over time in either oil (Bakken, Eagle Ford, Niobrara) or natural gas (Marcellus, Haynesville).”

Hughes'“Drill Baby, Drill” comes to far different conclusions about those fields. The day after Krohn's article was published, Energy in Depth published an article citing and quoting from it.

“Critics of shale development have frequently alleged that the industry is a 'bubble' about to burst, owing to an alleged need to drill more and more wells to maintain production,” wrote Energy in Depth's Dana Bohan. “But EIA’s latest report tosses cold water on that theory, demonstrating that technology is not static — unlike the bizarre musings of anti-fracking activists.” 

Bohan did not respond to a request for comment for this article.

Krohn's Track Record

Before coming to EIA, Krohn denied fracking has ever contaminated groundwater, promoted climate change denial, called for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency not to act on fracking and berated New York Governor Andrew Cuomo for not ushering in fracking to his state.

Image Credit: Twitter Screenshot

Image Credit: Twitter Screenshot

Though his name has been removed from the website, Krohn also served as a media contact for “Truthland,” which served as EID's rebuttal to Josh Fox's “Gasland.” His name still appears on an archived version of the website.

In between leaving EID and heading to EIA, Krohn was a self-described “consultant for major energy producers and energy coalitions.” Among those he did consulting work for: Natural Gas Now, a website and blog run by former EID-Marcellus Campaign Director Tom Shepstone.

Krohn has removed his resumé from his website, which also has no mention of his previous job at EID. Before his resumé was taken down, though, DeSmogBlog made a copy here.

Since coming to EIA, Krohn still maintains a pro-fracking stance on his Twitter account, which contains the “All opinions are my own” boilerplate language. 

“North Dakota added more millionaires last year than any other state as #energy and #shale drive wealth in the state,” reads a January 17 tweet from Krohn. Another January tweet by Krohn gives a shout out to people on Twitter who work for the oil and gas industry for “keeping us warm during the cold.”

Both Krohn and the EIA have denied repeated requests for comment. 

“Troubling” Hire

U.S. Public Law 95-91, Section 205, which created the EIA, suggests its reports should steer clear of policy prescriptions:

The [EIA] Administrator shall not be required to obtain the approval of any other officer or employee of the Department in connection with the collection or analysis of any information; nor shall the Administrator be required, prior to publication, to obtain the approval of any other officer or employee of the United States with respect to the substance of any statistical or forecasting technical reports which he has prepared in accordance with law.

Post Carbon Institute, which has been at the forefront of raising awareness about a prospective looming shale gas bubble, told DeSmogBlog it finds the hiring of Krohn “troubling.”

“The Energy Information Administration is viewed by government agencies — both here in the US and abroad — and media as the trusted source of energy information,” said Asher Miller, Executive Director of Post Carbon Institute“It plays an invaluable role in determining energy policy, which is why it’s so troubling that the EIA would hire staff with a recent history of pro-industry propaganda.”

Photo Credit: Facebook; Krohn on the left at a fracking site while working at EID


Bob Armstrong

$
0
0

Bob Armstrong

 Credentials

  • B.A. Psychology, Northwestern University, 1969
  • M.S. Mathematical Psychophysics, Northwestern University, 1976

Source: [1]

 Background

Bob Armstrong is “a bleeding heart libertarian,” the owner of CoSy.com, a computer programming company, and the previous drug affairs director of the Manhattan Libertarian Party. [1] According to his C.V. and the Heartland Institute, he spent the 1970s obtaining his Masters degree “studying visual psychophysics at Northwestern University … hanging out with the math and computer people.” [2]

Bob Armstrong has worked for companies such as Xerox, in Rochester, NY, and Rochester Gas and Electric, rewriting their respective systems in APL (array programming language). [1][2] In a section of his website titled “Planetary Temperature,” he provides resources on modeling the planet in APL and “how to calculate the temperature of a radiantly heated colored ball (like our earth).” [4] Armstrong “contends that a rather detailed model of the planet can be written in a few pages of succinct APL definitions far more scrutable than the million line FORTRAN programs still used by climate scientists.” [2]

Stance on Climate Change

I'm a bleeding heart Libertarian with particular understanding of the nonscience of the CO2 global warming fraud.” [3]

The inevitable compensation for our returning some carbon to the biosphere is an increase in green plant growth.” [4]

The evidence is becoming overwhelming that CO2 does NOT affect mean global temperature. On the other hand, evidence is mounting that it IS making the planet greener. The only real question is if rationality can prevail before the Global Governments do too much harm.” [4]

Key Quotes

CO2 is the ultimate “green” gas. It is a grade school fact that every green tree, every blade of grass, indeed all life is ultimately CO2 + H2O combined by sunlight plus a bit of ash and it is proven in both laboratory and practice that plants thrive on more than twice our current 3 or 4 molecules per 10,000. Life could not have started on earth without a (20%) CO2 rather than O2 atmosphere. Only photosynthesis converted it to an oxygen atmosphere bouncing along the minimal CO2 necessary to keep the plants alive. So any downside to the few percent of the natural CO2 budget we are restoring to our atmosphere from carbon sequestered in previous incredibly lush epochs must be weighed against this indisputable greening of the planet.” [4]

Key Deeds

July 7 - 9, 2014

Bob Armstrong was a speaker at the Heartland Institute’s Ninth International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC9) in Las Vegas, Nevada. [7]

Bob Armstrong presented with Anthony Lupo and Olavi Karner, in a talk titled “New Estimates of Climate Sensitivity,” which took place July 9, 2014. 

View DeSmogBlog’s in-depth research on the other speakers and sponsors from Heartland's ICCC9.

 Affiliations

Source: [2]

 Publications

According to Google Scholar and Skeptical Science, Bob Armstrong has never published research in a peer-reviewed journal on any subject.

 Resources

  1. Bob Armstrong. “C.V.,” CoSy.com. Archived July 31, 2014.

  2. 9th International Conference on Climate Change Speakers,” Heartland Institute. Archived July 14, 2014.

  3. Bob Armstrong. “Member Profile,” Libertarian Party of El Paso County on meetup.com, February 17, 2013. Archived July 31, 2013.

  4. Bob Armstrong. “Mean Global Temperature,” CoSy.com. Archived February 9, 2014.

  5. Bob Armstrong. “Homepage,” CoSy.com. Archived July 31, 2014.

  6. Bob Armstrong. “Resisting the Coalescing Global Nanny Police State with Logic,” CoSy.com

  7. Return of Climate Denial-a-Palooza: Heartland Institute Hitches Anti-Science Wagon To Vegas Freedomfest,” DeSmogBlog, July 7, 2014.

Russell Cook

$
0
0

Russell Cook

 Credentials

  • Associate’s Degree in Graphic Arts, Al Collins School of Graphic Design
  • Bachelor’s Degree in Business Administration, University of New Mexico

Source: [1]

Background

Russell Cook is a contributing editor for The Heartland Institute's Environment & Climate News.

Russell Cook is “neither a scientist nor a trained journalist,” but rather, “a common citizen having reasonably adequate enough education and an inquisitive enough mind to observe and question contradictory stories in the media about global warming.” [2]

Cook is the author of GelbspanFiles.com, where he “dig[s] deeply into the accusation that scientists and others who express skepticism about the theory of man-made global warming are being paid by the fossil fuel industry to lie about the issue.” [2]

Cook has written over 60 pieces about “the false accusation that skeptic scientists are paid to lie about global warming.” [3] On his website, he states that the funding for the articles he’s written come with “one unbreakable condition: No strings of any kind.” [2]

Cook notes that, prior to January 2013, he was paid $1,000 by the Science & Public Policy Institute and $1,350 by the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow. But “neither payment,” he said, “came with instructions of what position I was to take on global warming.” [2]

After January 2013, with his “savings drawn down to a critical level,” the Heartland Institute offered Cook a “$12,000 strings-free grant to enable [him] to continue devoting time to [the] subject. I have carte blanche to write whatever I wish to write, whenever I wish to write it, without any direction from Heartland, its donors, or anyone else,” he writes in GelbspanFiles.com in a section titled, “A Note About Funding.” [2]

Russell Cook is a contributor to American Thinker, Breitbart.com, Red State, GlobalWarming.org, Watts Up With That, and other websites. [3]

Stance on Climate Change

My conclusion can be readily summarized: the accusation [“that those who express skepticism about the theory of man-made global warming are being paid by the fossil fuel industry to lie about the issue”] appears to be a false claim, a myth generated by a small group of enviro-activists with significant direction from ex-Boston Globe reporter Ross Gelbspan.” [4]

Key Quotes

Warmist true believers bitterly cling their mantra that only the corrupting influence sinister money could possibly explain skepticism toward the theory they embrace as gospel truth.

In case anyone is unfamiliar with the simplicity of the man-caused global warming idea: overwhelming scientific conclusions say we are causing floods / droughts / blazing summers / intense winters, and don't listen to any skeptic scientists – they're corrupt.” [6]

AGW believers hope the Supreme Court will ultimately accept the simple mantra that global warming science is settled, thus corrupt skeptic scientists must be ignored.  Sadly, it takes a maddening amount of detail to tell how this group is interconnected in its efforts to manipulate us into believing such a simple concept.  That's the double-edge.” [5]

I'm no investigative journalist, I've never taken a journalism class, and I don't want to be a journalist when I grow up. I'm just a semi-retired idiot graphic artist who keeps asking how policymakers, environmentalists and mainstream news outlets justify their demand to regulate CO2 and why skeptic scientists should be silenced.” [6]

As common citizens without science expertise, the majority of us are forced to leave the debate over the actual causes of global warming to the scientists.  But we can participate in another process – namely, finding out for ourselves whether the narratives about the issue and its scientists ring true.  Examples include whether a commonly heard description about skeptics being “climate deniers” is true, when elemental examinations of skeptic reports indicate that it's more accurate to say they dispute that the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has conclusively made the case for human-induced greenhouse gases being the primary driver of global warming.” [7]

Key Deeds

July 7 - 9, 2014

Russell Cook was a speaker at the Heartland Institute’s Ninth International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC9) in Las Vegas, Nevada. [8]

Cook’s presentation with Marc Morano and Tony Heller, titled “Communicating Climate Change: The Blogosphere,” took place at 2:45 PM, July 8. [9]

View DeSmogBlog’s in-depth research on the other speakers and sponsors from Heartland's ICCC9.

 Affiliations

  • Heartland Institute, contributing editor to Environment & Climate News

  • Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow

Source: [1] , [2]

 Publications

View an ongoing list of Russell Cook’s publications. [3]

 Resources

  1. Russell Cook, Contributing Editor Environment & Climate News,” Heartland Institute. Archived July 23, 2013.

  2. Russell Cook. “About,” GelbspanFiles.com. Archived July 23, 2014.

  3. Russell Cook. “Archive,” GelbspanFiles.com. Archived November 15, 2013.

  4. Russell Cook. “Who is Russell Cook?” GelbspanFiles.com. Archived November 15, 2013.

  5. Russell Cook. ”Supreme Court to Hear Global Warming Case,” American Thinker, December 8, 2010. Archived September 7, 2013.

  6. Russell Cook. “Warmist Slander of Scientific Skeptics,” American Thinker, September 15, 2010. Archived July 29, 2014.

  7. Russell Cook. “'Trust Us, Skeptics Are Crooks',” American Thinker, April 5, 2013. Archived July 29, 2014.

  8. Return of Climate Denial-a-Palooza: Heartland Institute Hitches Anti-Science Wagon To Vegas Freedomfest,” DeSmogBlog, July 7, 2014.

  9. Russell Cook, Marc Morano, Tony Heller. Communicating Climate Change: The Blogosphere,” Heartland Institute, July 8, 2014.

Norman Rogers

$
0
0

Norman Rogers

 Credentials

  • B.A. Physics U.C. Berkley
  • M.S. Physics University of Hawaii

Source: [1]

 Background

Norman (Norm) Rogers is a Policy Advisor at the Heartland Institute. Norm Rogers received a B.A. in Physics from the University of California at Berkley and a M.S. in Physics from the University of Hawaii. Following his education, he “held a variety of engineering and computer programming jobs with IBM, Hewlett Packard and other companies,” according to the Heartland Institute.[1]

Norm Rogers is the author of ClimateViews.com, which lists Wikipedia as a “site promoting global warming alarmism,” in a section of the website. On the site’s homepage, Rogers notes that he’s “been studying global warming for about 6 years as a retirement project,” and has “a strong background in physics and computers and [is] able to follow the science involved.” [2] , [3]

Stance on Climate Change

Global warming is a political movement disguised as a scientific movement.” [7]

Global warming scare stories are good for global warming science because the scare stories promote research funding.  If it weren't for the scary predictions these scientists would be toiling in a poorly funded and obscure branch of academic science.” [6]

The increase in temperature predicted by the global warming computer models is about 3 degrees Celsius. This isn't very scary, so the promoters of global warming alarmism come up with additional scare stories. For example, there will be more hurricanes, the ice caps will melt, the polar bears will die, the oceans will become acid and kill the coral, and weather will become more extreme.” [6]

Controlling our own carbon dioxide emissions accomplishes practically nothing if the Chinese and Indians don't control theirs. They play along as long as it seems profitable. The Chinese and Indians are like the natives who happily attend church services as long as the missionaries are giving out free dinners.

Green electric power from windmills and solar energy is impracticable.  Its expensive and due to the erratic nature of sunshine and wind, solar and wind power must be backed up by duplicate power plants or by energy storage systems that are as expensive as duplicate power plants. It sometimes seems that the advocates of solar power don't realize that the sun does not shine at night. The much acclaimed Kyoto Treaty for the reduction of CO2 illogically does not give CO2 reduction credit for CO2-free nuclear power plants, something put in the treaty in response to green lobbying.” [6]

Key Quotes

I’ve discovered that if a person is committed to green ideology it is very difficult to change their mind about global warming alarmism. This is true even if they are technically qualified and able to understand scientific arguments. You can’t change their thinking because their thinking is faith based. In other words they have come to believe in a green religion. Even though these believers could have a green religion without global warming they are very reluctant to let go of global warming because it is a justification for other tenets of the green religion like using less energy. However scientific arguments and facts are very important for informing people who are open minded on the subject of global warming.” [2]

There are very eminent older climate scientists, like Richard Lindzen and Roger Peilke Sr. that are publicly critical of the green doctrine. These are scientists who are so accomplished and established as to be immune to retaliation. Mid-career climate scientists, like Roy Spencer and John Christy, both from the University of Alabama Huntsville, are critical of global warming doctrine and have done very important scientific work trying to point the science in a sounder direction. But most of the critics of global warming alarmism come from related fields of science, for example meteorology, engineering or physics.” [2]

Key Deeds

July 7 - 9, 2014

Norm Rogers was a speaker at the Heartland Institute’s Ninth International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC9) in Las Vegas, Nevada. [5] 

View DeSmogBlog’s in-depth research on the other speakers and sponsors from Heartland's ICCC9.

 Affiliations

  • American Geophysical Union
  • American Meteorological Society 
  • Heartland Institute, Policy Advisor, Expert
  • National Association of Scholars, Board of Directors

Source: [1] , [4]

 Publications

Norm Rogers has not published any peer-reviewed scientific literature according to Google Scholar, Skeptical Science, or search engines.

 Resources

  1. Norman Rogers, Expert,” Heartland Institute. Archived July 18, 2014.

  2. Norman Rogers. ”Welcome to Climate Views.com,” ClimateViews.com. Archived July 21, 2014.

  3. Norman Rogers. “Sites Promoting Global Warming Alarmism,” ClimateViews.com. Archived July 21, 2014.

  4. People: National Association of Scholars,” Sourcewatch, July 11, 2011.

  5. Return of Climate Denial-a-Palooza: Heartland Institute Hitches Anti-Science Wagon To Vegas Freedomfest,” DeSmogBlog, July 7, 2014.

