The irreplaceable Keith Olbermann is scheduled to interview me at around 8:15 pm on the GOP climate deniers vying to run the House Energy Committee.

Thoughts on messaging are always welcome.

“One of the reasons why I became a lawyer, and not a doctor, or an engineer, or a scientist, because I can’t figure this stuff out.”

In theory we elect political leaders who then consult with or even hire leading experts to help them make informed judgments on complex subjects affecting the health and well-being of their constituents.

In practice, the GOP has been taken over by the climate zombies, a condition spread by drinking tea.  Even previously smart and/or blunt people abandon any reason or clarity when it comes to climate science (see McCain drinks the Kool-Aid [iced tea?] and becomes a climate conspiracy theorist and The dumbing down of Carly Fiorina).

And so it is with the former ‘straight shooter’ Chris Christie, Governor of the Garden State, which would be devastated by the impact of unrestricted emissions of greenhouse gases, especially sea level rise, as Princeton scientists have explained.

HuffPost was provided with his full remarks on climate science from a Tuesday town meeting.  To sum up in one word — Fuggedaboutit:

Read more

In previously unreported remarks, Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI), the top candidate for the chairmanship of the House energy committee, questioned the science of man-made global warming and called for Congressional hearings to investigate climate scientists.  Brad Johnson has the story.

Read more

Mountaintop removal (MTR) coal mining is a really, really bad idea (see Science explodes myth of clean coal: “The preponderance of scientific evidence that impacts are pervasive and irreversible and that mitigation cannot compensate for losses”).

Now PNC Bank, the top funder of MTR, has announced an end to its support for the ecologically devastating practice. Brad Johnson has the story.

Read more

Yesterday, Vice President Joe Biden joined a growing number of voices in calling for Congress to extend the Treasury cash grant program.  This show of support from the Obama administration is timely and reflects the recognition that some stimulus programs should last into the future.  CAP’s Richard W. Caperton has the story.

Read more

WASHINGTON — According to a report released this week by the Center for Global Development, climate change, the popular mid-2000s issue that raised awareness of the fact that the earth’s continuous rise in temperature will have catastrophic ecological effects, has apparently not been resolved, and may still be a problem.

Okay, it’s just another killer piece from The Onion.  It may not be quite as funny as “Apple Unveils New Product-Unveiling Product,” but it’s a must-read nonetheless:

Read more

In previously unreported remarks, Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI), the top candidate for the chairmanship of the House energy committee, questioned the science of manmade global warming and called for Congressional hearings to investigate climate scientists. On January 14, 2010, Upton participated in a panel challenging the scientific consensus that fossil pollution is destabilizing the climate, arranged by Detroit News in conjunction with the 2010 North American International Auto Show. Moderated by global warming denier and right-wing radio host Frank Beckmann, “Are Green Auto Rules Based On Flawed Science?” also featured industry deniers Pat Michaels and Myron Ebell. When asked if “the emails from East Anglia University that seem to show a pattern of concealment at the least, deception at the extreme” should “affect climate policy here in the United States,” Upton claimed that there is “no real science” that supports climate policy and then called for Climategate hearings:

All of the steps Americans were going to take, businesses and individuals, the added costs that we were going to incur — Consumers Energy told us just because of cap-and-trade, energy costs would rise in Michigan by almost 40 percent by 2020. Are any of those incurred costs actually going to impact the rising temperature of debate? The answer was no. No matter what we did between now and 2050, it, it, there was no real science to verify that it would reduce the temperature rise that some predicted. And that’s why we do need hearings.

Watch it:

In fact, the threat of global warming pollution has been understood since the 1950s. The Environmental Protection Agency has found that the enactment of U.S. climate legislation would greatly impact rising temperatures, reducing the risk of warming by 2 C from 99 percent to 25 percent, and the risk of 4 C warming from 32 percent to practically zero. That is why the National Academies of Science recommended in May that the United States “act now to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.”

Upton is just one of several top House Republicans who have called for a witch hunt against practicing climate scientists. After Upton’s remarks in January, the scientists have been repeatedly exonerated of the unfounded charges of conspiracy and corruption laid against them by the right wing. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), in line to take over the oversight committee, has repeatedly called for hearings, and Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) hopes to use the global warming committee to investigate scientists. Upton’s challenger, Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX), also wants to launch McCarthyite show trials on climate science.

Upton enjoys a reputation as a “moderate on environmental issues,” but he has become as extreme as the rest of his Tea Party colleagues on global warming and other environmental rules.

The Wonk Room previously reported that Upton was “the only candidate to take over the House Committee on Energy and Commerce who doesn’t explicitly question the science of manmade global warming.” We regret the error.

Let me state for the record that I oppose Congressional hearings into “journalistic malpractice” underlying Washington Post coverage of global warming.

Sure Gawker said “The Washington Post Has the Worst Opinion Section in America.”  But is that “journalistic malpractice”?  Sure the Post seemed to abandon any journalistic standards when it let George Will publish a third time global warming lies debunked on its own pages.   Heck, even Bill O’Reilly accused Dana Milbank of an “outright lie,” but he also joked Milbank should be beheaded.

But surely that isn’t justification for holding Congressional hearings into “journalistic malpractice” at the Washington Post?

Stop the presses!  I’m now told whole darn story “may not be true.”

Read more

This is a re-post from the World Resource Institute by James Bradbury.

Members of U.S. Congress committed to helping U.S. industry save energy and become more globally competitive should think twice about undercutting existing federal laws that have the potential to spur efficiency upgrades at domestic manufacturing facilities. As we await final details of new regulations designed to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from major U.S. sources, despite criticism from industry representatives, it should be recognized that the appropriate and expected implementation of these rules will have the practical, lasting effect of achieving fuel savings and competitive advancements for affected U.S. manufacturers.

Before Congress takes any steps to limit Clean Air Act authorities to reduce U.S. GHG emissions, the following considerations should be kept in mind:

Read more

$312 Billion: Governments Gave Six Times More to Fossil Fuels Than Renewable Energy in 2009, IEA Report Says

According to the International Energy Agency (IEA) global subsidies for fossil fuel production were almost six times that of renewable energy subsidies 2009.

Read more

TopTen USA is a new nonprofit organization that identifies and publicizes the most energy-efficient products on the market.  One of their partners is World Wildlife Fund, which explains what TopTen USA is all about on their blog:

Read more