Washington, D.C., September 28, 2011 — The Envoronmental Protection Agency’s Inspector General has found that the agency based its 2009 “endangerment finding” on a flawed and inadequate assessment of climate science.
The IG’s report, released today, provides support to claims by Senator James M. Inhofe, (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, CEI, and many others that the EPA’s justification for its decision to regulate greenhouse gas emissions using the Clean Air Act relied on politically-biased science that does not meet minimal federal Information Quality Act requirements for objectivity.
“The Inspector General’s report requested by Senator Inhofe is just the latest evidence that the EPA is relying on junk science, bending the rules, and ignoring its own procedures in order to do whatever the White House wants them to do,” said Myron Ebell, Director of CEI’s Center on Energy and Environment. “Under President Obama, the EPA has become a lawless agency.”
“The EPA avoided rigorous peer review of its endangerment finding ‘Technical Support Document’ by not classifying it as a ‘highly influential’ scientific document,” said Marlo Lewis, CEI Senior Fellow. “In fact, the TSD may be the most influential document claiming scientific content any U.S. government agency has ever produced. It is the scientific rationale for EPA’s audacious – and congressionally unauthorized – project to de-carbonize the U.S. economy.”
“The EPA failed – or refused – to comply with the legal standards required of federal agencies, standards that are crucial because of serious impact regulations can have on the economy,” said Christopher Horner, CEI Senior Fellow.
“This is not the first time an activist administration has been reprimanded for producing junk climate science,” Horner added. “As a result of a lawsuit brought by CEI, Senator James Inhofe, and others, the Clinton/Gore administration put a disclaimer on the National Assessment on Climate Change that the report had not been subjected to the requirements of the Federal Information Quality Act.”
According to Sen. Inhofe, the Office of Budget and Management requires complete record-keeping of all documents leading up to such a major regulatory decision, along with a thorough review of the science by an impartial panel. Yet, the EPA neglected to identify from the outset if the endangerment finding – the Technical Support Document – amounted to a highly influential scientific assessment. The EPA’s endangerment finding concluded that greenhouse gas emissions endanger public health and welfare and, therefore, compelled the agency to regulate such emissions as a pollutant under the Clean Air Act.
► Read more on the EPA endangerment finding at Globalwarming.org.
Just Say “No” to Over-Regulation
BACKGROUND:
Toward the end of February 2011, the Montana House of Representatives passed, and forwarded on to their Senate, a bill providing specific direction to Montana state agencies NOT to administer federal Environmental Protection Agency greenhouse gas regulatory programs. Montana contends environmental management to be the sole responsibility of the sovereign states as guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution.
On Thursday, March 10, 2011, Texas Representative Lyle Larson (R-Bexar) filed a similar bill in Texas (House Bill (HB) 3188).Since Friday, March 11th was the deadline to file a new bill, Legislative Council rushed this bill filing through at the personal request of Representative Larson and other key state legislators. Over the next several weeks, Legislative Council will refine the bill language simultaneous with the bill proceeding through the referral process. This concurrent action will be followed by a committee substitute before the bill is heard.
http://www.sanantonioteaparty.us/103663/just-say-“no”-…ver-regulation/
http://www.sanantonioteaparty.us/?p=103663
UPDATE:
- March 18, 2011: HB 3188 read for the first time
- March 18, 2011: HB 3188 referred to State Sovereignty Select Committee (Chair: Rep. Brandon Creighton (R-Conroe))
NEXT ACTIONS:
- State Sovereignty Select Committee will study HB 3188, post notice of hearings, hold public hearings and either move HB 3188 to the Calendars Committee (or retain the bill in the State Sovereignty Committee). Obviously, the citizens of Texas want this bill to PROCEED ON TO CALENDARS COMMITTEE for assignment to a calendar for additional hearings and floor debate.