  6. Norman Rogers. “Global Warming Blues,” American Thinker, August 27, 2009. Archived July 21, 2014.

  7. Norman Rogers. “Bamboozled Billionaires,” American Thinker, July 21, 2014. Archived August 1, 2014.

John Hinderaker

$
0
0

John Hinderaker

 Credentials

  • A.B., Dartmouth College, 1971

  • J.D., Harvard Law School, 1974

Source: [1] , [2] , [4]

 Background

John Hinderaker is “a lawyer in Minneapolis who occasionally writes stuff on the web” for Powerlineblog.com, according to his Twitter profile biography. [3] Hinderaker’s litigation practice spans the United States and for twenty years he has written on public policy issues “including income inequality, income taxes, campaign finance reform, affirmative action, welfare reform, and race in the criminal justice system.” [1] His articles, which were co-written with law partner Scott W. Johnson, have been published in The American Enterprise, National Review, The Weekly Standard, American Experiment Quarterly, “and newspapers from Florida to California.” [1]

Hinderaker has appeared in court in 17 different states according to his biography at Faegre Baker Daniels, where he is a Partner. [4] Hinderaker has “won the largest case that was tried in Colorado in 2010, with $200 million in claims and counterclaims, on behalf of the owner of a $1.3 billion power plant project.” [4] Additionally, Hinderaker “won a $4 million arbitration award on behalf of a piping subcontractor in a case arising out of refinery construction in Utah … represented one of the world’s largest seed companies before congress and federal agencies in antitrust matters relating to the biotech seed industry,” and also, “represented a major chemical company in a lawsuit by a seed corn company, in which it was alleged that a fungicide caused millions of dollars in damages to hybrid seed corn.” [4]

According to Hinderaker’s Sourcewatch profile, he was the chairman of the Center for the American Experiment, a Minneapolis-based think tank, in the year 2000, and is a fellow at the Claremont Institute conservative think tank. [5]

Stance on Climate Change

Global warming hysteria is politics, not science. If the IPCC enterprise were science, it would at least make a good faith effort to deal with major defects in the temperature data, like the UHIE. Alarmists refuse to address the UHIE [Urban Heat Island Effect] not because they have a plausible case that it doesn’t exist–they don’t–but because there is an enormous amount of money being made by promoting “green” energy. You should read the comments to Dr. Spencer’s post; they draw out the difficulty of properly understanding and quantifying the urban heat island effect.” [6]

The fact is that global warming alarmism is a well-funded industry. The United States government alone has contributed billions of dollars to promote global warming alarmists, and nothing to the voices of scientific sanity. What is going on here is that the alarmists, knowing their science is shaky at best, cannot tolerate diversity of thought. They know that if critics are allowed to exist, their “scientific” house of cards will come tumbling down. So they must silence every dissenting voice; otherwise, the gravy train might end.

It isn’t pretty, but this is what happens when you make science subservient to a political agenda.” [7]

Key Quotes

There are many more problems with the data on which global warming hysteria rests; for example, those who have inspected weather stations in the U.S. have reported that well over half are out of compliance with standards for such stations, e.g. because they are next to heating vents.” [6]

Michael Mann, perpetrator of the notorious hockey stick hoax, is one of the world’s execrable characters. On top of his more important bad qualities, he is a whiner. The self-pitying Mann complains that scientists and organizations that are skeptical of the alarmists’ claims—like the now-ridiculed hockey stick—get tiny amounts of funding from concerned citizens.” [7]

Key Deeds

February 21, 2012

John Hinderaker writes a blog post on Powerlineblog.com titled, “Global Warming Alarmists Resort to Hoax,” referring to the “Confidential Memo: 2012 Heartland Climate Strategy.” Within the post, Hinderaker writes, “The Heartland Institute is a superb organization that deals with a number of issues including climate science. We have cited Heartland’s research many times.” [8] Further on, he states, “Let me be perfectly clear: I think it is obvious that Peter Gleick fabricated this document—the only one he posted that makes the Heartland Institute look bad—because the real ones he stole from Heartland didn’t serve his partisan purpose. Or, if he didn’t make it up himself, he got it from an ally who fabricated it. No knowledgeable person could mistake Gleick’s hoax for a legitimate top-secret Heartland memo.” [8]

March 3, 2011

Think Progress publishes an article titled, “Blogger From Koch’s Law Firm Defends Koch, Doesn’t Disclose Ties,” which details Hinderaker’s “failure to disclose his firm’s financial relationship with Koch,” while blogging for Powerlineblog.com. [9] Hinderaker responded to Think Progress with his own post, “Think Ignorance Swings and Misses.”

 Affiliations

  • Powerlineblog.com

  • The Claremont Institute

  • Koch Industries

Source: [1] , [5] , [9]

 Publications

According to a search of Google Scholar, John Hinderaker has not published any research in peer-reviewed journals. The search does list that he has published numerous articles with Powerlineblog.com and one with the Center of the American Experiment titled “The Truth About Income Inequality.”

View an ongoing archive of John Hinderaker’s posts on Powerlineblog.com.

 Resources

  1. About Us,” Powerlineblog.com. Archived August 29, 2014.

  2. Power Line,” Wikipedia. Archived August 19, 2014.

  3. Biography,” @jhinderaker Twitter Profile. Archived August 19, 2014.

  4. John Hinderaker,” Faegre Baker Daniels. Archived August 26, 2014.

  5. John H. Hinderaker,” Sourcewatch.org.

  6. John Hinderaker. “Is the Globe Warming? Or Just Your City?,” Powerlineblog.com, April 1, 2012. Archived August 21, 2014.

  7. John Hinderaker. “Who's funding whom?,” Powerlineblog.com, January 27, 2013. Archived August 21, 2014.

  8. John Hinderaker. “Global Warming Alarmists Resort to Hoax,” Powerlineblog.com, February 21, 2012. Archived August 22, 2014.

  9. Lee Fang. “Blogger From Koch's Law Firm Defends Koch, Doesn't Disclose Ties,” ThinkProgress, March 3, 2011. Archived August 22, 2014.

Not Just Public Lands: Defense Bill Also Incentivizes Fracked Gas Vehicles

$
0
0

DeSmogBlog recently revealed how Big Oil's lobbyists snuck expedited permitting for hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) on public lands into the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2015, which passed in the U.S. House and Senate and now awaits President Barack Obama's signature.

A follow-up probe reveals that the public lands giveaway was not the only sweetheart deal the industry got out of the pork barrel bill. The NDAA also included a provision that opened the floodgates for natural gas vehicles (NGVs) in the U.S.—cars that would largely be fueled by gas obtained via fracking.

The section of the bill titled, “Alternative Fuel Automobiles” (on page 104) lays it out:

NDAA of 2015 Natural Gas Vehicles
Image Credit: U.S. Government Publishing Office 

The “fuel described in subparagraph (E)” refers to natural gas, found within Title 49 of the United States Code's section 32901.

It means, as with electric vehicles, natural gas automobile manufacturers will now also receive financial credits under the new Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards introduced by President Obama in May 2009.

Introduced by Climate Denier Inhofe

The provision was initially introduced in February by U.S. Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), a climate science denier, as the Alternative Fuel Vehicle Development Act.

Inhofe called it a “bill that would incentivize the production and purchase of…natural gas vehicles (NGVs)” in a press release announcing its introduction.


U.S. Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK); Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons

“The booming natural gas industry in America is delivering a cheap, domestic energy source for our homes and businesses, but this fuel source is being underutilized in our vehicles,” said Inhofe. “I have introduced the Alternative Fuel Vehicle Development Act to help the rest of the nation tap into the benefits of using natural gas in vehicles.”

Though introduced at the beginning of the year, the bill did not advance and had only one co-sponsor: U.S. Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI), the soon-to-be-retired co-sponsor of the NDAA of 2015. Levin cited President Obama's support of natural gas as a “bridge fuel” in introducing the bill on the Senate floor.

“The President outlined in his State of the Union his goal to achieve energy independence through the use of alternative fuels,” said Levin in his floor statement. “He specifically mentioned natural gas as the bridge fuel that can grow our economy, create jobs for the middle class, and reduce carbon pollution. I am pleased to introduce legislation today that takes a step toward meeting that goal.”

On the day of the NDAA's passage, Inhofe and Levin issued a follow-up press release on Section 318. 

“Enactment of this bipartisan provision moves natural gas one step closer towards becoming a mainstream fuel for our everyday cars,” Inhofe declared. “Natural gas is an underutilized clean and abundant domestic energy resource for U.S. transportation in part due to outdated regulations. I am proud to have worked with Sen. Carl Levin to cut the red tape and help present Americans with another alternative to affordable, clean energy for their vehicles.”

Industry Lobbies, Then Cheerleads

Following the tried and true pattern, Big Oil — alongside the auto industry — first lobbied for the bill it likely wrote. Then once it passed, it praised it. 

“Sen. Inhofe continues to be a champion for the NGV industry by introducing legislation that will encourage both automakers and vehicle purchasers to put more NGVs on American roads,” Richard Kolodziej, president of NGVAmerica said in a March press release after the initial introduction of the stand-alone bill.

Alongside the auto industry and other companies, America's Natural Gas Alliance (ANGA) lobbied in quarter one, two and three for the bill's passage, according to lobbying disclosure forms reviewed by DeSmogBlog. 

ANGA's lobbying team for the NGVs issue embodies the government-industry revolving door.

It included Amy Farrell, former deputy assistant administrator for the George W. Bush Administration's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the associate director for environment & regulations for the Bush White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). Frank Macchiarola, former Republican minority staff director for the US Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, also lobbied for the cause.

On the Democratic side, ANGA was flanked by its CEO Marty Durbin, nephew of U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) and a former lobbyist for the American Petroleum Institute. Prior to becoming a lobbyist, Durbin worked as a congressional staffer

Upon the NDAA of 2015's passage, ANGA praised both fracking-related provisions, expedited permitting for fracking on U.S. public lands and natural gas vehicles, in a press release. Inhofe included ANGA's natural gas vehicles provision statement in his press release, as well.

“This bill also promotes the tangible benefits that natural gas vehicles offer in increasing the use of an abundant and affordable American resource,” declared Macchiarola in ANGA's release. “This provision helps pave the way for the deployment of cleaner, more efficient vehicles on our highways and allows our nation to enjoy the environmental and economic advantages natural gas offers.”

President Obama has declared strong support for NGVs in the past. 

Locking in Fracking

The two provisions buried within the 1,600-plus page NDAA of 2015 serve as the last laugh for Big Oil in the U.S. as 2014 winds down.

With three liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminals approved this year fueled by the same revolving door exemplified by the NGVs provision — and the floodgates now opened for expedited fracking permitting on public lands, Big Oil has locked in U.S. fracking infrastructure for years to come.

Or at least until the shale runs dry, with public lands now offering a new major lifeline.

As it stands, California and New York are the last major obstacles resisting the U.S. fracking rush. But there exists no state in the union — with the combination of pipelines, petrochemical plants, manufacturing facilities and now more NGV infrastructure  that remains untouched by the fracking revolution.

Update: On Dec. 19, in the form of a late Friday night “news dump,” President Obama signed the NDAA of 2015 into law. Obama did not mention Section 3021 in his press statement, instead focusing on how the bill will “counter the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant and [help] to respond to emerging needs in the face of evolving terrorist threats and emergent crises worldwide.”

Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons

Frank Clemente

$
0
0

Frank Clemente

Credentials

  • Bachelor of Arts degree in English from Indiana University  
  • Ph.D., Demography – University of Tennessee, 1971. 
  • Post-doctoral Fellow – University of Wisconsin, 1972-73.

Sources: [1][2]

Background

Frank Clemente is an emeritus professor of Sociology at Penn State University. He is the former head of Penn State's Environmental Policy Center (1979-1981) and has served as a consultant to a range of corporations and government agencies.  Clemente's areas of research have included energy policy including the “development of such energy resources as natural gas, oil and coal. Socio-economic aspects of construction of power plants, dams, pipelines and transmission lines.”  

Clemente was the co-author of the National Coal Council's, “The Urgency of Sustainable Coal.” [3], [2]

Frank Clemente has regularly testified on behalf of energy companies, and has been an expert witness in more than 50 energy related cases. [4] 

Greenpeace has described Clemente as a “favorite” of the coal industry. particularly Peabody Energy, which has regularly used his research as evidence for the need to expand coal power in developing countries. [5]

Clemente has been paid to write reports for Peabody Energy including one on “the Global Value of Coal,” for which he was paid $50,000 by Peabody Energy coal company. [5]

Energy-Facts.org

Frank Clemente is behind a now-defunct website titled Energy-Facts.org, which featured “Commentary and Research from Dr. Frank Clemente.” An archived version of Clemente's website describes coal as “the path out of poverty” for Southeast Asia and developing countries. [24]

According to WHOIS results, Clemente registered the website on September 22, 2009. The website, which describes itself “a project of Dr. Frank Clemente,” is also connected to climate change denier Mark P. Mills. [25], [26]

The website featured weekly issues written by both Frank Clemente and Mark P. Mills on the benefits of coal and other fossil fuels. [27]

Stance on Climate Change

“Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is the technological pathway to both meeting climate change goals and unlocking the full economic value of our greatest energy resource- coal.” [6]

Key Quotes

December, 2015

“I have written, spoken and testified quite a bit on coal's importance to the quality of life around the world, especially in developing nations. I have worked with the Coal Industry Advisory Board, International Energy Agency, World Coal Association, the American Coal Council and the NCC, as well as a number of private coal based companies and regional groups.” [7]

March, 2015

“There is no substitute for coal. To replace the world's coal power plants would require about 5,000 Hoover Dams or constructing a new nuclear power plant every four days for the next 25 years or adding more than 5 million wind turbines — enough to stretch 1 million miles to the moon and back twice.” [8]

February, 2014

The following is from a February, 2014 white paper by Frank Clemente titled Coal Lifts Billions from Energy Poverty and Increases Access to Low-Cost Electricity at Scale” (PDF)

“Access to affordable energy, socioeconomic security and a clean environment are inalienable human rights. If the world's goal truly is the eradication of poverty and environmental improvement, then coal, our most abundant source of electricity, must be an integral part of the solution

[…] On the other side of the globe, since 1990, China has used coal-based energy to lift 650 million people out of poverty, reduce female illiteracy by almost 80 percent and decrease infant mortality by 70 percent. Clean coal technologies, including the construction of highly efficient supercritical power plants, provide the opportunity for the rest of the developing world to utilize coal to eradicate the specter of energy poverty that haunts billions.” [9]
November, 2013
“Coal is now powering the remarkable 21st century socio-economic miracle unfolding in China, where 80% of the global population taken out of poverty in the last 20 years is Chinese. Importantly, this increasing dependence on coal continues apace as India and other developing countries are emerging from the wings to seek a better life for their citizens through coal.” [24]

Key Deeds

December, 2015

A Greenpeace undercover investigationfound that Frank Clemente was among a group of academics willing to accept funding from fossil fuel companies to testify at state hearings, write newspaper articles, and author journal articles. [5]

Greenpeace approached a group of academics from Princeton and Penn State, posing as representatives of oil and coal companies and asking for papers promoting the benefits of CO2 and the use of coal in developing countries. 

In none of these cases is the sponsor identified. All my work is published as an independent scholar,” Clemente said.  [5]

Greenpeace published a series of emails between Frank Clemente and fictional energy companies. In one interchange, Clemente is asked to write a briefing paper for a “client with significant interests in the Indonesian energy sector, who is looking to safeguard their interests there.” [5]

The reporter, posing as a representative for the fictional company “Horizon Focus,” asks Clemente “Would we be able to quote you as Professor Emeritus at Penn State University on the research paper.” Clemente responds: “quoting me as Professor Emeritus at the University poses no difficulty whatsoever.”[5]

Horizon also asks whether there is a need to declare source funding. Clemente responds, “I have little doubt we can publish the findings here in the USThere is no requirement to declare source funding in the US(emphasis added). Despite being “supported by government agencies, trade associations, the University, and private companies,” Clemente writes that his research and writing was always “published under the rubric of me as an independent scholar.” See below. [5]

In another email, Clemente discloses that he was paid to author a 2012 report (PDF) for the International Energy Agency in 2012. Greenpeace notes that the fine print of the report lists Peabody Energy as a sponsor, however the dollar value had not been known until now.  View the full email chain here. [10][7]

As ABC News reports, Frank Clemente responded to the Greenpeace's claims, saying “I fully stand behind every single statement I made. […] I write as an independent scholar fully apart from my non-salary role as Professor Emeritus. This is academic freedom.” [11]

He added, “I am very proud of my research and believe that clean coal technologies are the pathway to reliable and affordable electricity, reduction of global energy poverty and a cleaner environment.” [12]

Dr Clemente said he was retired and operating as an independent consultant:

“I was not on the Penn State payroll during the publication of either of the two documents that were mentioned in the Greenpeace blog. Thus, the University is not responsible for my work in any way,” he told ABC News via email.  [11]
Lisa Powers, director of news and media relations for Penn State, said that “Dr Clemente has long since retired from the university (he is no longer on our payroll) and the university doesn't have disclosure rules for retirees.
“When Dr Clemente expresses his views on issues publicly, they are his own and do not reflect the views of the university,” she said. [11]

September, 2014

Frank Clemente was a keynote speaker at the “At the Crossroads Energy & Climate Policy Summit“ event hosted by the Texas Public Policy Foundation (TPPC). [22]

Clement's speech was included in a TPPC collection promoting a report by Kathleen Hartnett White titled ”Fossil Fuels: The Moral Case.” [23]

See video below.

According to Clemente, “it's not like fossil fuels are reaching the twilight. This is like the end of the beginning.”

“Coal-based generation in the United States […] has increased 146% since 1970. And all these emissions have dropped off. Clean coal works. We have to implement it.

“People need electric power. They need natural gas. And they need oil. And they're going to get it. And they should have it.”

June 21, 2013

Alex Epstein of the Center for Industrial Progress (CIPinterviewed Frank Clemente on coal and its “impact on human health” for episode 55 of the Power Hour program. [13]

Audio available here.

