What use is a shiny new tablet or e-reader without content? Give the gift of facts! Electronic copies of CFACT's Miracle Molecule and Cracking Big Green are now available instantly for Kindle, Nook, IPAD and other popular E-Readers.
EPA assumes zero benefits from the burning of fossil fuels while proclaiming heavy costs from increased carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere. Now, as Greens push for increasing the alleged "social cost of carbon" from the current 36/ton (up from $22/ton back in 2010) to an astonishing $43/ton, Roger Bezdek and Paul Driessen show that EPA is violating federal law (including Executive Order 12866) by ignoring the massive benefits to society (some $70 trillion in the U.S. alone) from fossil fuels use.
Kelvin Kemm likens the scurrying about to combat the supposed ill effects of increasing worldwide atmospheric carbon dioxide to a nation reacting in fear to rumors of ghosts in the attic and in the addled brains of policymakers. Reality no longer matters to those afflicted, as Pierre Gosselin says, to a mental disorder linked to extreme weather fears.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: CFACT to Supreme Court -- EPA emissions rules violate Constitution's separation of powers They are harmful, arbitrary, capricious and fraudulent. Read the brief.
Carbon dioxide has received a lot of flak for its supposed link to global warming. But Dr. Craig Idso of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide believes CO2 actually provides the planet with more benefits than costs.
Will the Supreme Court apply the constitutional brakes to EPA's emissions regulations while there's still an economy left to regulate?
Watch out would-be carbon taxers. You're signed up for what the left-wing Guardian newspaper just termed "the killing fields of Australian politics."
In this special report, CFACT senior policy advisor Paul Driessen examines carbon dioxide and its many benefits. While global warming alarmists rail against it, carbon dioxide is actually the "gas of life," without which life on earth would perish.
When it comes to urging people to lower their carbon footprint, no organization is more outspoken than the United Nations. But is this international body hypocritical?
Despite the man-made global warming fear movement’s clarion call of alarm, many scientists are dismissing the 400ppm level of carbon dioxide as a non-event. Scientists point out that there are literally hundreds of factors that govern Earth’s climate and temperature – not just CO2.
When you hear about melting glaciers in Greenland, you probably think this a result of manmade global warming. But more and more scientists are coming to an understanding that Greenland’s ice sheet has been naturally melting for millennia. . .
Average planetary temperatures haven’t budged in 16 years. Hurricanes and strong tornadoes are at or near their lowest ebb in decades. Global sea ice is back to normal, Arctic ice is nearly normal, and the Antarctic icepack continues to grow. The rate of sea level rise remains what it was in 1900.
Those concerned about global warming have recently been pushing the idea of a new tax on carbon emissions. But according to a recent study by the Heritage Foundation, such a carbon tax would cause serious economic harm without even making a dent in global emissions.
Would a carbon tax, now proposed by Green enthusiasts and revenue-hungry politicians, be good for the economy? Derrick Morgan of the Heritage Foundation says no, and here explains why:
For those who believe humans are causing catastrophic climate change – or simply crave control over the world’s energy and “unsustainable” economic systems – Doha resulted in bitter failure.