Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Cooler Heads Digest 23 May 2014

Cooler Heads Digest 23 May 2014

Ratings: (0)|Views: 4,338 |Likes:
Published by freedom1001
Cooler Heads Digest 23 May 2014
Cooler Heads Digest 23 May 2014

More info:

Published by: freedom1001 on May 27, 2014
Copyright:Traditional Copyright: All rights reserved


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





23 May 2014
On Thursday May 29th, at 9:45 AM, the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee will
hold a hearing on “Examining the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Process.” Watch live 
Registration is now open for the Heartland Institute’s 9th International Conference on Climate
Change, July 7-9, at the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino in Las Vegas. Click here to learn more.
In the News
 Scott Blakeman, The Foundry, 23 May 2014
 Robert Bradley, Jr., Master Resource, 22 May 2014
 Valerie Richardson, Washington Times, 22 May 2014 Federalism Re
to EPA Control William Yeatman, Global Warming.org, 19 May 2014
Prison Space Paul Bremmer, NewsBusters, 19 May 2014
 Lawson Bader & William Yeatman, Human Events, 19 May 2014
News You Can Use
James O’Keefe Stings Enviros
James O’Keefe this week
 released a twenty-minute video at the Cannes Film Festival that shows Hollywood environmental activists Ed Begley, Jr., and Mariel Hemingway and environmental propaganda documentary producers Josh and Rebecca Tickell talking about getting $9 million in funding from a phony Middle Eastern oil sheikh to produce an anti-fracking documentary.The Hollywood Reporter  ran 
an exclusive on O’Keefe’s sting, and the video has
been posted on YouTube.
Inside the Beltway
Myron Ebell
House Passes Amendment To Curb Use of Junk Science
The House of Representatives on Thursday, 22nd May, passed an amendment offered by Representative David McKinley (R-WV) that if enacted into law would prevent the federal government from basing regulations and other policies on junk science. The 231 to 192 vote  was almost straight down party lines. Four Democrats joined 227 Republicans in voting Yes, while three Republicans joined 189 Democrats in voting No. Rep. McKinley plans to offer an improved version of his amendment to the Commerce-Justice-Science appropriations bill when it comes to the House floor next week.
Rep. McKinley’s 
amendment would prohibit expenditures that involve the use of the third
National Climate Assessment, the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Fifth
 Assessment Report, the Social Cost of Carbon guidance document, or Agenda 21. It was attached to the annual National Defense Authorization Act, H. R. 4435. The chances that this amendment will be accepted by the Senate are close to nil, but it was a good test vote. It reveals that the two parties are united on opposite sides of the global warming debate. Democrats are close to unanimous in supporting the use of junk climate science to make public policy, while Republicans are close to unanimously opposed. On roll call vote 231, Democrats voting Yes were: John Barrow of Georgia, Nick Joe Rahall of West Virginia, Henry Cuellar of Texas, and Mike McIntyre of North Carolina. Republicans voting No were: Scott Garrett of New Jersey, Frank LoBiondo of New Jersey, and Chris Gibson of New York. Those not voting were: Republicans Sean Duffy of Wisconsin and Gary Miller of California; and Democrats Karen Bass of California, Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas, Cedric Richmond of Louisiana, Bobby Rush of Illinois, Allyson Schwartz of Pennsylvania, and Louise Slaughter of New York.
EPA Promulgates Cooling Water Intake Standards
On Monday, EPA issued Clean Water Act standards to protect larvae and minnows from cooling water intake systems at nuclear, coal, and natural gas power plants. The cost would be about $250 million per year, and these expenses would fall disproportionately on nuclear power plants, which require greater volumes of water for cooling purposes. According to the North
 American Electric Reliability Council, an electric reliability watchdog, EPA’s rule was a major
reason that utilities and independent power producers decided to retire almost 4,000 megawatts of nuclear powered electricity.
Across the States
William Yeatman 
EPA’s Reported Climate Plan Would Facilitate Carbon Taxes
and Cap-and-Trade
Details are leaking out
about EPA’s impending climate plan for existing power plants pursuant to
section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act. In the past, EPA has interpreted Clean Air Act section 111(d) such that it applied on a source-by-source basis. However, Bloomberg and Reuters  recently
reported that EPA’s climate
 plan would
require “beyond the fence” or “mass emissions”
—i.e., states would be required to regulate beyond a power plant’s smokestack. EPA’s
plan thus represents a radical change from past practice, one that gives the agency the authority to require green energy production quotas or even curtailments of electricity demand.
Environmental special interests were quick to support EPA’s approach and offer ideas for what
the agency could impose. Yesterday, for example, David Bookbinder, co-founder of the climate consulting firm Element VI, endorsed state carbon taxes at a briefing held by Center for Climate and Energy Solutions. And David Doniger, policy director for the climate and clean air program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, told 
Reuters that EPA’s reported plan would
facilitate regional cap-and-trades. Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt this week presented the alternative viewpoint. On Tuesday at the N
ational Press Club, AG Pruitt released his plan for compliance with EPA’s carbon rules that prohibited a “beyond the fence” approach, in line with what the agency has
always done to date when it implements Clean Air Act section 111(d).
Around the World
Myron Ebell
Australia Slashes Renewable and Climate Funding
 Australia’s Liberal
-National Coalition government announced last week that it would cut spending on renewable energy and all climate-related programs from A$5.75 billion in the current fiscal year to A$1.25 billion in the 2014-15 fiscal year and to A$500 million by 2017-18.
 plan last year, spending on climate and

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->