cooler heads blog feed

Center for Climate Strategies in Black & White

Paul Chesser — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:41:19 -0700

I've reported repeatedly how the Center for Climate Strategies, which has been hired in many states to manage greenhouse gas reduction commissions created by governors, claims they are objective consultants and have no environmental advocacy interests. Well, it's one thing to tell an audience something is so; it's even better when you can show them.

California News

wyeatman — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:18:39 -0700

A California court rejected a proposal to build a controversial luxury resort and golf course in Desert Hot Springs because the project's environmental study failed to analyze the project's greenhouse gas emissions. The lawsuit, which was brought by the Center for Biological Diversity and the Sierra Club, challenged the development based on AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act. AB 32 did not address emissions analysis as part of the California Environmental Quality Act, but the California Legislature passed SB 97 last year, requiring the Office of Planning and Research to develop regulations on how emissions should be addressed in CEQ documents no later than July 1, 2009. The court’s decision is the first legal interpretation of how to incorporate emissions analysis into CEQ documents until the OPR releases its regulations.

Wind Power Is Bad for Your Health

wyeatman — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 07:12:03 -0700

According to Dr. Nina Pierpont of Malone, N.Y., living within two miles of a wind turbine causes serious health problems, including headaches; difficulty sleeping; tinnitus, or ringing in the ears; learning and mood disorders; panic attacks; irritability; disruption of equilibrium, concentration and memory; and childhood behavior problems. Dr. Pierpont has coined the phrase "wind turbine syndrome" to describe these effects, which are caused by the low-frequency noise and vibration generated by wind machines.

The Week In Washington, D. C.

wyeatman — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 07:10:53 -0700

With Congress out all month, not much is happening in Washington, which is always a good thing. But the debate is shifting noticeably. For evidence, read this editorial in the Washington Post. The Post has not said anything reasonable or even factually correct on energy for over a decade (they used to support oil production in ANWR). In this editorial, however, the Post corrects ads being run by the Natural Resources Defense Council Action Fund on three key points about offshore oil production. This is remarkable and to my knowledge unprecedented. It isn’t an earthquake yet, but you can see the ground moving.

APA Wants to Greenwash Brains

Paul Chesser — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 07:31:56 -0700

Ever read a story and think, "I can't believe what I'm reading?" I had that experience this morning when I read this report in USA Today, with the headline 'Psychologists determine what it means to think 'green.

Hiding Budget Numbers in Kansas

Paul Chesser — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 13:06:48 -0700

One of the proud proclamations the Center for Climate Strategies makes whenever they start managing a new climate commission for a state is that their "process is fully transparent." That can be challenged on a few different points, and none more so than the issue of how much they get paid to do their work for each state and how much the alarmist foundations are paying them.

Observations from North Carolina

Paul Chesser — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 08:27:23 -0700

A few of my John Locke Foundation colleagues have noticed an AP story about the final day of the annual meeting of the Southern Governor's Association, in which members "are working on a comprehensive plan to reduce the South's carbon footprint and create jobs."

Update on Maryland Climate Report

Paul Chesser — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 07:25:25 -0700

A few days have passed since I discussed in this space my dispute with the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science over an alarm-sounding global warming report that was leaked to the sympathetic Baltimore Sun but is not available to anyone else.

The Week In Washington, D. C.

wyeatman — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 08:50:34 -0700

Apparently, the Bush Administration has forgotten what happened to the first National Assessment. Many of the same people who produced the first Assessment have been in charge of producing the second Assessment. What they have produced is an even bigger piece of junk science than the first. It’s full of undocumented or poorly documented claims. For example: tipping points are becoming more likely (page 5); many climate changes are occurring even faster than expected just a few years ago (page 6); extreme weather events are already having increasing impacts (page 6); past climate history is no longer an adequate guide to future climate change (page 7).

Peterson: Today the U.S., Tomorrow the...

Paul Chesser — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 10:35:02 -0700

It shouldn't be surprising given the nature of the URLs for various state climate commissions (www: mdclimatechange.us; ncclimatechange.us; scclimatechange.us; mnclimatechange.us; and so forth) that the ownership of those domain names for every state belongs to Thomas D. Peterson, individual (you can look it up).