January, 2012

Frank Clemente is the lead author and editor of a 2012 Working Paper by the Coal Industry Advisory Board/International Energy Agency (IEA) titled “The Global Value of Coal” (PDF). [10]

The Acknowledgements section lists Peabody Energy as the sponsor of the paper. The paper also mentions contributions from individuals from Anglo American and Rio Tinto Energy for “structuring and guiding the work.”

In a 2015 undercover investigation by Greenpeace, Clemente admits to having been paid $15,000 by Peabody Energy for the paper. [5]

The paper is explicit about its purpose to encourage pro-coal policy and investment:

“The purpose of this paper is to highlight for policy makers the value of coal to world economic and social development and so encourage development of a policy environment that will allow the coal and electricity industries to make the necessary investments in production capacity and CO2 emissions reduction technologies.” [10]

The paper also promotes “clean coal,” which it says “presents a unique opportunity for the world to meet both economic and environmental goals affordably, reliably and sustainably.”

SourceWatch describes clean coal as a “high-profile marketing campaign aimed at convincing the public and politicians that the goal of using coal without damaging the environment and public health is either a current or a foreseeable reality.” [20]

April, 2010

Peabody Energy's Chairman and and CEO, Gregory H. Boyce, references Frank Clemente heavily in a testimony (PDF) before the U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee for Energy Independence and Global Warming where Boyce argues that there is a “near-zero emissions future from coal.” [14]

Boyce's references include the following:

  1. United Nations Millennium Goals, International Energy Agency, 2005; Analysis by Dr. Frank Clemente, Pennsylvania State University. 
  2. Global Energy Institute, 2008, “Out of Poverty: Coal’s Contribution to China is a Model for the Developing World,” Dr. Frank Clemente, Pennsylvania State University, American Coal Magazine, July 2009. 
  3. Analysis of United Nations Population Division, “The World at Six Billion,” Dr. Frank Clemente, Pennsylvania State University. 
  4. Analysis by Dr. Frank Clemente, Pennsylvania State University. 

December, 2009

Frank Clemente wrote an article for the American Coal Council’s American Coal magazine titled  “Out of Poverty: Coal’s contribution to China is a model for the developing world” (PDF).

The article argues that without coal, “China could not have catapulted itself to the center of the world’s economic stage.” [15]

“China is providing a template of how coal can be used to pull people out of poverty and propel an entire society toward higher living standards. India and many other countries around the world are learning from China’s example,” Clemente writes. [16]

July, 2009

Frank Clemente authored a paper (PDF) where he argues that coal is superior to natural gas for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. [17]

“Fuel-switching from coal to natural gas will not only increase electricity prices and lower reliability, it will frustrate, not advance, current climate policies by retarding policy advances in CCUS for both coal and gas,” Clemente writes.

March 8 - 10, 2009

Frank Clemente was a speaker at the Heartland Institute's 2009 International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC2) in New York.[18]

DeSmogBlog investigated sponsors behind the conference and found that they had collectively received over $47 million from energy companies and right-wing foundations. [19]

Affiliations

Frank Clemente claims to have worked with the following organizations: [7]

Other Affiliations

Publications

A search of Google Scholar shows that Frank Clemente has authored a number of articles in peer-reviewed journals on the subject of Sociology. [21]

He has also published a range of articles on energy policy in industry-friendly journals. According to his archived profile at Coal Can Do That, Clemente had published over 100 articles in energy related media including Public Utilities Fortnightly, Electrical World, Nuclear News, World Oil, American Coal, Oil and Gas Journal and the Journal of Commerce. His social science publications have appeared in such journals as Farm Economics, Urban Studies, Journal of Black Studies, Growth and Change and Rural Sociology.  [1]

Resources

  1. Expert Profile: Dr. Frank Clemente,” Coal Can Do That. Archived September 23, 2015. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  2. Frank Clemente,” PennState Department of Sociology & Crime, Law and Justice. Archived June 18, 2010. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  3. Frank Clemente,” PennState. Archived December 9, 2015. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6deYiZKuz

  4. Frank Clemente: Member Profile,” EnergyBiz. Archived December 9, 2015. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6deZYHmPv

  5. Lawrence Carter and Maeve McClenaghan. “Exposed: Academics-for-hire agree not to disclose fossil fuel funding,” GreenPeace EnergyDesk, December 8, 2015. Archived December 9, 2015. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6deZxlWnq

  6. “Why We Need More Coal Based Electricity: Energy Realities Facing the United States” (PDF), Penn State, July, 2009. Retrieved from TheCoalInstitute.org. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog. 

  7. Email chain: Frank Clemente,” DocumentCloud. Contributed by Damian Kahya, Greenpeace. Accessed December 9, 2015. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  8. Frank Clemente: Fossil-free protesters oppose energies that improve our lives,” The Morning Call, March 21, 2015. Archived December 11, 2015. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6dhoxEFSa

  9. Dr. Frank Clemente. “Coal Lifts Billions from Energy Poverty and Increases Access to Low-Cost Electricity at Scale” (PDF), Advance Energy For Life, February, 2014. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  10. “The Global Value of Coal” (PDF), International Energy Agency, 2012. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  11. Sara Phillips. “'This is academic freedom': US Professor Frank Clemente hits back at Greenpeace claims,” ABC News, December 9, 2015. Archived December 9, 2015.

  12. John Schwartz. “Greenpeace Subterfuge Tests Climate Research,” The New York Times, December 9, 2015. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6dheFehms

  13. Power Hour: Frank Clemente on Coal and Human Health,” Center for Industrial Progress, June 21, 2013. Archived December 11, 2015. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6dhnNpWSN

  14. “The U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee for Energy Independence and Global Warming: Testimony of Gregory H. Boyce, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Peabody Energy” (PDF), markey.senate.gov, April, 2010. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  15. Joe Lucas. “Coal-generated electricity and China’s rapid industrial growth,” Behind the Plug Blog, December 15, 2009. Archived December 11, 2015. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6dhexGvzI

  16. “Cleaning up the  Confusion Over Coal” (PDF)American Coal, Issue 1, 2009. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  17. “Frank Clemente. GHG Life Cycle Analysis: Literature Review of Shale Gas / LNG” (PDF), Penn State, July, 2009. Retrieved from assocarboni. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  18. Speakers,” The 2009 International Conference on Climate Change, March 5, 2009. Archived July 9, 2009. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  19. Heartland Institute's 2009 Climate Conference in New York: funding history of the sponsors,” DeSmogBlog.

  20. Clean Coal,” Sourcewatch. Accessed December 11, 2015. 

  21. Search for author “Frank Clemente,” Google Scholar. Performed December 9, 2015.

  22. Crossroads Summit Keynote: Frank Clemente,” YouTube video by Texas Public Policy Foundation, October 6, 2014.

  23. Kathleen Hartnett-White. “Fossil Fuels: The Moral Case” (PDF), Texas Public Policy Foundation, June 2014. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  24. Home,” Energy-Facts.org. Archived May 17, 2014. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  25. Whois Record for Energy-Facts.org,” Domaintools.com. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  26. About Energy-Facts.org,” Energy-Facts.org. Archived September 6, 2013. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  27. Energy Facts Weekly: Issues,” Energy-Facts.org. Archived September 6, 2013. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

Bonner Cohen

$
0
0

Bonner R. Cohen

 Credentials

  • Ph.D. University of Munich
  • B.A. University of Georgia
Source: [1]

 Background

Bonner Cohen was the editor of EPA Watch from 1992 to 1999a group that the tobacco company Philip Morris (PM) once described as an “asset.” Bonner Cohen has been highlighted in Philip Morris documents as an “expert on EPA matters” and served as former Director of The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition (TASSC), which has been described as a front group for Philip Morris that was set up by APCO Associates (now APCO Worldwide). [2], [3]

Bonner Cohen also served as an editor of American Values, published by the Environmental Policy Analysis Network in 1996 along with Steve Milloy, who was also Cohen's colleague at TASSC. Steve Milloy has a history as a paid industry lobbyist and served as executive director at TASCC, which worked to expand and assist Philip Morris in its efforts with issues in targeted states.”  [4][5], [6], [7]

Cohen's affiliations include a range of other industry groups and conservative organizations including the Lexington Institute, where he was a Senior Fellow, the Heartland Institute (“Expert”), theNational Center for Public Policy Research (Senior Fellow) and theCommittee for a Constructive Tomorrow(Senior Policy Advisor)[4], [8][9]

Bonner Cohen edited a 2000 joint NCPA/Junkscience.com report titled The Fear Profiteers: Do 'Socially Responsible' Businesses Sow Health Scares to Reap Monetary Rewards?” (PDF), which offers the following profile on Cohen:
“Dr. Bonner R. Cohen, Ph.D., joined the Lexington Institute as a senior fellow in 1999. Dr. Cohen has lectured and participated in panels dealing with environmental issues in the United States and abroad and is a frequent commentator on television and radio programs. He was the editor for Environment & Climate News. 
 
“Together with Steve Milloy, Cohen has served as editor of American Values: an Environmental Vision, an anthology published by the Environmental Policy Analysis Network in 1996. Articles by Dr. Cohen have appeared in Forbes, The Weekly Standard, National Review, Investor’s Business Daily, Journal of Commerce, Washington Times, Earth Times, and other publications. He has been interviewed on CNN, America’s Voice, and numerous radio programs. His previous positions include that of research associate at the Stiftung, Germany Wissenschaft und Politik (Foundation for Science and Policy)in Ebenhausen, Germany and as a German-language lecturer for the United States Information Agency (USIA),in Germany. 
 
“Dr. Cohen holds a Ph.D.—summa cum laude—from the University of Munich and a B.A. from the University of Georgia.” [1][10]

Cohen's profile at the National Center for Public Policy Research (NCPPR) notes that he has testified before the U.S. Senate committees on Energy & Natural Resources and Environment & Public Works as well as the U.S. House committees on Natural Resources and Judiciary. [9]

*Note: don't confuse Bonner Cohen with Bernard Cohen, a radon scientist who also worked for Phillip Morris and the tobacco industry. [11]

EPA Watch, Tobacco & the American Policy Center

The third quarter 2000 issue of the investigative PR Watch (PDF) identifies Bonner Cohen's role in EPA watch and the group's connection to the tobacco industry:
“Bonner Cohen edits a newsletter called EPA Watch, which accuses the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency of everything from destroying the U.S. economy to trying to stop people from taking showers. A Philip Morris strategy document describes EPA Watch as an  'asset' created by PM funding allocated  'to establish groups … that have a broader impact for PM. ' Another Philip Morris strategy memo discusses plans to promote  'EPA Watch/Bonner Cohen as expert on EPA matters, i.e., regular syndicated radio features on EPA activities, … news bureau function, speaking engagements, whatever can be done to increase his visibility and credibility on matters dealing with the EPA.'
 
EPA Watch is published by the American Policy Center (APC), headed by long-time PR pro Thomas DeWeese. APC weighs in on what can safely be called the looney fringe of the sound science movement. One issue of the APC’s newsletter, for example, attacks longtime environmentalist and author Jeremy Rifkin as  'anti-industry, anti-civilization, anti-people' and accuses him of preaching  'suicide, abortion, cannibalism and sodomy.'” [2]

A memo contained in the Philip Morris public document site outlines a plan for EPA Watch and Bonner Cohen, written by former Philip Morris executive Thomas Humber:

“We should specifically discuss the potential for EPA Watch as a part of media and other efforts. I have previously discussed with Tom Borelli several ideas for expanding the impact of EPA Watch and the reputation of Bonner Cohen as an expert on EPA matters. At a minimum, a series of radio actualities with Bonner commenting on EPA matters could reach an extremely wide audience, and we can tailor geographically for maximum appeal. We think it also possible to establish a standard format that could give Bonner presence as an expert commentator, butt that requires further investigation. As a part of the D-Day operation, Bonner's name was provided to several Colorado journalists as an outside resource on EPA transgressions.” [12]

Stance on Climate Change

The following is a partial transcript of an interview between Bonner Cohen and a representative at C-SPAN's National Journal (Reported on at DeSmogBlog and originally at ThinkProgress). [13], [14]
Caller: “I do believe in global warming[..] how do you foresee the future if we keep going with the pedal to metal so to speak?”
Cohen: “Your grandchildren would be best served, when considering climate change that we not allow ourselves to be driven by idle speculation, not by computer models. Simply look at the scientific data and see if in fact we are experiencing anything out of the ordinary.”
 
“[…]what i think is vitally important is that for everyone, that we make the decisions that we make with respect to our environmental and energy policies based on the best available scientific data that we have. We cannot afford to do that based on speculation alone.”

Fossil Fuel Funding

Cohen admits that the National Center for Public Policy Research, which he works for, receives fossil fuel funding:  [13]
Host: “Our guest also serves as a Senior Fellow at the NCPPR, which is…”
 
Bonner:“A think tank here in town…”
 
Host: “How are you funded?”
 
Bonner:“Mostly through individual donations….”
 
Host: “Energy industry at all?”
 
Bonner: “Yes, some”
 
Host: “Which forms?”
 
Bonner: “It would, ahh, it would, ahh, from… from the, ahh, fossil fuel industry.”

 Tobacco

“The science [on tobacco smoke], of which the EPA avails itself, is that which happens to fit the political agenda of the moment …. the one certainty following the EPA's report on tobacco smoke, is that the available science is inconclusive.” [13]

Key Quotes

February, 2014

“The contribution of coal-fired power plants to the U.S., much less global, CO2 emissions is so minuscule that it cannot be measured with any degree of accuracy.” [15]

2012

“[W]e’re in the midst of an enormous battle. A battle between the entrenched interest of the environmental community and government regulatory agencies in Washington and […] ordinary citizens.” [16]

2006

“[T]he vision that the environmentalists are trying to impose on the rest of us is contrary to how nature works and, if you predicate your actions, regulations, laws, assorted schemes from rails to trails to heritage areas and what have you, ultimately on the notion that you are protecting nature by preserving the balance, by protecting the ecosystem, you are actually working contrary to how nature functions, and the results of this can be absolutely catastrophic, not just for the rural people caught up in all of this whose livelihoods are regularly destroyed by the environmentalists, but also to nature itself.” [17]

“[T]he banning of DDT and the similar regulations were something which were not based on available scientific evidence, so too is the environmental vision being imposed on rural America itself, contrary to how nature really works. ” [17]

February, 2000

Indeed, public discussion of environmental issues is replete with references to 'toxic' chemicals or 'toxic pollutants.' In reality, these are regulatory terms with no basis in science.” [18]

Key Deeds

June, 2015
 
Bonner Cohen appeared on Aljazeera's Inside Story, alongside Bill Galston of the Brookings Institution, to discuss Pope Francis's Climate Change Encyclical. (Video below.) [19]
Transcript excerpt:
“What we really don't want to do, I think, is impose policies that would deny [Catholics in parts of the world vulnerable to climate change] access to electricity or make their access to electricity more difficult. And that's were I think that's where the Pope needs to be very, very careful here because if he favors policies that will ultimately put some of the good things about modern life out of reach of the most vulnerable, he will ultimately wind up perpetuating poverty and putting himself behind policies that will lead to shorter life expectancies and that that's something I don't think any of us want.”
February 7, 2014
 
The Washington Times reports that Bonner Cohen appeared at an EPA hearing discussing pollution standards on new coal power plants:
“At an Environmental Protection Agency hearing last Thursday on carbon-dioxide 'pollution' standards for new power plants, environmental policy analyst Bonner Cohen pointed out that the total U.S. contribution of atmospheric carbon dioxide is a tiny 0.01 percent: 'The contribution of coal-fired power plants to the U.S., much less global, CO2 emissions is so minuscule that it cannot be measured with any degree of accuracy.'” [15]
October 20, 2012

Bonner Cohen spoke at the Sixteenth Annual National Conference on Private Property Rights hosted by the Property Rights Foundation of America. 

In Cohen's speach, titled “Energy Abundance or Poverty: The Choice of a Century,” he describes the environmental movement as a  “threat”: [16]
“The biggest threat to American energy independence comes from […] the environmental movement and the assortment of government agencies with which the environmental movement has been cooperating now for decades.”
 
“You see, what is a blessing for landowners in the Marcellus Shale area (with the sad exception of New York, but we hope that changes), what has been a blessing for these communities in Pennsylvania and North Dakota and elsewhere is an absolute nightmare for the environmental movement. Indeed for them, the shale revolution has been a black swan. […] Now natural gas poses an enormous threat to the world view of the environmentalists, simply because there is so much of it. And so much of that natural gas, and as well as the oil in various formations, is on private land, meaning that the ability of the environmental movement to block exploitation of those natural resources is limited.”
According to Cohen, “we’re in the midst of an enormous battle. A battle between the entrenched interest of the environmental community and government regulatory agencies in Washington and […] ordinary citizens.”

He says that allowing the EPA to regulate fracking (hydraulic fracturing) would be a “total disaster for the country.”

