Political Climate
Nov 13, 2014
EPW Critical Review Document decimates Obama administration and EPA psuedo science


When this report was first introduced in July of 2013, a number of important assertions were being made in the public forum, particularly on Capitol Hill, that were wholly factually and scientifically inaccurate. The original version of the report, as well as the expert scientific testimony provided to Congress in the interim, was meant to be helpful in limiting some of the more egregious claims that were being perpetuated. Unfortunately, much of the public discourse on important issues related to climate science has devolved into name-calling, including terminology such as “denier” or “dirty denier. Melissa Harrison, Daily Dirty Denier$, NRDC ACTION FUND (July 28, 2014),

Both have connotations which frequent use of is counter-productive to an honest public discussion involving a matter of such incredible scientific and economic importance. No scientific discussion that requires precision, particularly when it relates to issues as complex as climate science, should utilize means to limit debate and understanding when critical evaluation is necessary.

Additional events that have transpired since the first version of this report was introduced clarify the need for providing some basic level scientific facts that are important to understanding
carbon dioxide’s (CO2) role in our environment. Certain media figures have gone so far as to try and discredit the basic science of photosynthesis and our understanding of the impacts of
anthropogenic CO2. Such mischaracterization does an additional disservice to the understanding of this important greenhouse gas and related policy making.

To rectify some of the challenges in ensuring additional factors based on empirical evidence were understood, this report has been updated to include the following:

1. A new section has been added on the benefits of CO2.

2. Wildfires and forestry management have garnered additional public attention of late, and so was split into its own section with additional information.

3. A new section has been added on the impacts European countries have seen as a result of their climate regulations.

4. A new section has been added on Polar Bear populations and claims of mass extinctions.

5. Nearly all sections have been updated with new information.

6. An addendum was added to provide examples of how the Obama Administration’s

National Climate Assessment report ignores critical scientific evidence when submitted by top researchers and scientists.

Four former Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrators testified before the EPW Committee in 2014 and provided important answers to questions for the record as it relates to basic CO2 science, economics, and EPA regulations:

1. CO2 is necessary to life on earth. It is in fact plant food, and makes possible the process of photosynthesis. Photosynthesis is the process whereby plants using light energy from
the sun convert carbon dioxide and water to glucose sugar and oxygen gas through a series of reactions. The general equation for photosynthesis is:

carbon dioxide + water = light energy => glucose + oxygen
6CO2 + 6H2O =light energy=> C6H12O6 + 6O2

2. Humans exhale CO2 at a rate of approximately 40,000 parts per million (ppm). Humans inhale CO2 at the rate it currently exists in the atmosphere, which is just below 400 ppm.
Accordingly, humans exhale CO2 at a much higher rate than they inhale. Not a single former Administrator could answer a question on these rates.

3. As all four EPA Administrators made clear, EPA’s decision to regulate CO2 is the first time the agency has ever regulated a gas that is necessary to and makes life on earth possible. As well, it is also the only gas the federal government has ever tried to regulate that humans exhale at a greater rate than they inhale. Given both these facts, the claim that CO2 is a “pollutant” deserves further scrutiny.

4. Finally, all four former EPA Administrators were unable to name even a single product that could be made out of wind and sunlight. Everything in modern society, from computers, laptops, solar panels, iPads and flat screen televisions, to advanced medical equipment and all our nation’s critical infrastructure is built out of fossil resources and their derivative products.

An important note that bears repeating is the clear and simple fact that the climate has always and will always be changing. That is an indisputable scientific fact that should be the starting point of any honest discussion on the state of climate science and our understanding of a very complex system that is impacted by everything from solar radiation and ocean currents, to volcanic activity, cosmic rays and a number of greenhouse gases. Some of the false claims that seem to have largely been eliminated from the public discussions, at least on Capitol Hill, since the introduction of the first version of this report (and the expert testimony noted) include:

1. That hurricane activity is increasing in either frequency or intensity.

2. That the impact from human emissions has turned out to be worse than was predicted even as recent as ten years ago.

3. That drought and heat wave conditions are getting worse.

4. That a warming trend has been continuous over the last fifteen years.

5. That economic benefits will certainly accrue from regulatory policies to address theoretical impacts from CO2 production.These claims are demonstrably false and have been rejected by expert testimony and largely abandoned in discussions on Capitol Hill. As well, the fact that the climate has not been notably warming for at least the last 15 years has received considerable attention: multiple theories have
been proposed as to why the climate models failed to foresee this trend, again highlighting our lack of understanding of a very complex system.

Important events have occurred internationally since the report was first released that are worth noting:

1. Australia repealed their carbon tax after the economic consequences of such regulation was recognized.

2. Australia is now investigating serious concerns with corruption of the temperature records to artificially produce a warming trend that did not exist. It is important to note that similar charges and concerns have been raised with the UK Met office as well as the U.S. data.

3. The economic impacts in European Union countries that adopted climate regulations, including Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdomhave been disastrous. Serious concerns are now being raised over the economic viability of their manufacturing sectors as well as budget and energy poverty concerns. The poor and elderly are suffering the worst consequences from these policies.

4. India has since identified Greenpeace as an economic threat, with Greenpeace long having a record of making significant, scientifically implausible claims, while simultaneously having executives who fly jets to work.

5. China and India are now indicating that they will not attend the UN summit conference in New York City this year.

6. Only 11 of the 144 original parties to the Kyoto Protocol have thus far signed an extension.

7. Most importantly, it appears President Obama is attempting to force an international agreement that would not require Senate ratification as a way of “shaming” countries into implementing carbon emissions reductions. Rather than adhering to the prescribed ratification process, Obama is attempting to do an end-run around the Constitution.

Read the full report with charts that support the complete failure of the greenhouse theory here

Page 1 of 1 pages