WHAT YOU CAN TO DO TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN:
Contact the members of the State Sovereignty Select Committee (below). Tell them (via letter, email, fax, phone call or, best of all, in person) that YOU and numerous citizens (aka “voters”) like YOU support this bill. If you write, email or fax the Representatives feel free to send them the one-page, “Say “NO! To EPA” white paper (shown below-bottom). Cut and paste it; change it to fit YOU. Make it your own. Let the committee members know how YOU feel and what YOU want them to do—move HB 3188 along and out of committee!
State Sovereignty Select Committee members:
- Chairman: Rep Brandon Creighton (R-Conroe), (512) 463-0726, brandon.creighton@house.state.tx.us
- Vice Chairman: Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer (D-San Antonio), (512) 463-0616, trey.martinez@house.state.tx.us
- Rep. Dan Branch (R-Dallas), (512) 463-0367, dan.branch@house.state.tx.us
- Rep. Drew Darby (R-San Angelo), (512) 463-0331, drew.darby@house.state.tx.us
- Rep. Sid Miller (R-Stephenville), (512) 463-0628, sid.miller@house.state.tx.us
- Rep. Jim Pitts (R-Waxahachie), (512) 463-0516, jim.pitts@house.state.tx.us
- Rep. Senfronia Thompson (D-Houston), (512) 463-0720, senfronia.thompson@house.state.tx.us
WHEN SHOULD YOU DO THIS:
TODAY!! TIME IS NOT ON OUR SIDE! House Bill 3188 MUST move out of Committee, be placed on the House calendar, debated before the entire House of Representatives and passed in order to proceed on to the Senate and, ultimately, the Governor for review and signature into law.
Patriots, thank you in advance for taking charge and moving out on this extremely important piece of legislation. Please share this will all like-minded citizen-Patriots. Feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns you may have at steve.baysinger@tenthamendmentcenter.com.
RISING ONCE AGAIN FROM THE BOWELS OF CONGRESS: LATEST CLIMATE BILL (updated: May 16, 2010)
The bill has been published as of Thursday the 13th. initial comments from the American Thinker.
Bloomberg reports, “Climate-Change Bill Avoids ‘Cap-and-Trade’ Tag in U.S. Senate.”
“Now Graham, John Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat, and independent Joe Lieberman of Connecticut are preparing to introduce a compromise bill in the Senate. They have indicated it will include a mandatory, declining limit on carbon emissions in the electric-power industry while giving utilities the right to buy and sell carbon allowances. “The senators aren’t calling it ‘cap-and-trade,’ though. The legislation is about ‘pricing carbon,’ Graham told reporters in Washington last month.” (emphasis added)
EPA’s definition of cap-and-trade:
“A cap and trade program first sets an aggressive cap, or maximum limit, on emissions. Sources covered by the program then receive authorizations to emit in the form of emissions allowances, with the total amount of allowances limited by the cap. Each source can design its own compliance strategy to meet the overall reduction requirement, including the sale or purchase of allowances, installation of pollution controls, and implementation of efficiency measures, among other options.” (emphasis added)
The sponsors of the bill can call it a Clean Energy and Security Bill (tried that), the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Bill (tried that), or the Clean American Jobs and Low Energy Prices Bill (guess for the new name) but it won’t change the fact that it is going to cap emissions and require companies trade emission credits (for at least utilities and manufacturing).
It is therefore, at root, a cap-and-trade bill. And as we all know, under President Obama’s cap-and-trade plan, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. It is still unclear how the bill will reduce emissions from transportation, the source of 33% of energy-related emissions. A gas tax (whether imposed on consumers or to the companies themselves) would be ineffective.
All the above rate increases and taxing is in response to the false premise of man-caused global warming.
ACTION PLAN: To be posted after bill is published, and we have had a chance to review it. Hang in there! We want to get it right. The bill has been published as of Thursday the 13th. Initial comments from the American Thinker.
Senator Inhoff’s family builds igloo in honor of Al Gore.
Great photos, graphs, diagrams from U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.
The Weatherman, Dexter Wright, Digs Deep into the Climategate
Climategate Fraud Investigation
Michael Mann’s “Hockey Stick” challenged by Virginia Attorney General.