October 23, 2010
 
Bonner Cohen spoke at the Fourteenth Annual Conference on Private Property Rights hosted by the Property Rights Foundation of America. 
 
Cohen spoke on  the Ocean Policy Initiative: [20]
“The Coastal Marine Special Planning Program would not have much to do with oceans but would be a mechanism to allow for federal zoning throughout the United States,” said Dr. Bonner.
October 14, 2006
 
Bonner Cohen spoke at the Tenth Annual Conference on Private Property Rights hosted by the Property Rights Foundation of America. 
 
Cohen's speech was titled “Environmentalism and Its Consequences.” Some excerpts below: [17]

“[T]he vision that the environmentalists are trying to impose on the rest of us is contrary to how nature works and, if you predicate your actions, regulations, laws, assorted schemes from rails to trails to heritage areas and what have you, ultimately on the notion that you are protecting nature by preserving the balance, by protecting the ecosystem, you are actually working contrary to how nature functions, and the results of this can be absolutely catastrophic, not just for the rural people caught up in all of this whose livelihoods are regularly destroyed by the environmentalists, but also to nature itself.

Cohen also argues in favor of DDT, concluding that regulations were “not based on available scientific evidence”:

“[T]he banning of DDT and the similar regulations were something which were not based on available scientific evidence, so too is the environmental vision being imposed on rural America itself, contrary to how nature really works. ”

January 1, 2006

Bonner Cohen wrote The Green Wave: Environmentalism and Its Consequences, a book critical of the environmental movement. A book review at the Property Rights Foundation of America notes that “DDT was never shown to be harmful to the environment.” [21]

Environmentalism and its Consequences is published by the Capital Research Center (CRC), a group which has significant funding from the fossil fuel industry and well-connected conservative foundations including: [22]
December, 2000
 
The Washington Times reports that Bonner Cohen was a member of a “global warming panel” on the Kyoto Protocol in the Cannon House Office Building. [24]
 
Panel members mentioned by the Times included:
C-SPAN describes the Cooler Heads Coalition (CHC) as hosting the event, and also named Joe Knollenberg, U.S. Representative for Michigan, as a member of the panel. Video below (Cohen appears at timestamp 7:20): [25]


August 31, 2000

Bonner Cohen is a co-editor of a joint report by the National Center for Public Policy Research (NCPPR) and Junkscience.com titled The Fear Profiteers: Do 'Socially Responsible' Businesses Sow Health Scares to Reap Monetary Rewards?” (PDF). [1][10]

According to the report's press release, “Authored by a distinguished group of experts, 'Fear Profiteers: Do Socially Responsible Businesses Sow Health Scares to Reap Monetary Rewards?' describes a number of major health scares of the last decade and links them to Fenton Communications - a slick, for-profit public relations business that, along with its clients, makes money by alarming the public:” [10]
 
The report was part of the “No More Scares” campaign, which Sourcewatch describes as “a front group launched in August 2000 by a number of leading figures in the anti-environmental 'sound science' movement, aiming to smear environmental and health activists as behind-the-scenes conspirators who 'sow health scares to reap monetary rewards.'” [26], [27]

The report's authors/editors included the following: [10]

Affiliations

 Publications

According to Bonner Cohen's profile at the National Center for Public Policy Research:

“Articles by Dr. Cohen have appeared in the Wall Street Journal, Forbes, Investor's Business Daily, New York Post, Washington Times, National Review, Philadelphia Inquirer, Detroit News, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Miami Herald, and dozens of other newspapers in the U.S. and Canada. He has been interviewed on Fox News, CNN, Fox Business Channel, BBC, BBC Worldwide Television, NBC, NPR, N 24 (German language news channel), Voice of Russia, and scores of radio stations in the U.S.” [9]

Based on a search of the online news sources mentioned in his profile, Cohen has been largely inactive since the late 1990s with exception to the Washington Times where he has published a number of pieces on renewable energy:

Below are some samples of Cohen's more recent publications

Books

  • The Green Wave: Environmentalism and its Consequences.  Washington: Capital Research Center, 2006.
  • Marshall, Mao und Chiang: Die amerikanischen Vermittlungsbemuehungen im chinesischen Buergerkrieg (Marshall, Mao and Chiang: The American Mediations Effort in the Chinese Civil War). Munich: Tuduv Verlag, 1984

 Resources

  1. “The Fear Profiteers: Do 'Socially Responsible' Businesses Sow Health Scares to Reap Monetary Rewards?” (PDF), National Center for Public Policy/Junkscience.com. Retrieved from the Hudson Institute website. Archived March 3, 2016. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.)

  2. Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber. “The Usual Suspects: Industry Hacks Turn Fear on its Head” (PDF), PR Watch, Volumber 7, Number 3 (Third Quarter 2000). Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  3. The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition,” Sourcewatch. Accessed March 5, 2016.

  4. Bonner R. Cohen, Ph.D.: Senior Fellow,” Lexington Institute. Archived April 18, 2003. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  5. “The Advancement of Sound Science Center” (990 form - PDF), for tax year beginning OCt 1, 2003 and ending Sept 30, 2004. PDF archived at DeSmogBlog.

  6. Steven J. Milloy,” SourceWatch Profile.

  7. Paul D. Thacker. “Smoked Out,” New Republic, February 5, 2006. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  8. “Expert: Bonner R. Cohen,” Heartland Institute. Archived March 4, 2016. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6fkL7Y2Q8

  9.  BONNERCOHEN, PH.D.: SENIORFELLOW,” National Center for Public Policy Research. Archived March 4, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6fkLLO0gV

  10. (Press Release). “Watchdog group releases 'Fear Profiteers';Report exposes health scare industry,” NoMoreScares.com, August 31, 2000. Archived October 17, 2000. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  11. Search results for “Bernard Cohen,” Truth Tobacco Industry Documents. Accessed March 3, 2016.

  12. ETS,” (Memo, est. 1993) from Thomas Humber to Ellen Mrelo (CC Vic Han). Philip Morris Public Library. PDF archived at DeSmogBlog.

  13. Keven Grandia. “Tobacco hack turned climate change flak,” DeSmogBlog, August 9, 2006.

  14. Judd Legum. “Industry-Backed Author: The ‘Vast Majority’ of Climatologists Don’t Believe In Global Warming,” ThinkProgressAugust 9, 2006. Archived March 4, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6fliKmvZq

  15. EDITORIAL: Obama’s warmed-over fudge on global warming,” The Washington Times, February 10, 2014. Archived March 4, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6flVxQWDe

  16. Energy Abundance or Poverty: The Choice of a Century,” Property Rights Foundation of America, October 20, 2012. Archived March 4, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6flM4xqzc

  17. Environmentalism and Its Consequences,” Property Rights Foundation of America, October 14, 2006. Archived March 4, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6flPmpkmx

  18. FDR wouldn't like politically correct memorial,” The Washington Times, February 14, 2000. Archived March 4, 2016.

  19. Bonner Cohen on Pope Francis's Climate Change Encyclical,” Youtube video uploaded by  National Center for Public Policy Research, June 25, 2015.

  20. AFTERNOONADDRESS: From Ocean Regulation to Federal Land Use Control,” PRF America. Archived March 3, 2016. WebCite URL:  http://www.webcitation.org/6flQEdps3

  21. Book Review: The Truth About Environmentalism,” Property Rights Foundation of America. Archived March 4, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6flRzo1AT

  22. Capital Research Center,” Conservative Transparency. Accessed October 18, 2015.

  23. ExxonSecrets Factsheet: Capital Research Center and Greenwatch, CRC. Accessed October, 2015.

  24. Inside the Beltway,” The Washington Times, December 8, 2000. Archived March 4, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6flWMZmd3

  25. Kyoto Protocol,” C-SPAN (Video), December 6, 2000.

  26. NoMoreScares.com Homepage. Archived October 18, 2000. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  27. No More Scares Campaign,” SourceWatch. Accessed March 3, 2016. 

  28. Pranay Gupte and Bonner R. Cohen. “Carol Browner, master of mission creep,” Forbes, October 20, 1997.  Archived .pdf on file at DeSMogBlog.  WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6flTCDMpl

Other Resources


Jeffrey R. Holmstead

$
0
0

Jeffrey R. Holmstead

Credentials

  • J.D., Yale Law School, 1987. [1]
  • B.A., summa cum laude, Brigham Young University, 1984. [1]

Background

Jeffrey R. Holmstead is a partner and attorney for Bracewell LLP in Washington, DC (formerly Bracewell & Giuliani*) where he has headed their “Environmental Strategies Group (ESG)” since 2006. [1] The ESG reportedly works to “advise and defend companies and business groups confronting major environmental and energy-development challenges, both domestically and globally.” Holmstead previously served as Associate Counsel to President George H.W. Bush from 1989 to 1993, where he was “deeply involved” in the passage and amendments to the Clean Air Act. [1] Holmstead's work with the Clean Air Act earned him the title of “Clean Air Villain of the Month” by the Clean Air Trust. [2]

Holmstead then moved to the corporate law firm Lantham & Watkins until 2001, another law firm representing industry interests and combatting regulations on mercury pollution from coal & oil power plants. [3], [1], [4], From 2001 to 2005, Holmstead served as the EPA's Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation under the Bush administration, a position that Polluterwatch reports Holmstead used to stall mercury pollution controls in US power plants for over eight years. [5]

Holmstead's appointment at the EPA was controversial and protested by US Senators due to his previous lobbying work for coal companies. [6] Jeffrey Holmstead has been described as a prime example of a “revolving door lobbyist“—a term that OpenSecrets defines as “a revolving door that shuffles former federal employees into jobs as lobbyists, consultants and strategists just as the door pulls former hired guns into government careers.” [7], [8]

While Holmstead has also been described as “one of the nation's leading climate change lawyers,” [1] he has lobbied extensively for the coal and energy industries with clients including Duke EnergySouthern Company​AmerenArch CoalProgress EnergyDTE EnergySalt River Project, and others. [9] Holmstead was also an adjunct scholar with the Citizens for the Environment, a group created by Koch Industries' now-defunct Citizens for a Sound Economy (CSE)[3]

*Bracewell LLP was renamed in 2016 after the departure of its founder, former New York City mayor Rudy Giulani. [10]

Electric Reliability Coordinating Council (ERCC)

Jeffrey Holmstead is counsel to the Electric Reliability Coordinating Council (ERCC), [11] a group that describes itself as “a broad-based coalition of energy companies committed to the continued viability of diverse, affordable and reliable electric power supply in the United States.” Members of the ERCC“include some of the major electric utilities companies in the country who all possess the shared belief that coal-based energy should play an important role as our nation moves toward a clean energy future.” [12] The ERCC's director, Scott Segal, is also a partner at Bracewell LLP. [13], [14]

Latham & Watkins LLP

Latham & Watkins worked along with Holmstead to weaken legislation to reduce mercury pollution from coal and oil power plants. According to DC Bureau,  Latham & Watkins's “attorneys outlined an anemic cap-and-trade system to address mercury pollution from coal and oil fired plants. The firm’s recommendations were written to behoove industry clients.” [3]

“A side-by-side comparison of one of the three proposed rules and the memorandums prepared by Latham & Watkins – one of Washington's premier corporate environmental law firms – shows that at least a dozen paragraphs were lifted, sometimes verbatim, from the industry suggestions,” The Washington Post reported. [15]

Holmstead, while working as associate administrator of the EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation, was responsible for drafting the mercury rule and used language from the Latham & Watkins memo. Prior to working in the Bush administration, Holmstead worked with Latham & Watkins to represent groups like the Alliance for Constructive Air Policy, a utility front group that focused on state smog standards.  [3]

Stance on Climate Change

“I'm not sure the big debates are around the science, the big debates are around well, what is it that we should do… It's really a technology issue, and I think the only effective way to deal with climate change is to make sure we're investing in technologies that will give people what we get today from fossil fuels at a cost that's cost competitive. 

If I were in charge of climate change policy in the government, I would certainly want to invest more in those kinds of technology breakthroughs.  And we're seeing some encouraging things, but I think… if this is only about making people's energy more expensive, making it harder for people to have the things that they have today with fossil fuels, I think it's very hard to overcome human nature.  But if there are technologies that can actually give us those same things without those CO2 issues and at a comparable cost, I think that's the only way we actually end up dealing with climate change.” [16]

On Mercury

According to the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), some of Jeffrey Holmstead's statements on the toxicity of mercurcy during his time at the EPA directly contradict statements he made while working for Bracewell & Giuliani: [17]

Statements by Holmstead of EPA when Holmstead headed EPA program (2001-2005)

“Reducing power plants’ air pollution would result in '14,100 fewer premature deaths,' among other 'significant health benefits,' 'by dramatically reducing fine particle pollution caused by SO2 and NOx emissions.'

EPA estimates that reducing power plants’ SO2 and NOx emissions by approximately 60% will deliver 'particulate matter-related annual benefits' that include 13,000-17,000 fewer premature fatalities every year. “

Statements by Holmstead while at Bracewell & Giuliani (2011)

I don't believe that there are thousands of people who are dying because of exposure to these small [particles],” i.e. particulate matter.

It is pretty hard to say that [mercury from coal-fired power plants] is a significant public health issue.”

Key Quotes

February, 2016

I think the likelihood that [the EPA rules] will ever go into effect is pretty low,” Holmstead says. “There needs to be some sort of congressional action to decide how the United States is going to deal with climate change.” [18]

“Until the Clean Power Plan, the federal government has never said that states must shut down certain types of plants and build others to replace them.  States like Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and South Dakota believe that EPA has gone well beyond its statutory authority in ordering the construction of new wind and solar plants. Even if EPA is, to some extent, requiring them to do things they are doing anyway, they simply don’t believe that EPA has this authority.” [19]

November 11, 2011

“The answer isn't just to regulate our way to clean energy.” —Politico Energy Forum (video below). [20]

June 7, 2011

“The benefits of reducing mercury are very insignificant.” — Video Below [21]

2006

With regards to his move from a government regulator, to a lobbyist for those he was regulating:

“I, I'm not sure why, uh, people have tried to make something of that. But people have to have jobs. And that's the way it works.” [22]

Lobbying

Since joining Bracewell LLP in 2007, Holmstead's clients have included almost exclusively coal and energy companies including: [23], [9]

Electric Reliability Coordinating Council—  $10,087,500
Southern Company—  $3,230,000
​Ameren—  $1,568,000
Duke Energy—  $1,548,000
​Energy Future Holdings—  $1,538,000
Arch Coal —  $1,520,000
Progress Energy—  $948,000 (merged with Duke Energy)
DTE Energy—  $620,000
Salt River Project—  $594,000
LG&E&KU Energy (PPL subsidiary)—  $170,000

Former Clients

Mirant (now GenOn)— $270,000
Chase Power Development — $260,000
CSX Corp&CSX Transportation (ships coal by rail)— $198,000
Edison Electric Institute— $60,000

Grand Total — $22,611,500

Other Clients

Key Deeds

February, 2016

Jeffrey Holmstead is representing clients suing the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over a rule aiming for utilities to shift away from coal-fired power plants and move towards renewable energy sources, The Wall Street Journal reports. [25]

July 7, 2015

Politico interviewed Jeffrey Holmstead about why the industry expects the Clean Power Plan to be overturned. Some excerpts below:

“I find it very hard to believe that the courts will ultimately uphold the rule, unless it changes a lot. We've only seen the proposal, but I think if you …had to choose one way to oppose the rule, you would say you'd do it in court, because it really is hard to see how the courts would uphold this.”

