In a recent post, Keith Kloor worried about what would happen when a “bad paper spotlighted on a popular climate blog” is not debunked. In fact, even when a “bad paper spotlighted on a popular climate blog” is debunked, that doesn’t prevent subsequent reliance in policy discussions, as we see in EPA citation of the [...]
The recent report of the EPA Office of Inspector General(OIG) contains a remarkable dispute between the OIG on the one hand and EPA and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on the other as to whether the Technical Support Document (TSD) for the Endangerment Finding was a “highly influential scientific assessment”, a defined category [...]
The EPA, as expected, has denied the various petitions for reconsideration of their Endangerment Finding. They refer to the various “inquiries” on some points. Interesting reading here http://epa.gov/climatechange/endangerment/petitions.html
Ryan O asked serial Mann coauthor, Caspar Ammann, for supporting data for Ammann et al (PNAS 2007), which was referred to in CCSP (2009c) Past Climate Variability and Change in the Arctic and at High Latitude, an assessment report that was, in turn, cited in the EPA Endangerment Finding. Ryan’s request was as follows: the [...]
While considerable attention has been paid by me and others to the cozy UK “inquiries”, Climategate is featuring prominently in another not-so-cozy forum in the US, though the connection has not been articulated to a larger audience. A June 18 article in the New York Times reports: Three judges issued an order (pdf) Wednesday that [...]
Did any of you know that the US supposedly has a National Contingency Plan for dealing with very large oil spills? And that EPA has legal responsibility for maintaining readiness for such an eventuality? Who knew? I’ve watched hours of coverage and this hasn’t been mentioned anywhere. The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Contingency Plan [...]
Lost in the Climategate events has been the publication of EPA’s response to comments on the Endangerment finding on or about Dec 18, 2009. Followers of the various IPCC gates will appreciate the following quotation from Volume 11 of the Responses: As IPCC Chairman Rajendra K. Pachauri recently stated: IPCC relies entirely on peer reviewed [...]
One of the more interesting knock-ons of the opportunistic IPCC reliance on WWF and similar “authorities” is that it may compromise the ability of the U.S. EPA to argue that IPCC peer review meets the statutory standards required of EPA peer review. In this respect, I refer to the Climate Audit submission to EPA last [...]
A couple of months ago, I posted on the EPA Endangerment Finding. In Canada, the government would just go ahead and pass the regulations without the long U.S. regulatory processes. In practical terms, some odd coalitions can form for specific policies between people who are worried about energy supply or the impact of energy imports [...]
The U.S. EPA just released (Apr 17, 2009) “Proposed Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act” url together with a Technical Support Document url. In Canada and most countries, governments just implement these sorts of policies without the huge regulatory process that delays everything in [...]
The WWF and the EPA Endangerment Finding
One of the more interesting knock-ons of the opportunistic IPCC reliance on WWF and similar “authorities” is that it may compromise the ability of the U.S. EPA to argue that IPCC peer review meets the statutory standards required of EPA peer review. In this respect, I refer to the Climate Audit submission to EPA last [...]