Global Warming on Trial
Texas Attorney General Greg Abbot filing in federal court a challenge to the EPAs’s endangerment finding stating that it was based on the now discredited IPCC report–fraudlent science!
The 9 mm Won’t Save You!
Whoever leaked the incriminating e-mails deserves a medal for saving the U.S. economy from certain ruin.
Climategate: Is It Criminal
The British Parlament has convened hearings to investigate East Anglia University and the Climate Research Unit to uncover “unethical” and ”illegal” activities.
Climategate: Just Sign on the Dotted Line
The Jones Gang, “Forget credentials and just get signatures.” Opponents speak out and have been speaking out: Heidelberg Appeal (4000 scientists,72 Nobel Prize winners), Leipzig Declaration (reputable scientists), and the Oregon Petition (31,000 scientists). And still the Jones Gang persists!
Climategate: The Truth Hurts When It Hits You in the Head
Evidence that the climate computer models have failed.
Climategate: How to Hide the Sun
An effort to distort and discredit solar impact on climate. Solar flares track with global warming.
Climategate and the Migrating Arctic Tree Line
A case “discrediting proxy tree data” in the Mann “hockey stick” graph depicting global warming.
Climategate’s Stubborn Facts
Distorting facts that are inconvenient to a desired conclusion.
U.S. To Give Brazil 10 Billion Tax Payer Dollars To Drill For Oil
The U.S. government is prepared to provide up to $10 billion in loans to finance the development of massive hydrocarbon reserves off Brazil’s coast.
President Barack Obama’s national security adviser, Gen. James Jones, discussed the matter with officials this week during a visit to the South American country, Brazilian Planning Minister Paulo Bernardo da Silva told reporters.
He said the U.S. Export-Import Bank already has signed a letter of intent in that regard with Brazilian state oil company Petrobras.
The loan is equal in value to a similar credit line agreed to with the China Development Bank, also for exploiting Brazil’s “pre-salt” area, so-named because the estimated 80 billion barrels of high-quality crude in that new oil frontier lie far beneath the ocean floor under layers of rock and an unstable salt formation.
Under the agreement with the Chinese state bank, finalized during Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva’s visit to Beijing in May, Brazil can repay the loan facility with oil as opposed to cash.
According to the government’s projections, the pre-salt reserves – located at a depth of up to seven kilometers (4.3 miles) below the ocean surface in an 800-kilometer by 200-kilometer area – could eventually lead to a nearly six-fold increase in Brazil’s current proven reserves of 14 billion barrels and transform that nation into one of the world’s 10 largest oil producers and a major crude exporter.
Petrobras plans to invest close to $29 billion through 2013 to develop the pre-salt deposits in which the company already holds concession rights.
Petrobras is projecting that some 1.3 million barrels per day can be extracted by 2013 from the pre-salt fields and 1.8 million bpd by 2020.
The Tupi field, which is believed to contain between 5 billion and 8 billion barrels of oil and was the first to be exploited in the pre-salt region, is considered to be the largest hydrocarbon discovery in the Americas in the past 30 years.
Other large oil and natural gas fields were later found nearby, also under a thick bed of salt.
But Brazil has been forced to seek external financing because the fields pose an enormous technical and financial challenge due to the depth and thickness of the salt and the drastic changes in temperature as the oil is brought to the surface.
Acknowledging that Petrobras alone is not capable of developing the massive pre-salt reserves, Brazil announced in May that it will invite international oil companies to bid for concessions in that region beginning next year.
The country had previously halted the sale of concessions after the massive finds were made.
Petrobras, an integrated energy company and the global leader in deepwater oil exploration and production, operates in 27 countries in the Americas, Africa, Asia and Europe.
Shares of Petrobras, Brazil’s largest corporation, trade on the Sao Paulo, New York, Madrid and Buenos Aires stock exchanges, but the Brazilian government retains control through a golden share.
San Antonio Tea Party