[…] I've spent the last 25 years working on Clean Air Act issues and I can say with some confidence that the act doesn't work very well, if the goal is to get a level of environmental protection at the lowest possible cost. We're paying a lot more than we need to for the reductions that we're getting because there's so much underbrush here.  People are starting to talk about another round of Clean Air Act reauthorization.” [16]

September 11, 2014

Jeffrey Holmstead was disqualified by a federal judge in a lawsuit brought by theU.S. Environmental Protection Agency against the coal burning utility company Ameren Missouri. The EPA had filed the case in 2011, claiming Ameren violated the Clean Air Act by failing to notify the agency of major modifications to multiple units at the plant. [26]

Polluterwatch reports that Judge Rodney Sippel granted U.S. Justice Department's request to remove Holmstead as a witness, confirming that the lobbyist's history at U.S.EPA posed “multiple conflicts of interest.” [27], [28]

Below is the judge's motion to dismiss Jeffrey Holmstead, with emphasis added: [29]

Mr. Holmstead’s legal opinions are irrelevant, speculative, and inadmissible.” […] “By his own description, Mr. Holmstead’s testimony relies on his recollection of EPA“internal meetings” that he says are relevant to the issues to be tried in this action. Such internal communications are privileged and confidential and Mr. Holmstead may not rely on his recollection of them to testify against EPA. Moreover, Mr. Holmstead received other privileged information concerning the issues about which he now seeks to testify on behalf of Ameren, and participated in power-plants enforcement cases related to this one while at EPA. Before he left EPA, he even personally provided a declaration for EPA that is at issue in this and other related power-plants enforcement cases asserting privilege claims on behalf of EPA over documents that are relevant to the opinions he now seeks to offer. Yet he now seeks to change sides and testify against EPA. Moreover, he was assisted in the preparation of his report by another former EPA attorney who was involved in the early stages of the investigation that ultimately led to the filing of this case. For the reasons discussed in the accompanying Memorandum, Mr. Holmstead should not be allowed to testify in this matter due to his multiple conflicts of interest. [29]

July 30, 2014

Jeffrey Holmstead testified before before the U.S. House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology on the EPA's carbon plan. Holmstead leads his testimony with two stated concerns: [30]

“(1) EPA’s proposal goes well beyond its legal authority under the Clean Air Act by trying to force states to regulate anything that produces or uses electricity; and (2) EPA has been so distracted by the notion that it can fundamentally change the electricity system in all 50 states that it has not done the technical work needed to develop legally sound regulations to reduce carbon emissions from existing fossil fuel power plants.” [30]

June 18, 2014

Jeffrey Holmstead was on a panel discussion on the EPA's Clean Power Plan hosted by the Bipartisan Policy Center. [31]

With regards to the Clean Power Rule, Holstead said that “As someone who believes in the rule of law, I think this clearly goes beyond what EPA is allowed to do under the Clean Air Act.” After the panel discussion, Holmstead was questioned by Greenpeace representatives. Some comments and the full video below: [32]

Greenpeace: “All the technical expertise you have, and the experience you have with the EPA and lawyer, If you recognize the threat and the cost of climate change, why not use these skills in a way to help agencies solve this problem? It seems like every time there is a solution proposed, perhaps for obvious reasons—if you're hired by Southern Company or Duke Energy you're opposing the rules—but there's never a solutions to any of that”

Holmstead: “That's not true. We propose a lot of solutions, they're just solutions that you don't like.” [32]

June 5, 2014

Jeffrey Holmstead talked at a Resources for the Future seminar titled “Making Sense of EPA’s Proposed Rule for Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Existing Power Plants” on a panel discussion titled “EPA's Proposed Rule: Challenges and Opportunities.” [33] Transcript is available for download here. [34]

September, 2013

OpenSecrets reports that Jeffrey Holmstead was lobbying against GHG restrictions proposed by the EPA, working with Bracewell & Giuliani to represent the interests of major coal producers including Arch Coal, which spent nearly $600,000 lobbying in 2013. Holmstead's firm also represented Ameren Corp and DTE Energy which spent $634,000 and $860,000 respectively lobbying in 2013, listing clean air regulations and climate controls among their concerns. [35]

November, 2012

Gabe Elsner of the The Checks and Balances Project confronted Jeffrey Holmstead on why he failed to disclose his ties to the coal industry at an “Energy and Presidency” event sponsored by Politico (Video below). [36]

The Checks and Balances project also analysed 50 mainstream news stories mentioning Holmstead and found that his ties to the coal industry were only mentioned 36% of the time.

May 13, 2010

Jeff Holmstead released the following statement opposing the EPA's greenhouse gas “tailoring” rule: [11]

“With this rule, the Administration is trying to use the Clean Air Act to do something it was never intended to do. They're basically trying to pound a large square peg into a small round hole, and their efforts will have serious legal and economic consequences. The decision to require permits for greenhouse gases means that thousands of construction projects around the country will be blocked or delayed by several years. If the tailoring rule is upheld in court, then the Administration's temporary construction ban will only stop about 1,600 hundred of the largest projects planned for next year. But if the rule is overturned – and many lawyers believe it will be – then EPA itself estimates that the new rules will block or delay construction on more than 80,000 projects that would otherwise be creating jobs all over the country.” [11]

September, 2009

Jeffrey Holmstead worked with  Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AL) to write a controversial amendment to limit the EPA's authority to regulate carbon dioxide as a pollutant. [37]

“Murkowski's proposed amendment to the Clean Air Act has been attacked by Obama administration officials and environmental advocates as an industry-led attempt to hamstring efforts to regulate carbon — the only option available in the absence of a viable Senate climate change bill,” reports Politico.  [37]

In an interview, Holmstead said of the Murkowski amendment, “I certainly worked with her staff” on the exact phrasing of the measure in September reports The Washington Post. [38]

“I was involved,” he said, adding that Robert J. Martella also helped advise Murkowski's aides on the matter. “The line out of the White House and the administration was that the amendment would block the car and truck rule” setting the first-ever greenhouse gas limits on emissions from vehicles. [38]

Desmogblog noted that Senator Murkowski had received $470,000 in campaign contributions from energy and mining industries since 2005, according to data from the Center for Responsive Politics. [39], [40]

April, 2003

Polluterwatch reports that, in his role at the EPA, Holmstead dismantled the EPA-sponsored Utility MACT (maximum achievable control technology) working group which consisted of 20 experts from the utility industry, state and local air quality offices and environmental group which were confident a Utility MACT rule under the Clean Air Act should be implemented to control mercury emissions from power plants. The Utility MACT Working Group was never reconvened under the Bush EPA. [5]

Shortly after the working group was disbanded, the New York Times reported that EPA employees in Holmstead’s department were told “either not to analyze or not to release information about mercury, carbon dioxide and other air pollutants,” in order to be consistent with the Bush Administration’s unscientific political positions. [41]

March, 2002

The Clean Air Trust named Jeffrey Holmstead the “Clean Air Villain if the Month” for promoting a “dirty-air bill” and “[undermining] enforcement.”  [2]

“We are extremely reluctant to make this choice, because Holmstead is the federal government's top politically appointed official charged with regulating air pollution,” said Clean Air Trust executive director Frank O'Donnell. “But we are hard pressed to find anyone else – either inside or outside of government – who appears to be working so hard against pollution cleanup.

“Indeed, when Holmstead recently announced publicly that the President would veto any Clean Air Act amendments unless they gutted the key enforcement program of the law – new source review – his designation as 'villain' became not only obvious, but essential,” O'Donnell added.

“Now that a federal appeals court has upheld EPA's national clean air standards for smog and soot, it's time for EPA officials like Holmstead to enforce the law rather than spend their time trying to weaken or repeal it.” [2]

2002

As an assistant administrator at EPA under George W. Bush, Holmstead dismantled technology-based mercury standards moving forward under the Clean Air Act and proposed the “Clear Skies Initiative,” which would have allowed “three times as much mercury as the Clean Air Act.” [42]

Affiliations

  • Bracewell & Giuliani (2006-Current) — Attorney [9]
  • Environmental Protection Agency (2001-2005) — Assistant Admin for Air & Radiation [9]
  • Latham & Watkins (1993-2001)—Partner  [9]
  • Executive Office of the President (1989-1993)—Associate Counsel [9]
  • Citizens for the Environment (project of now-defunct Citizens for a Sound Economy— Previous Adjunct Scholar [3], [43]

Resources

  1. Jeffrey R. Holmstead: Partner,” Bracewell LLP. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6hkUYqtr6

  2. Clean Air Villain of the Month,” Clean Air Trust, March, 2002. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hkdfbNnR

  3. The Polluters’ Lawyers,” DC Bureau, November 3, 2011. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hkgoXRdl

  4. Jeff Holmstead Testimony on EPA's Carbon Plan,” Electric Reliability Coordinating Council, July 29, 2014. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hkcDW6qu

  5. Connor Gibson. “Jeffrey Holmstead: the Coal Industry's Mercury Lobbyist (Report),” Polluterwatch, December 21, 2011. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hkYF9C5U

  6. Connor Gibson. “Coal Lobbyist Jeff Holmstead Disqualified by Federal Judge in Ameren Pollution Lawsuit,” PolluterWatch. Republished by DeSmogBlog, September 12, 2014.

  7. Josh Harkinson. “Revolving Door: Climate Edition,” Mother Jones, December 14, 2009.

  8. “Revolving Door,” OpenSecrets.org. Accessed May 24, 2016.

  9. Holmstead, Jeffrey,” Profile at OpenSecrets.org. Accessed May 24, 2016.

  10. Sara Randazzo. “Bracewell & Giuliani is Losing … Giuliani,” The Wall Street Journal, January 19, 2016. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6hkZY6g7m

  11. Statement from ERCC Counsel Jeff Holmstead on the EPA's GHG Tailoring Rule,” Electric Reliability Coordinating Counsel, May 13, 2010. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6hklGztFQ

  12. What is ERCC?” Electric Reliability Coordinating Council. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hkje4lRz

  13. Statement from ERCC Director Scott H. Segal at a Public Hearing on National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants From Coal- and Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units,” Electric Reliability Coordinating Council, May 24, 2011. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hkbtNv7i

  14. Scott H. Segal: Partner,” Bracewell LLP. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hkbZ703j

  15. Eric Pianin. “Proposed Mercury Rules Bear Industry Mark,” The Washington Post, January 31, 2004. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  16. Darren Samuelsohn. “Inside the fight against Obama's climate plan,” Politico, July 7, 2015. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6hkteJ48L

  17. John Walke. “Desperate Denial: Utility Pollution Apologists Deny Harms From Air Pollution or Health Benefits From Cleaning It Up,” Natural Resources Defense Council, June 14, 2011. Archived May 25, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hkq83yEx

  18. Jeff Tollefson. “US Supreme Court puts Obama climate regulations on hold,” Nature, February 10, 2016. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hks9Fikj

  19. Chris Mooney. “These states are setting wind energy records – and suing over Obama’s climate plans,” The Washington Post, February 25, 2016. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hksdnjHR

  20. Coal Lobbyist Jeff Holmstead Challenged for Protecting Polluters,” YouTube Video uploaded by user PolluterWatch, November 5, 2012.

  21. Resolved: EPA Utility MACT is the right tool at the right time,”Environmental Law Institute, June 7, 2011. (Time 25:58). Retrieved from Vimeo.

  22. Ex-Bush air man, now with Giuliani law firm, claims credit for Bush global warming stance,” Clean Air Watch, December 2, 2006. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hkpea0Rf

  23. Jeffrey Holmstead,” Polluterwatch. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hkWFVbsy

  24. “Full D.C. Circuit to Hear Clean Power Plan Argument,” Bloomberg BNA, May 16, 2016. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hkrxgPHy

  25. Brent Kendall and Amy Harder. “Supreme Court Puts EPA Carbon Rule on Hold During Litigation,” The Wall Street Journal, February 9, 2016.

  26. Jeremy P. Jacobs. “AIRPOLLUTION:Judge bars former EPA official from testifying in enforcement suit,” E&E Publishing, September 10, 2014. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hkdtTC6g

  27. Connor Gibson. “Coal Lobbyist Jeff Holmstead Disqualified by Federal Judge in Ameren Pollution Lawsuit,” Polluterwatch, September 11, 2014. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hkeD0pNY

  28. Patrick Ambrosio. “Former EPA Official Should Be Disqualified As Expert Witness, Justice Dept. Tells Court,” Bloomberg BNA, July 22, 2014. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite Url: http://www.webcitation.org/6hkeMXlAZ

  29. UNITEDSTATESOFAMERICA, Plaintiff, v.  AMERENMISSOURI, Defendant,” UNITEDSTATESDISTRICTCOURTEASTERNDISTRICTOFMISSOURIEASTERNDIVISION. Civil Action No. 4:11-cv-00077-RWS. Filed 07/18.14. Retrieved from Bloomberg Law. Archived .pdf on file at DesmogBlog.

  30. Jeff Holmstead Testimony on EPA's Carbon Plan,” Electric Reliability Coordinating Council, July 29, 2014. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hkrSlqiV

  31. Discussing EPA’s Newly-Released Clean Power Plan,” Bipartisan Policy Center, June 18, 2014. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6hknuD2Ow

  32. Connor Gibson. “K Street Confrontation: Greenpeace Questions Coal Lobbyist Jeff Holmstead (VIDEO),” Greenpeace USA. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hkp0kKTz

  33. Making Sense of EPA’s Proposed Rule for Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Existing Power Plants,” Resources for the Future, June 5, 2014. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hknVKwQ6

  34. Making Sense of EPA’s Proposed Rule for Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Existing Power Plants” (PDF), Resources for the Future. Archived .pdf on file at DesmogBlog.

  35. Brandon Conradis. “Former EPA Official Lobbies Against Plan to Curb Greenhouse Gases,” OpenSecrets, September 16, 2013. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hkn5jNBS

  36. Confessions of a Coal Lobbyist,” November 16, 2012. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6hkgGJfdh

  37. Glenn Thrush. “Lobbyists led meeting on Murkowski EPA amendment,” Politico, January 13, 2010. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hkkT17U1

  38. Juliet Eilperin. “Murkowski and her lobbyist allies,” The Washington Post, January 11, 2010. Archived May 24, 2016.

  39. Brendan DeMelle. “Murkowski Amendment To Protect Polluters Was Written By Dirty Polluter Lobbyists,” DeSmogBlog, January 11, 2010.

  40. Sen. Lisa Murkowski: Top Industries, 2005-2010,” Profile at OpenSecrets. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hkqz9j6q

  41. Jennifer Lee. “Critics Say E.P.A. Won't Analyze Clean Air Proposals Conflicting With President's Policies,” The New York Times, July 14, 2003. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  42. Bruce Barcott. “Changing All the Rules,” The New York Times Magazine, April 4, 2004. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  43. Brad Johnson. “Romney Getting Energy Advice From Bush Pollution Lobbyist Jeffrey R. Holmstead,” ThinkProgress, May 11, 2011. Archived May 23, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hkmP2n2N

Other Resources

Kevin Cramer

$
0
0

Kevin Cramer

Credentials

According to his biographical profile at the U.S. House of Representatives, Kevin Cramer has a Bachelor of Arts degree from Concordia College in Moorhead, Minnesota, a Master’s degree in Management from the University of Mary in Bismarck, North Dakota, and was conferred the degree of Doctor of Leadership, honoris causa, by the University of Mary on May 4, 2013. [1]

Background

Rep. Kevin Cramer (R-NDwas elected to the U.S. House of Representatives on November 6, 2012, and serves on the House Committee on Energy and Commerce as well as three subcommittees: Communications and Technology, Environment and the Economy, and Oversight and Investigations. [1]

In 1991, Cramer was elected Chairman of the North Dakota Republication National Committee. From 1993 to 2000, he served in Governor Ed Schafer’s cabinet, first as State Tourism Director from 1993 to 1997, then as State Economic Development & Finance Director from 1997 to 2000. [1]

According to his profile at the House of Representatives, Cramer is a “strong advocate for the free market system” as well as “limited, common sense regulations and limited government.” He is also described as an “energy policy expert,” who “understands America’s energy security is integral to national and economic security.” [1]

Kevin Cramer has been described as “one of the country’s strongest supporters of fossil fuels and oil and gas drilling and a signed- up climate change sceptic.” He has also received over half-a-million dollars in lifetime campaign contributions from oil, gas, and energy companies. [2]

In May, 2016, Kevin Cramer was chosen as energy adviser for Donald Trump's presidential campaign. Trump's team requested Cramer draft a briefing paper on energy policy. Cramer has said the paper includes suggestions on the elimination of the Obama adinistration's Clean Power Plan among other regulations. [3]

Between 2013 and 2016, Rep. Kevin Cramer has voted to pass 97 bills and amendments that the League of Conservation Voters considers to be “anti-environment” policies. [4]

Motherboard reports that Rep. Cramer “isn’t simply a [climate change] skeptic—he’s a head-in-the-sand obstructionist and mouthpiece for fossil fuel powers fighting to repeal some of the nation’s strongest environmental protections. The congressman once pledged to oppose all climate change legislation, as part of the 'No Climate Tax' initiative started by the Koch-founded Americans for Prosperity conservative advocacy group.” [5]

Kevin Cramer, Donald Trump & Climate Change

Environmental groups and the Clinton campaign have criticized Trump for choosing Kevin Cramer, described as a “prominent climate change skeptic,” as advisor: [6]

Trump and Cramer are two peas in the climate denial pod, who would make reckless attacks on the progress we have made in the fight against climate change” — Seth Stein, spokesman for the League of Conservation Voters.[3]

“Kevin Cramer has consistently backed reckless and dangerous schemes to put the profits of fossil fuel executives before the health of the public, so he and Trump are a match made in polluter heaven” — Melinda Pierce, Sierra Club Legislative Director.  [6]

Donald Trump’s choice of outspoken climate (change) denier Kevin Cramer to advise him on energy policy is just the latest piece of evidence that letting him get near the White House would put our children’s health and futures at risk.”
 
Trump has been light on the details of his energy policy, though he recently told supporters in West Virginia that the coal industry would thrive if he were president. He has also claimed global warming is a concept “created by and for the Chinese” to hurt U.S. business.

