Questionable data, secret science

By |2015-07-22T18:16:57+00:00July 22nd, 2015|Guest Insights|3 Comments

battigJanet McCabe’s defense of EPA implementation of the Clean Air Act reaches back 45 years, at a time when environmental targets were large and easily defined (Letters, July 15). Yet, to date, the chemistry of ozone depletion in the upper atmosphere related to chlorine chemistry remains unsettled science. How does the EPA measure the success of replacing chlorofluorocarbon for refrigerants said to promote ozone depletion with the potent greenhouse gas hydrofluorocarbon?

Ms. McCabe states that, “With every rule the EPA creates, the agency is committed to meeting the law’s letter and spirit, while following strict procedures for public review and input.” She also says “the courts have upheld the EPA’s air rules.” Is the EPA’s apparent collusion with radical environmental activists in the orchestrated “sue and settle” consent decrees part of these “strict procedures” as they skirt the Administrative Procedures Act and avoid congressional and public scrutiny?

EPA Clean Air Act policy continues in a self-perpetuating bureaucratic endeavor far removed from its original congressional mission. Questionable data and secret science are used to justify the EPA’s continuing ratcheting down of environmental “safe levels” without concern for cost-benefit justification.

Charles G. Battig

VA Scientists and Engineers for Energy and Environment, Charlottesville, Va.

NOTE:  This letter to the editor was posted in the Wall Street Journal on July 20.


  1. Anon Anon July 23, 2015 at 9:11 AM

    What science? The EPA does not know what science is.

    • Brin Jenkins July 23, 2015 at 9:49 AM

      You don’t need to know science when there is an agenda to follow. Just build a consensus of like minded people and ignore facts.

  2. MOLON LABE August 2, 2015 at 6:01 PM

    Jul 21, 2015 Don’t panic – we’re all still doomed, scientists insist Arctic ice EMBIGGENS, returns to 1980s levels of cap cover

    The Arctic ice cap has not, contrary to the predictions of climate alarmists, completely disappeared: in fact it has been growing rapidly, increasing by an entire third just in 2013 and more since.

Comments are closed.