A Free-Market Energy Blog

The Texas Petition against the U.S. EPA’s Endangerment Finding: A User’s Guide (Part II in a series)

By Chip Knappenberger -- March 18, 2010

[The other parts of this series on the activism of Texas A&M climatologists are here: Part IPart IIIPart IV, and Part V]

“Texas’ challenge to the EPA’s endangerment finding on carbon dioxide contains very little science….”

– Andrew Dessler, Gerald North, et al….., “On Global Warming, the Science Is Solid,” Houston Chronicle, March 7, 2010. [Also see yesterday’s Part I post on Dessler/North.]

Last month, the State of Texas filed a petition for reconsideration in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (summary here) against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The Petition lays out why the EPA’s reliance on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to provide an assessment of climate change science was a very bad idea.…

Continue Reading

Andrew Dessler and Gerald North on Climategate, Climate Alarmism, and the State of Texas’s Challenge to the U.S. EPA’s Endangerment Finding (Part I in a series)

By Robert Bradley Jr. -- March 17, 2010

[The other posts in this series on the activism of Texas A&M climatologists are here: Part IIPart IIIPart IV, and Part V]

On March 7th, the Houston Chronicle published an editorial by two Texas A&M climate scientists, Andrew Dessler and Gerald North (et al.):  “On Global Warming, the Science is Solid.” The op-ed argued that Climategate was a mere distraction and that climate science was settled in favor of alarm–both points being intended to challenge the State of Texas’s Petition for Rehearing to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s endangerment finding, which was based on a belief of “settled science.”

A week later, a response/defense followed in the Chronicle, written by Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott: “State Suing for Responsible Scientific Conclusions.”

Continue Reading

What Real Scientists Do: Global Warming Science vs. Global Whining Scientists

By David Schnare -- March 16, 2010

According to M. Mitchell Waldrop, editorial page editor for Nature, “global-warming deniers . . . are sowing doubts about the fundamental [climate change] science.” Further, Waldrop argues in his op-ed “Climate of Fear, “scientists’ reputations have taken a hit.”

Let’s ignore the snarky reference to “deniers” and ask: is science and are scientists under attack? The answer is Yes. But in an intellectual sense, isn’t this the essence of falsifiable, non-verifiable  physical science?

Climategate (et al.) is not simply about “deniers” and Waldrop’s complaint that skeptics are “stok[ing] the angry fires of talk radio, cable news, the blogosphere and the like.” It’s much more nuanced than that.

As a quick aside, perhaps Dr. Waldrop can be forgiven for failing to see the big picture. To critics (can he tolerate them?),

Continue Reading

Climate Mitigation: Costs versus Benefits (reassessing Robert Frank’s call for policy action)

By Robert Murphy -- March 15, 2010
Continue Reading

Understanding the Limits of Wind Power: Key Industry Terms

By Glenn Schleede -- March 14, 2010
Continue Reading

Howlin’ Wolf: Paul Ehrlich on Energy (Part I: Demeaning Julian Simon; Energy as Desecrator; Doom from Depletion)

By Robert Bradley Jr. -- March 13, 2010
Continue Reading

U.S. Wind Industry: Turbine Construction Won’t be Domestic

By Kenneth P. Green -- March 12, 2010
Continue Reading

Empty Shell: The Unbearable Lightness of U.S. CAP (A critical look at Marvin Odum’s Op-Ed)

By -- March 11, 2010
Continue Reading

Can Utility-Scale Batteries Rescue Intermittent Renewables? (Improvement, market shakeout, but no ‘silver bullet’)

By Robert Peltier -- March 10, 2010
Continue Reading

The U.S. Biofuel Scam: A View from Abroad

By Caroline Boin -- March 9, 2010
Continue Reading