Clinton, meanwhile, has advocated shifting the country to 50 percent clean energy by 2030, promised heavy regulation of fracking, and said her prospective administration would put coal companies “out of business.” — Clinton campaign spokesman Jesse Ferguson. [6]

The New York Times reports that while Donald J. Trump has said little about climate change himself, the four-page briefing paper prepared by Kevin Cramer may provide some clues. The paper outlines a number of regulations Mr. Trump may remove if he becomes president, including the Obama administration's Clean Power Plan. [3]

There is no downside in reducing emissions from fuel,” said Kevin Cramer. While Cramer admitted that “the climate is clearly changing,” he was also skeptical about how much humans were contributing and about the Democrat's proposed regulatory solutions. [3]

Explaining his energy policy papers for Trump, which he has not yet publicly released, Cramer said “I just want [Mr. Trump] to have a good general, high-level view and understanding of why an America-first energy policy should put states first. I want him to understand that we can have clean energy without having to get rid of fossil fuel (industry).” [7]

“What I put down for him was what I call an all-of-the-above energy paper highlighting North Dakota's assets of oil, wind, ethanol, coal, of course, and how addressing greenhouse gas emissions does not require throwing fossil fuels under the bus. We can have policies that say all American-made energy can be a winner,” Cramer said.  [7]

Cramer endorsed Trump earlier in 2016 at the North Dakota GOP convention, calling him “the best chance at unity for the party.” [7]

Stance on Climate Change

2016

“I've been skeptical, but I don't resist the reality that we’re heading toward or our goal is a more carbon-constrained world. […]”

My idea of a carbon tax would be to help fund clean fossil fuel research and development, not to fund the government, not to punish fossil fuel generation, not to manipulate fuel choice. Even a neutral, a revenue-neutral, carbon tax is inappropriate, in my view. But if we can have a very, very modest carbon tax to fund, again, the solution by utilizing fossil fuels like coal, I think even the industry would support that.” [8]

2015

“There is that sense of the Senate that climate change is real and not a hoax. Now, we can throw that out as sort of meaningless.” [5]

“I don't even participate in that 'climate change is real, climate change isn't real' debate. It doesn't matter to me whether it's real or it isn't real. We're dealing with it in reality, and my concern is more on the solution to it than it is on the climate change issue itself. What I do reject is the notion that somehow the power sector in the United States of America is going to bear the burden and the responsibility for fixing the entire world.” [9]

February, 2012

“These mandates and these wind farms are all based on this fraudulent science from the EPA, meaning their claim that CO2 is a pollutant and is causing global warming. […] So the idea that CO2 is somehow causing global warming is on its face fraudulent.” [10]

January 21, 2010

Kevin Cramer signed (PDF) the Americans for Prosperity's“No Climate Tax” project: [11]

Key Quotes

February, 2016

“The EPA’s actions are clearly illegal and violate the expressed intent of Congress,” Cramer said of the EPA's Clean Power Plan.  “In order to defend the law and authority of Congress I joined my colleagues to stand up to this Administration and oppose it’s actions in federal court. North Dakota’s electrical producers provide some of the most affordable electricity and maintain some of the cleanest air, but this Administration’s focus on implementing a radical environmental agenda threatens our economic future.” [12]

2014

Asked if it was scientifically possible to make Bakken crude oil safer by stripping out the explosive natural gas liquids with a process like oil stabilization, Cramer responded

So scientifically can you do it? Sure, but you have to look at it holistically and consider all of the other elements including economics, and is the benefit of doing something like that does that trump other things like speed of trains, and what kind of cars.” [13]

Campaign Contributions

According to Maplight, a nonpartisan nonprofit, Kevin Cramer received $222,400 from the oil and gas industry between 2013 and 2015. [14] Energy analysts at Fractracker Alliance estimate that Cramer has accepted $343,000 in campaign financing from fossil fuel lobbyists. [15]

According to Kevin Cramer's profile at the Center for Responsive Politics, he has received at least $573,600 from Oil & Gas since 1989, with his largest donor being Tesoro which has a refinery in North Dakota. The following is compiled from data collected by the Center for Responsive Politics/OpenSecrets: [16]

Top Industries (Career Total) [16]

IndustryTotal
Oil & Gas$573,600
Crop Production & Basic Processing$282,640
Retired$211,545
Leadership PACs$185,263
Health Professionals$119,000
Agricultural Services/Products$108,250
Commercial Banks$106,900
Real Estate$91,105
General Contractors$73,700
Insurance$72,850
Electric Utilities$71,650
Mining$57,950
Lawyers/Law Firms$57,602
Education$54,400
Misc Energy$54,100
Telephone Utilities$53,250
Building Materials & Equipment$49,250
Telecom Services$48,500
Republican/Conservative$44,579
Securities & Investment$43,750

Top Donors (2016 Election Cycle) [16]

Kevin Cramer's top 100 Campaign Contributors are listed below, with some notable groups and industries highlighted in bold:

NameIndustryTotal
Tesoro CorpOil & Gas$11,000
Coughlin Construction $10,800
Titanium Builders $10,800
American Interventional Pain Physicians $10,000
Berkshire Hathaway $10,000
Deere & Co $10,000
General AtomicsNuclear & Defense$10,000
National Assn of Broadcasters $10,000
National Telecommunications Cooperative Assn $10,000
Poet LLC $10,000
Oasis PetroleumOil & Gas$9,900
WPX EnergyOil & Gas$9,300
National Cable & Telecommunications Assn $9,000
AT&T Inc $8,500
Verizon Communications $8,000
Microsoft Corp $7,500
Northrop GrummanArms Manufacturer$7,500
American Optometric Assn $6,500
American Bankers Assn $6,000
Exxon MobilOil & Gas$6,000
Honeywell International $6,000
National Cattlemen's Beef AssnIndustry Lobby$6,000
New York Life Insurance $6,000
Cody Oil & GasOil & Gas$5,900
University of North Dakota $5,900
Charter Communications $5,500
Time Warner Cable $5,500
Brandt Holdings $5,400
International Western Co $5,400
Select Energy ServicesOil & Gas Services$5,400
Und Smhs $5,400
RD Offut Co $5,200
American Crystal Sugar $5,000
Armstrong Corp $5,000
Boeing CoAerospace & Defense$5,000
ConocoPhillipsEnergy Company$5,000
Continental ResourcesOil & Gas$5,000
Farm Credit Council $5,000
Halliburton CoOil, Gas, & Military$5,000
Home Depot $5,000
Lignite Energy CouncilCoal Lobbying Group$5,000
Mednax Inc $5,000
National Electrical Contractors AssnElectrical Construction$5,000
National Rural Electric Cooperative AssnCooperative$5,000
United Transportation Union $5,000
Chesapeake EnergyOil & Gas$4,500
Koch IndustriesOil & Gas$4,500
Alkermes PlcPharmaceuticals$4,000
American Maritime Officers $4,000
Blue Cross/Blue ShieldLobby Group$4,000
CenturyLink $4,000
Edison Electric InstituteEnergy Industry Lobby$4,000
Independent Community Bankers of America $4,000
ITC HoldingsElectrical Transmission$4,000
National Assn of Convenience Stores $4,000
Xcel EnergyEnergy Company$4,000
Dakota Community Bank $3,700
Gremada Industries $3,700
American Cable Assn $3,500
Comcast Corp $3,500
National Assn of Home Builders $3,500
Petroleum Marketers AssnTrade Association$3,500
Miller Insulation $3,300
American Assn of Crop Insurers $3,000
American College of Emergency Physicians $3,000
Archer Daniels Midland $3,000
Biotechnology Industry Organization $3,000
Cellular Telecom & Internet Assn $3,000
Ford Motor CoAuto Industry$3,000
General Electric $3,000
Minn-Dak Farmers Co-Op $3,000
National Amusements Inc $3,000
National Assn of Insurance & Financial Advisors $3,000
National Mining AssnTrade/Lobby Group$3,000
Occidental PetroleumOil & Gas$3,000
ONEOK IncOil & Gas$3,000
Union Pacific Corp $3,000
Amity Technology $2,700
Arthur Co $2,700
Arthur Companies $2,700
Beverage Wholesalers Inc $2,700
Carbon Tec EnergyEnergy Industry R&D$2,700
First International Bank $2,700
Kadrmas, Lee & Jackson $2,700
M InternationalDefense$2,700
Puyallup Tribe of Indians $2,700
Tmi Hospitality $2,700
American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons $2,500
American Fuel & Petrochem ManufacturersFuel Industry Trade Assn.$2,500
Arch CoalCoal Company$2,500
Associated Builders & Contractors $2,500
Dakota PAC $2,500
Deutsche Telekom $2,500
Fredrikson & Byron $2,500
Indep Tel & Telecom Alliance $2,500
Marathon OilOil & Gas$2,500
Marathon PetroleumOil & Gas$2,500
MDU Resources GroupEnergy Company$2,500
Monsanto CoBiotechnology$2,500
National Beer Wholesalers Assn $2,500
National Football League $2,500
Odney Advertising $2,500
Phillips 66Energy Company$2,500
Praxair Inc $2,500
Professional Compounding Centers of America $2,500
QEP ResourcesOil & Gas$2,500
Society of Interventional Radiology $2,500
Southern CoEnergy Company$2,500
Textile Rental Services Assn of America $2,500
UnitedHealth Group $2,500

Key Deeds

May 12, 2016

Kevin Cramer, in his new position as energy adviser to Donald Trump's campaign, said that he was preparing at least two white papers on energy policy for Trump's upcoming address at an oil and gas conference in North Dakota later in May. [8]

Cramer has expressed support for a small carbon tax to replace the Clean Power Plan. He also said he may offer Trump advice on climate change that challenge Trumps assertions that it is a hoax promoted by the Democrats: 

He can do all that if he wants,” Cramer said of Trump’s climate position. “But my advice would be, while I’m a skeptic, as well, he is a product of political populism, and political populism believes that there needs [to be] some addressing of climate change.” [8]

With regards to the Clean Power Plan, Cramer said “I would still tell him, ‘Yeah, we need to stop and repeal the Clean Power Plan,’” Cramer said. “If in fact he wants a more carbon-restrained energy policy, he ought to work with real scientists and work with Congress to come up with a better one.”

My idea of a carbon tax would be to help fund clean fossil fuel research and development, not to fund the government, not to punish fossil fuel generation, not to manipulate fuel choice,” Cramer said. “Even a neutral, a revenue-neutral, carbon tax is inappropriate, in my view. But if we can have a very, very modest carbon tax to fund, again, the solution by utilizing fossil fuels like coal, I think even the industry would support that.”  [8]

According to Cramer, “I just want [Mr. Trump] to have a good general, high-level view and understanding of why an America-first energy policy should put states first. I want him to understand that we can have clean energy without having to get rid of fossil fuel (industry).” [7]

April 12, 2016

Kevin Cramer co-sponsored H.R. 4775 (“Ozone Standards Implementation Act of 2016”), [17] a bill Bloomberg writes is designed to “halt the EPA's new smog standards.” [18]

February 23, 2016

Kevin Cramer announced he was joining 34 members of the U.S. Senate and 170 House colleagues in filing an amicus brief (PDF) supporting a petition to overturn the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Clean Power Pan Rule. [12]

September 9, 2014

Kevin Cramer arranged a congressional hearing to discuss the properties of Bakken crude. When Cramer first announced the hearing, he promised to bring together top scientists to discuss the issue, as he told 6:30 Point of View (video below): [19]

I want three good solid scientists… consultants apart from all of the politicians and the presidential appointees. And I’ve promised them a very fair thorough review of the data and the evidence and the information. So that we can, you know, answer definitively and scientifically what is the volatility, if you will, of Bakken crude. How does it compare to other crudes?” [20]

DeSmogBlog reported that none of the witnesses brought by Cramer were actually crude oil scientists: 

“So for a hearing with the goal of determining the characteristics of Bakken crude oil, the experts include two firefighters, one oil industry lobbyist, a banker with oil industry experience and one engineer who just happens to work for the firm that issued the report saying Bakken is no different from other crude oils and does not require stabilization to make it safe for rail transport.” [20]

Witnesses included:  [20]

  • Timothy P. Butters—deputy administrator of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.
  • Christopher Smith—political appointee and principal deputy assistant secretary for fossil energy at the Department of Energy. According to his official bio, prior to this position he worked for “two major international oil companies focused primarily on upstream business development and LNG trading, including three years negotiating production and transportation agreements.” Before that he was an investment banker with Citibank and JPMorgan.
  • Kari Cutting is vice president of the North Dakota Petroleum Council, i.e. an oil industry lobbyist.
  • John Auers, executive vice president of Turner, Mason, & Company, is the only engineer at the hearing. However, his experience is not in the science of crude oil. According to his bio he is “experienced in facilities planning, computer operations, process control, refinery evaluations, refinery sales, and application of refinery linear programs.” His prior employer was Exxon.
  • Mark Zoanetti, deputy chief of special operations for the Syracuse Fire Department.
December, 2013
 
Kevin Cramer sponsored a bill that expedited hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) on public lands in the Bakken Shale basin, reported DeSmogBlog. On December 25, 2014, President Obama signed the bill into law. [21]
 
Co-Sponsors of the bill included:  [21]

The bill was dubbed the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Streamlining Act, and is an amendment to Section 365 of the Bush-era 2005 Energy Policy Act. It creates offices in North Dakota and Montana to rubber stamp fracking permits on public lands in those states.  Desmogblog reports that The BLM Streamlining Act “[r]eplaces the Miles City, Montana field office with the Montana/Dakotas State Office,” creating an open season for fracking North Dakota's public lands. [27]

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 was known for the “Halliburton Loophole,” which exempted the fracking industry from the legal dictates of the Safe Drinking Water Act and made the chemicals in “fracking fluid” a trade secret. [21]

Kevin Cramer discussed the House version of the bill on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives in May 2013, referring to the BLM Streamlining Act as “rather benign bill with rather major ramifications.” Cramer also referred to North Dakota as the “perfect laboratory” for streamlining of permits on public lands, saying “the North Dakota experiment will be one people look back on and say 'That's the way to do it, that's the right way to do it.'” Video below. [28]

February, 2012

Kevin Cramer was interviewed by KNOX's Jarrod Thomas, where he discussed Cramer's own version of the “Climategate” conspiracy theory: [10]

These mandates and these wind farms are all based on this fraudulent science from the EPA, meaning their claim that CO2 is a pollutant and is causing global warming. I’m sure you’re familiar with one of the leading climate research centers in the world there at East Anglia University in England, the Hadley Research Centre. The director, Phil Jones, his emails, he admitted that he was falsifying temperature data. The reason he had to do is because was the data was showing the global climate is actually declining in temperature, temperatures were going down. He was overlaying higher temperatures on the real data to show that it was actually rising. We know the globe is cooling. Number one, we know that. So the idea that CO2 is somehow causing global warming is on its face fraudulent.” [10]

Listen to the full audio below:

January 1, 2010

Kevin Cramer signed the “No Climate Tax” pledge sponsored by Americans for Prosperity (AFP), the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), the Institute for Liberty (IFL) , and the National Taxpayers Union (NTU). His pledge read as follows (image of signed copy below): [11]

“I, Kevin  Cramer, pledge to the taxpayers of the State of North Dakota and to the American People that I will oppose any legislation relating to climate change that includes a net increase in government revenue.” [11]

Kevin Cramer No Climate Tax Pledge

Affiliations

Resources

  1. About,” Congressman Kevin Cramer (cramer.house.gov). Archived May 25, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hm86TMNU

  2. Jon Austin. “Trump the climate change denier? Republican hires top sceptic as energy advisor,” Daily Express, May 23, 2016. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  3. Erica Goode. “What Are Donald Trump’s Views on Climate Change? Some Clues Emerge,” The New York Times, May 20, 2016. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  4. National Environmental Scorecard: Representative Kevin Cramer,” League of Conservation Voters. Accessed May 25, 2016. Archived .xlsx on file at DeSmogBlog.

  5. Sarah Emerson. “Trump's Energy Adviser Is Dangerously Anti-Environment,” Motherboard, May 18, 2016. Archived May 25, 2016. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  6. Valerie Volcovici and Emily Flitter. “Trump taps climate change skeptic as energy adviser, pushes back on taxes,” Reuters, May 13, 2016. Archived May 24, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hm97qQ1v

  7. Kevin Cramer explains his energy policy paper for Trump,” Bismarck Tribune, May 21, 2016. Archived May 25, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hlzZXwsm

  8. Evan Lehmann. “CAMPAIGN 2016: Meet Donald Trump's new energy adviser,” E&E Publishing, May 13, 2016. Archived May 25, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6hmBMwh7c

  9. POLITICS: Former state energy regulator vows to fight Clean Power Plan from inside Congress,”E&E Publishing, May 26, 2015. Archived May 25, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hmGcVLkg

  10. AUDIO: Rep. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) Believes Global Warming Is 'Fraudulent Science' To Promote Wind Farms,” Hill Heat, August 8, 2013. Archived May 25, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6hmEh1l8H

  11. “NoClimateTax.com Pledge” (PDF) NoClimateTax. Archived January 8, 2012. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  12. CRAMERJOINSAMICUSBRIEFTOOVERTURNEPA'S CLEANPOWERPLAN,” Cramer.house.gov, February 23, 2016. Archived May 25, 2016. Full Amicus Brief (.pdf) on file at DeSmogBlog. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6hmBnIOX1

  13. Justin Mikulka. “Safety of Citizens in Bomb Train Blast Zones in Hands of North Dakota Politicians,” DeSmogBlog, September 5, 2014.

  14. Kevin Cramer Republican (Elected 2013), ND House district 0,” Profile at MapLight. Accessed May 25, 2016. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  15. Ted Auch. “O&G Politics & Campaign Financing,” Fractracker Alliance, October 8, 2014. Archived May 25, 2016.

  16. Rep. Kevin Cramer: Top Industries,” OpenSecrets.org. Accessed May 25, 2016.

  17. Cosponsors: H.R.4775 - Ozone Standards Implementation Act of 2016,” Congress.gov. Accessed May 25, 2016. Archived. pdf on file at DeSmogBlog. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hmAXHrFD

  18. Mark Drajem. “Get your energy policy ideas to Kevin Cramer ASAP,” Bloomberg Government, May 16, 2016. Archived May 25, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6hmAeayxv

  19. Subcommittee on Energy and Subcommittee on Oversight Joint Hearing - Bakken Petroleum: The Substance of Energy Independence,” Committee on  Science, Space, and Technology, September 9, 2014. Archived December 7, 2014.

  20. Justin Mikulka. “How Many Crude Oil Scientists Will Testify At Congressional Science Committee Hearing on Bakken Crude? Zero,” DeSmogBlog, September 8, 2014. 

  21. Steve Horn. “Days Before Casselton Oil Train Explosion, Obama Signed Bill Hastening Fracking Permits on ND Public Lands,” DeSmogBlog, January 7, 2014.

  22. Rep. Cynthia Marie Lummis: Top Industries, 2011-2012,” OpenSecrets.org. Accessed May 25, 2016.

  23. Rep. Cynthia Marie Lummis: Top Industries, 2013-2014,” OpenSecrets.org. Accessed May 25, 2016.

  24. Rep. Kristi Noem: Top Industries, 2011-2012,” OpenSecrets.org. Accessed May 25, 2016.

  25. Rep. Kristi Noem: Top Industries, 2013-2014,” OpenSecrets.org. Accessed May 25, 2016.

  26. Sen. Steven Daines: Top Industries, 2013-2014,” OpenSecrets.org. Accessed May 25, 2016.

  27. Bill Summary & Status  113th Congress (2013 - 2014)  S.244 CRS Summary,” The Library of Congress.  WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6hm0FwPQi

  28. Congressman Cramer Speaks on Passage of H.R. 767,” YouTube Video uploaded by user Kevin Cramer, May 15, 2013.

Other Resources

File attachments: 

Lawson Bader

$
0
0

Lawson R. Bader

Credentials

  • M.A. (1997 - 2000), Public Policy Analysis, The Johns Hopkins University. [1]
  • B.A. (1984 – 1988), Political Science and Government, Wheaton College. [1]

Background

Lawson Bader is the President and CEO of both DonorsTrust and Donors Capital Fund, and the former president of the Competitive Enterprise Institute where he still serves as a member of the Board of Directors[2], [3], [4], [5]

Donors Trust (DT) and its sister organization Donors Capital Fund (DCF) have been described as the “dark money ATM” of the conservative movement. DT and DCF have distributed millions of dollars to conservative causes through “donor advised funds” that conceal the identity of their original donors. [6]

Following the passing of DonorsTrust President Whitney Ball in August of 2015, [7] DonorsTrust announced that Lawson Bader would take Ball's place as CEO in November of 2015. Bader had worked for three years as president and CEO at the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), and prior to that served as Vice President of the Mercatus Center at George Mason University for 16 years. According to Greenpeace, during Bader's time at Mercatus, the Center accepted more than $10 million in funding from Koch-related foundations. [8]

DeSmog reported that Bader’s move to DonorsTrust would see him remain within the funding circle of Republican activists the Koch Brothers. [9] DeSmog analysis found that one foundation controlled by Charles Koch – the Knowledge and Progress Fund– gave $7.65 million to DT between 2010 and 2013. KPF did not give grants to any other organisation over that period. [10]

According to his profile at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, Bader has also served as the manager of government relations at SRI International, a legislative analyst with the D.C. law firm Pierson, Semmes and Finley, and a special assistant at the U.S. Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs. He also expanded CEI's programs by launching their radio show, RealClear Radio Hour with Bill Frezza, and “streamlined the organization's policy efforts by emphasizing legal strategies to attack economic regulation and executive branch overreach.”  [4]

Stance on Climate Change

Lawson Bader is a signatory to a declaration organized by the Cornwall Alliance that calls on politicians to “abandon fruitless and harmful policies to control global temperature.” [11]

Some excerpts from the declaration, titled “Protect the Poor: Ten Reasons to Oppose Harmful Climate Change Policies,” are below: [12]

“Earth’s temperature naturally warms and cools cyclically throughout time, and warmer periods are typically more conducive to human thriving than colder periods.”

“While human addition of greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide (CO2), to the atmosphere may slightly raise atmospheric temperatures, observational studies indicate that the climate system responds more in ways that suppress than in ways that amplify CO2’s effect on temperature, implying a relatively small and benign rather than large and dangerous warming effect.”

“Rising atmospheric CO2 benefits all life on Earth by improving plant growth and crop yields, making food more abundant and affordable, helping the poor most of all.”

“Abundant, affordable, reliable energy, most of it now and in the foreseeable future provided by burning fossil fuels, which are the primary source of CO2 emissions, is indispensable to lifting and keeping people out of poverty.”

“Mandatory reductions in CO2 emissions, pursued to prevent dangerous global warming, would have little or no discernible impact on global temperatures, but would greatly increase the price of energy and therefore of everything else. Such policies would put more people at greater risk than the warming they are intended to prevent, because they would slow, stop, or even reverse the economic growth that enables people to adapt to all climates. They would also harm the poor more than the wealthy, and would harm them more than the small amount of warming they might prevent.”

Key Quotes

November, 2014

Lawson Bader lists the following as the first among “five opportunities to have a positive effect on the economy and do well by your constituents and fellow citizens”: [13]

“Protect Americans’ Access to Affordable Energy. Congress will likely consider reauthorizing a tax extenders package that includes production tax credits (PTC) for wind and solar energy. These credits deserve to go the way of the Model T. They amount to subsidies for politically connected energy firms that cannot compete in the energy marketplace on either price or reliability. Energy from wind, solar, and other renewable sources is more expensive than energy from fossil fuels. So-called renewables are costly, and those costs are ultimately passed on to consumers, for no discernable environmental benefit. Nine of the 11 largest wind power-producing states are experiencing skyrocketing electricity prices, rising more than four times the national average.”

May, 2014

“From carbon capture to fracking to climate change to coal production, the EPA is interested more in pursuing the Obama administration’s desire to regulate out of business industries it doesn’t like, rather than ensure proper environmental stewardship.” [14]

April, 2014

“How does Big Labor maintain its privileged position? Quite simply, politics. While liberals scream 'foul' over the political contributions of the Koch brothers, 'corporations', or 'special interests' like the tobacco and pharmaceutical companies, the truth is that organized labor accounts for 10 of the top 15 political campaign contributions between 1989 and 2014, with nearly all of their giving going to Democratic candidates.” [15]

Key Deeds

March 4, 2016

Lawson Bader, representing Donors Trust, was a speaker at a 2016 Conservative Leadership Conference event titled “Dark Money vs. Private Philanthropy - How to Keep Your Donations Private and the Left out of Your Business.” [16]

Other speakers included Starlee Coleman, Senior Policy Advisor of the State Policy Network and  C. Theodore Hicks II, Certified Financial Planner at Hicks & Associates.

July, 2015

Lawson Bader, representing the Competitive Enterprise Institute, was a speaker at FreedomFest 2015 where he offered a July 10 presentation titled ”Gavel Out! Legal Opportunities to Push Back Regulatory Overreach.” [17]

Bader also appeared on a July 11 panel discussion titled “Think Tanks Make a Difference.” Speakers included representatives from a number of prominent Conservative think tanks: [18]

February, 2015

Mother Jones magazine reports that the Competitive Enterprise Institute, of which Lawson Bader was president at the time, was the driving force behind two lawsuits opposing Obamacare including King v. Burwell. [19]

According to Mother Jones, “If the CEI-backed case prevails, more than 8 million people could lose their health coverage, premiums could skyrocket 35 percent or more, and the fledgling health care reform effort could collapse. CEI also helped launch Halbig v. Burwell, a similar case that is on hold pending the Supreme Court's decision in King.” [19]

The magazine notes that while “after CEI filed its anti-Obamacare lawsuits, Big Pharma continued to fund the think tank” even while the health care law was projected to boost the industry's profits by up by $25 billion over the following decade. While PHRMA declined whether to say if they would continue to fund CEI, a GlaxoSmithKline spokeswoman said that ”GSK supports efforts to increase access, improve quality and reduce cost growth in the US health system and we remain committed to working with the administration and other stakeholders as the ACA is fully implemented.” [19]

“If that's the case, though, it begs the question of why Glaxo and other pharmaceutical industry outfits that pledged their support to Obamacare have simultaneously backed a group that for years has been plotting the law's destruction,” writes Mother Jones[19]

October 29, 2014

Lawson Bader's Competitive Enterprise Institute filed a lawsuit suing the White House “over a video that claimed global warming might be tied to last year's extreme cold spell, commonly referred to as the 'polar vortex,'” according to a report from ThinkProgress. The White House stated that the video did not “represent the official agency position,” and instead represented the “personal opinions” of the White House's Office of Science and Technology director, John Holdren, and OSTP Senior Communications Advisor, Becky Fried. [25]

CEI then filed a Freedom of Information Act request “for all White House documents and e-mails discussing whether the validity of the science really does constitute Holdren and Fried’s personal opinions, and all documents related to the cost of producing Holdren’s video.” The White House came forth with some material following the FOIA request, but withheld 47 additional pieces of information that it claimed contained “privileged material.” [25]

September, 2014

Lawson Bader is a signatory to the Cornwall Alliance's declaration titled “Protect the Poor: Ten Reasons to Oppose Harmful Climate Change Policies.” [11][12]

The Cornwall Alliance has been described as “the most influential evangelical anti-environmentalist in the United States,” and posits that “Earth and its ecosystems – created by God's intelligent design and infinite power and sustained by His faithful providence – are robust, resilient, self-regulating, and self-correcting, admirably suited for human flourishing, and displaying His glory. [20]

The Cornwall Alliance's parent group, the James Partnership, has received over $1.2 million in funding from the secretive DonorsTrust, of which Bader is now CEO. [21], [22]

The Cornwall Alliance's declaration makes a number of sweeping statements about climate change, including that “Earth’s temperature naturally warms and cools cyclically throughout time, and warmer periods are typically more conducive to human thriving than colder periods,” and that more CO2 is a good thing, as “Rising atmospheric CO2 benefits all life on Earth by improving plant growth and crop yields, making food more abundant and affordable, helping the poor most of all.”

According to the declaration, reductions on CO2 emissions would “have little or no discernible impact on global temperatures,” and would “harm the poor more than the wealthy.”

June, 2014

The Competitive Enterprise Institute filed a lawsuit against the NSA. Lawson Bader writes that their reasoning is to gain access to information they have failed to retrieve from the EPA including “cell phone and text message records that we believe will show the degree to which left-leaning environmental pressure groups have had unfettered, back-channel access to EPA leadership.” [23]

Bader writes that “the NSA might have the information that the EPA claims is non-existent. So we are asking the federal government to snitch on itself. And that is actually kind of funny.” 

Affiliations

Publications

The Competitive Enterprise Institute offers a large list of content written by Lawson Bader. Some sample publications below: [24]

TitlePublicationDate
Farewell and Toast to CEI's FutureCompetitive Enterprise InstituteNov 12, 2015
The Man Who Brought Obamacare Back to the Supreme CourtReason FoundationMar 25, 2015
The most transparent administration …. oh, wait…..Human EventsMar 16, 2015
Why Capitalist Virtue Beats Cronyist SinHuman EventsMar 9, 2015
In Washington, Every Day is Groundhog DayHuman EventsFeb 9, 2015
To Get Up and Go – and Go AgainHuman EventsJan 12, 2015
If it Walks Like a Lame DuckHuman EventsNov 17, 2014
Obamacare is a Game of JengaHuman EventsJuly 14, 2014
CEI Sues the NSAHuman EventsJune 16, 2014
Watergate Don't Bother Me, Does The EPA Bother You?Human EventsMay 19, 2014
Republicans Graham, Chaffetz Place the Wrong Bet on Internet GamblingHuman EventsMay 10, 2014
Big Labor's Privileged PositionHuman EventsApril 21, 2014

Resources

  1. Lawson Bader,” LinkedIn. Accessed June 21, 2016. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  2. DonorsTrust’s New CEO,” Donors Trust, September 22, 2015. Archived September 23, 2015. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6blg5zdSq

  3. Lawson R. Bader,” Donors Capital Fund. Archived April 16, 2016. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  4. Lawson Bader,” Competitive Enterprise Institute. Archived June 21, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6iRFt3zvg

  5. CEI Board of Directors,” Competitive Enterprise Institute. Archived March 15, 2016. WebCiteURL: http://www.webcitation.org/6g27UIIdr

  6. Exposed: The Dark-Money ATM of the Conservative Movement,” Mother Jones, February 5, 2013. Archived July 23, 2015.

  7.  ”A Tribute to Whitney Ball,” American Legislator (ALEC Blog), August 18, 2015. Archived August 20, 2015.

  8. Mercatus Center: Koch Industries Climate Denial Front Group,” GreenPeace USA. Archived June 21, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6iRHAqzRy

  9. Graham Readfearn. “Climate Science Denier Lawson Bader Named CEO At Conservative Funding Arm Donors Trust,” DeSmog, September 28, 2015.

  10. Graham Readfearn. “Exclusive: Major Climate Denial Funders Donors Trust and Donors Capital Fund Handled $479 Million Of Dark Money,” DeSmog, May 12, 2015.

  11. Notable Signers of 'Protect the Poor: Ten Reasons to Oppose Harmful Climate Change Policies',” Cornwall Alliance, September 17, 2014. Archived June 21, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6iRHgpyE1

  12. Protect the Poor: Ten Reasons to Oppose Harmful Climate Change Policies,” Cornwall Alliance. Archived June 21, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6iRHaYgRR

  13. Lawson Bader. “If it walks like a lame duck,” Human Events, November 17, 2014. Archived June 22, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6iSilzHdf

  14. Lawson Bader. “Watergate Don't Bother Me, Does The EPA Bother You?Human Events, May 19, 2014. Archived June 22, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6iSmf1yL8

  15. Big Labor's Privileged Position,” Human Events, April 21, 2014. Archived June 22, 2015. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6iSnic1RM

  16. Dark Money vs. Private Philanthropy - How to Keep Your Donations Private and the Left out of Your Business,” Conservative Leadership Conference, March 4, 2016. Archived June 21, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6iRIkyzl8

  17. Lawson Bader 'Gavel Out! Legal Opportunities to Push Back Regulatory Overreach',” Freedom Fest, July 10, 2015. Archived June 22, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6iRiEC07d

  18. PANEL Think Tanks Make a Difference!” FreedomFest, July 11, 2015. Archived June 22, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6iRia1WZy

  19. Why Is Big Pharma Financing a Conservative Group Trying to Destroy Obamacare?Mother Jones, February 18, 2015. Archived June 21, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6iSjGF31Q

  20. Joyce Nelson. “The Harper government and evangelical capitalism,” Rabble.ca, February 6, 2015. Archived March 21, 2016. WebCiteURL: http://www.webcitation.org/6gBLcokYW

  21. The James Partnership,” (Homepage). Archived March 17, 2016. WebCiteURL: http://www.webcitation.org/6g5dmoseR

  22. The James Partnership,” Conservative Transparency. Accessed March 17, 2016.

  23. Lawson Bader. “CEI Sues the NSA,” Human Events, June 16, 2014. Archived June 22, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6iSmQfoZQ

  24. Content by Lawson Bader,” Competitive Enterprise Institute. Accessed June 21, 2016.

  25. Libertarians Sue White House Over Climate Change Video,” ThinkProgress, October 30, 2014. Archived July 30, 2015.

Kathleen Hartnett-White

$
0
0

Kathleen Hartnett-White

Credentials

“White received her bachelor cum laude and master degrees from Stanford University where for three years she held the Elizabeth Wheeler Lyman Scholarship for an Outstanding Woman in the Humanities. She was also awarded a Danforth National Fellowship for doctoral work at Princeton University in Comparative Religion and there won the Jonathan Edwards Award for Academic Excellence. She also studied law under a Lineberry Foundation Fellowship at Texas Tech University.” [1]

Background

Kathleen Hartnett-White is the distinguished senior fellow-in-residence and director of the Armstrong Center for Energy & the Environment at the Texas Public Policy Foundation. [1] Hartnett-White is also a member of the Advisory Committee for the CO2 Coalition, [2] formerly known as the George C. Marshall Institute. [3]

Kathleen Hartnett-White previously worked as Chairman and Commissioner of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). Prior to 2001, she served as then-Governor George W. Bush's appointee to the Texas Water Development Board where she sat until appointed to TCEQ. Her publications have included articles in National Review, Investors’ Business Daily, Washington Examiner, Forbes, Daily Caller, The Hill, and a number of other Texas newspapers. [1]

Hartnett-White has also held positions as the Director of Private Lands and the Environment for the National Cattlemen's Beef Association in Washington, D.C. She has served as director of the Ranching Heritage Association, and was a special assistant in the White House Office of the First Lady Nancy Reagan. [1]

She is co-author, with Stephen Moore, of Fueling Freedom: Exposing the Mad War on Energy published by Regnery, May 2016. [1]

Stance on Climate Change

2015

“Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the gas of life on this planet, an essential nutrient for plant growth on which human life depends. How craftily our government has masked these fundamental realities and the environmental benefits of fossil fuels! […]

Notwithstanding the unscientific declaration of absolute certainty surrounding the politically official science, the climate’s sensitivity to the relatively small increment of human-induced CO2 remains the central unsettled question surrounding the climate issue.” [4]

2014

IPCC science claims of 95 percent certainty that human activity is causing climate calamity are more like the dogmatic claims of ideologues and clerics than scientific conclusions. ” [16]

Key Quotes

May, 2016

Green energy remains an inconsequential source of energy in America despite more than $80 billion in direct federal taxpayer subsidies under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama.” [5]

March, 2016

”[…] mounting evidence invalidates the modeled predictions of the IPCC— the official scientific anchor of the crusade. For decades, the IPCC models have failed to accurately forecast temperature as observed by the most sophisticated technology: NASA’s remote sensing satellites and balloons.” [6]

“Like it or not, prosperous countries are utterly dependent on the abundant, affordable, versatile, reliable, concentrated, controllable, and portable energy available from fossil fuels. At this point in time, the intermittent, and far more expensive, renewable energies cannot provide the countless energy services on which our long, healthy, affluent, and comfortable lives with personal freedom depend.” [6]

November, 2015

“The official science driving global warming alarmism is based on models built to assume that natural climate variables are extremely sensitive to a relatively small increase in atmospheric CO2 from human activity. But facts on the ground contradict the climate models’ assumption.

Temperatures have not warmed as predicted by the models over the last 18 years. And extreme weather events have not been more frequent or more intense than in the 20th century.” [7]

March, 2008

Lost in the outcry over carbon dioxide are these considerations:

CO2 represents only 5 percent of global greenhouse gas. CO2 added by human activity such as power plants constitutes only 3.4 percent of all CO2.

As predicted by the reigning science of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the risk of global warming from human-induced greenhouse gases such as CO2 is an uncertain, remote, gradual risk with impacts predicted in 100 years or more.” [8]

Key Deeds

June 17, 2016

Kathleen Hartnett-White wrote an article in The Hill calling for restraint of the “imperial EPA.” White promotes bill H.R. 3880, “The Stopping the EPA Overreach Act.” The bill would prevent the EPA from regulating carbon dioxide, methane and three other greenhouse gases. According to White, the EPA's treatment of carbon dioxide as a pollutant is an example of “regulatory overreach.” [9]

The truth is that our bodies, blood and bones are built of carbon! Carbon dioxide is a necessary nutrient for plant life, acting as the catalyst for the most essential energy conversion process on planet earth: photosynthesis,” she writes. “[…] How do our national leaders square their public vilification of carbon dioxide with fundamental scientific and economic realities? Such political propaganda has now educated at least two generations of Americans who think carbon is a killer instead of the stuff of life on the earth.” [9]

May 26, 2016

Kathleen Hartnett-White, director of the Armstrong Center for Energy & the Environment at the TPPF, went on the One America News Network's Tipping Point to discuss Hillary Clinton's energy policies[10]

A significant part of [Hillary's] party is at a predominately extreme position on energy,” Hartnett-White says.  [10]

May 23, 2016

Kathleen Hartnett-White is the co-author, with Stephen Moore, of Fueling Freedom: Exposing the Mad War on Energy. The Amazon description of the book reads as follows: [11]

“Fossil fuel energy is the lifeblood of the modern world. Before the Industrial Revolution, humanity depended on burning wood and candle wax. But with the ability to harness the energy in oil and other fossil fuels, quality of life and capacity for progress increased exponentially. Thanks to incredible innovations in the energy industry, fossil fuels are as promising, safe, and clean an energy resource as has ever existed in history. Yet, highly politicized climate policies are pushing a grand-scale shift to unreliable, impractical, incredibly expensive, and far less efficient energy sources. Today, 'fossil fuel' has become such a dirty word that even fossil fuel companies feel compelled to apologize for their products. In Fueling Freedom, energy experts Stephen Moore and Kathleen Hartnett White make an unapologetic case for fossil fuels, turning around progressives' protestations to prove that if fossil fuel energy is supplanted by  'green' alternatives for political reasons, humanity will take a giant step backwards and the planet will be less safe, less clean, and less free.” [11]

The Heartland Institute, which hosted Stephen Moore for a talk on his book, describes how the authors “argue that if fossil fuel energy is supplanted by 'green' alternatives for political reasons, humanity will take a giant step backwards and the planet will be less safe, less clean, and less free.” [12]

April 21, 2016

Kathleen Hartnett-White gave a talk at the April Luncheon of the Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE), Fort Worth Section. Her talk was titled “The Great Energy Enrichment.” [13]

November 18, 2015

Shortly before the U.N. Climate Change Conference in Paris (COP21) Kathleen Hartnett White was interviewed by The Daily Signal where she “outlines important climate questions.” According to Hartnett White, there hasn't been significant global warming in 18 years: 

Temperatures have not warmed as predicted by the models over the last 18 years. And extreme weather events have not been more frequent or more intense than in the 20th century.” [7]

She argues coal, natural gas, and nuclear power are superior to wind and solar, claiming they have a smaller “physical footprint” and that the EPA's Clean Power Plan would “disfigure millions of acres of open space” with wind turbines.   [7]

The kind of energy available in fossil fuels – abundant, affordable, concentrated, versatile, reliable, controllable, storable – was and remains a necessary condition of monumental improvements in human welfare and economic growth that emerged around 1800,” she said. “Policies to supplant fossil fuels – without a fully comparable substitute proven at scale – are immoral.”  [7]

With reference to the UN COP21 climate conference, she writes that “We don’t need to supplant fossil fuels at this point in time. We need to help developing countries increase energy availability for their people and use emission control technologies to manage real pollutants.” She concludes that the U.S. Congress should recognize that “CO2 is not a pollutant within the regulatory jurisdiction of the Clean Air Act.”  [7]

September 29, 2015

Kathleen Hartnett-White writes in Townhall that Pope Francis's visit to America “is a reminder of the extent to which pure propaganda now circumscribes public discourse about climate change.” [4]

“The climate issue, in all its many dimensions, is not about air pollution as Pope Francis’s recent speeches labeled the issue and as the media parroted his words. The climate change issue is about energy derived from fossil fuels,” White writes.

June 11, 2015

Kathleen Hartnett-White was a speaker at the Heartland Institute's Tenth International Conference on Climate Change in Washington, DC where she discussed “ the economic impacts of federal climate policy” on a panel titled “Energy Realities.” [14]

Video below:

June, 2014

Kathleen Hartnett-White authored a study at the Texas Public Policy Foundation titled “Fossil Fuels: The Moral Case.”   [16]

White says that her research was inspired by a “comprehensively researched monograph” written by fellow climate change denier Indur Goklany titled “Humanity Unbound.”  [16]

White describes the thesis of her paper as that “fossil fuels, as a necessary condition of the Industrial Revolution, made modern living standards possible and vastly improved living conditions across the world.”  [16]

”[…] the greatest beneficiaries of this energy revolution known as the Industrial Revolution were average workers and the most impoverished. Increasing emission of man-made CO2 is tightly correlated with this monumental achievement.”  [16]

According to White,  ”[fossil ]fuels are superior on many levels to the current alternatives.” With reference to climate change, she claims that evidence for dangerous climate change “weakens” over time.   [16]

“Mandates to force an abrupt energy transition from fossil fuels to renewable sources are naïve and fraught with peril for highly industrialized economies. As this paper detailed, energy sources are not necessarily interchangeable. In energy density, abundance, reliability, versatility, and other advantages, fossil fuels are far superior to wind, solar, and biomass. […]” 

IPCC science claims of 95 percent certainty that human activity is causing climate calamity are more like the dogmatic claims of ideologues and clerics than scientific conclusions. “ she writes.  [16]

Hartnett-White spoke about the study at an event hosted by the Heritage Foundation. See video below:

March 14, 2008

Kathleen Hartnett-White published an article in the opinion pages ofThe Hays Daily News [18] where she claims that she made the decision to approve the first coal-fired power plant in texas in 20 years because “[…] equipped with groundbreaking emission controls [the new plant], was a net environmental benefit for Texas,” reports Desmog. [8]

The Wichita Eagle's Editorial blog responded:

She [Harnett White] also makes misleading, unsupported assertions on science, claiming that the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change portrays global warming as an 'uncertain, remote, gradual risk with impacts predicted in 100 years or more.' To the contrary, the panel’s study is unequivocal on the high risks of warming, the environmental damage already under way, and the urgency of controlling carbon and greenhouse gases now.” [8]

July 23, 2007

The Dallas Morning News wrote an editorial discussing Hartnett-White's departure as chairman of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality: [15]

“She [Harnett White] has been an apologist for polluters, consistently siding with business interests instead of protecting public health. Ms. White worked to set a low bar as she lobbied for lax ozone standards and pushed through an inadequate anti-pollution plan. She also voted to approve TXU's pollution-intensive Oak Grove coal units, ignoring evidence that emissions from the lignite plant could thwart North Texas' efforts to meet air quality standards,” the editorial reads. [15]

Affiliations

Publications

A TPPF “Media Expert” backgrounder of Kathleen Hartnett-White lists the following “Select Publications” and media appearances: [17]

Select Publications

  • The Fracas on Fracking” National Review print
  • EPA’s Approaching Regulatory Avalanche”
  • Taming the Fourth Branch” Daily Caller
  • The Ruse of Regulatory Reform” National Review online
  • Environmental Policy Constraints on U.S. Oil Supply”
  • EPA’s Pretense of Science: Regulating Phantom Risks”
  • Fossil Fuels: The Moral Case”

Media Appearances

  • National Review (print and online)
  • Investors’ Business Daily
  • Washington Examiner
  • Daily Caller
  • Forbes
  • Houston Chronicle
  • Dallas Morning News

Resources

  1. Kathleen Hartnett White, Distinguished Senior Fellow-In-Residence & Director, Armstrong Center for Energy & the Environment,” Texas Public Policy Foundation. Archived July 4, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6iksxaTJj

  2. About,” Co2Coalition. Archived April 14, 2016.

  3. Gayathri Vaidyanathan. “Think tank that cast doubt on climate change science morphs into smaller one,” ClimateWire, December 10, 2015. Archived July 4, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6iksoLWt9

  4. Kathleen Hartnett White. “Clearing the Air on Climate Change,” Townhall, September 29, 2015. Archived July 4, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6il1AI6iq

  5. Ken Blackwell. “Green Energy Policies May Haunt Democrats This Fall,” The Patriot Post, July 2, 2016. Archived July 4, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6ikxTMqu8

  6. Kathleen Hartnett White. “Is the Climate Crusade Stalling?National Review, March 3, 2016. Archived July 4, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6ikwiZkNE

  7. “Here's What Will Not Be Discussed at the Upcoming U.N. Climate Conference in Paris,” The Daily Signal, November 18, 2015. Republished by the Texas Public Policy Foundation. Archived December 1, 2015. WebCiteURL: http://www.webcitation.org/6dShEpvHO

  8. Kevin Grandia. “Texas Pollution Apologist Weighs in on Kansas Coal Fight,” Desmog, March 13, 2008.

  9. Kathleen Hartnett White. “Restrain the imperial EPA,” The Hill, June 17, 2016. Archived July 4, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6ikr92qdV

  10. Kathleen Hartnett-White on Tipping Point with Liz Wheeler,” YouTube video uploaded by Javelin DC, May 26, 2016

  11. Fueling Freedom: Exposing the Mad War on Energy Hardcover – May 23 2016,” Amazon.ca. Archived July 4, 2016. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmog.

  12. Nancy Thorner. “Stephen Moore Exposes the Mad War on Energy,” The Heartland Institute, July 1, 2016. Archived July 4, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6ikxdx2uz

  13. April Luncheon - Kathleen Hartnett White, 'The Great Energy Enrichment',SPE International Fort Worth Section. Archived July 4, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6ikwyhFnE

  14. TPPF's Kathleen Hartnett White to Participate in International Conference on Climate Change,” Texas Public Policy Foundation, June 11, 2015. Archived July 4, 2016. WebCite URLhttp://www.webcitation.org/6il1SKO3P

  15. Clean Air Awaits: Gov. Perry should seize this chance to reshape TCEQ,” The Dallas Morning News, July 23, 2007. Archived August 27, 2007. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  16. Kathleen Hartnett-White. “Fossil Fuels: The Moral Case” (PDF), Texas Public Policy Foundation, June 2014. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  17. “Media Expert: Kathleen Hartnett White” (PDF), Texas Public Policy Foundation. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.

  18. Kathleen White. “Holcom holds environmental promise” (PDF), The Hays Daily News. Retrieved from Newspapers.com. Archived .pdf on file at Desmogblog.

Other Resources

Joe Fone

$
0
0

Joe Fone

 Credentials

[Pending Further Investigation]

 Background

Joe Fone works as a Computer Aided Design (CAD) Engineer at Enatel [7].  Previously he worked at Tait Electronics from 1977- 2002 [8]. He perceives manmade global warming as just one among many fads supported by scientists and eagerly promoted by the media, but he asserts that this is one that ‘has become a Frankenstein monster and seems to be out of control’.

Stance on Climate Change

The climate science community has been hijacked by vested interest groups, from politicians to environmentalist extremists, who are more concerned with advocacy for their causes than true unbiased scientific endeavor.  We can only hope to have begun here to redress the balance, and to ask the questions which vested interests do not want asked.” [5]

Key Quotes

Truth has nothing to do with it. To the politicians, it’s about power; to the AGW scientists, it’s about funding; to the media, it’s a marketable commodity and to the environmentalists, it’s a religious conviction and a need to impose socialist controls. The only people who care about the truth are the sceptics.” [5]

Despite oft-repeated claims by the IPCC and its fawning apologists that the planet is heading for some kind of apocalyptic meltdown, the actual empirical evidence suggests precisely the opposite. Europe and the United States are buried in record amounts of snow every year, but somehow the alarmists manage to twist even this into “evidence” of manmade global warming.” [3]

Everything it seems can be attributed to global warming, everything from acne and declining bat populations to deaf fish and zoonotic diseases (www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm). And in order to dilute growing public scepticism and suspicions that the science is not stacking up, the alarmists shift the goal posts so that “global warming” tends to be downplayed while promoting “climate change” or “climate disruption” and now “climate challenges” to account for the obvious contradictions.” [3]

Epicurus understood more about how the earth behaves than the IPCC does two millennia later.” [4]

Key Deeds

June 15, 2013

Fone teamed up with Tom Harris, Executive Director of International Climate Science Coalition to attack Bill McKibben’s presentation while on tour in New Zealand. [1]

2012

Authored the book “Climate Change: Natural or Manmade” which argued that humans have no effect on climate change and it is a political scam to get money and attention from the public. 

 Affiliations

 Publications

No peer-reviewed journals or research papers have been found for Joe Fone. 

He’s contributed to Investigate Magazine[5], Stuff Nation[1], and New Zealand Climate Science Coalition[6].

 Resources

1. Joe Fone and Tom Harris. “Climate change math doesn’t add up,”Stuff Nation, 15/06/2013

2. Joe Fone. “Political Feed in the Cancun Mire,” Climate Conversation Group, 10/12/2010. 

3. Joe Fone. “Filthy Political Lucre,” Scoop Independent News, 09/09/2011.

4. John Shade. “Book Review: Climate Change: Natural or Manmade?” Bishop Hill, 12/03/2013. 

5. Joe Fone. “A Legacy of Vested Interests,” Investigate Magazine, 23/06/2009.

6. Joe Fone and Tom Groser. “ Coalition Member Challenges NZ Minister to look at both sides,” New Zealand Climate Science Coalition, 03/08/2012. 

7. Joe Fone. LinkedIn 

8. Joe Fone. Facebook

Viewing all 74 articles
Browse latest View live