EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt is under attack and needs your help!
Pruitt’s Real Sin? Cleaning Up EPA.
Politicians must consider unintended consequences.
EPA regulators would only be allowed to consider scientific studies that make their data available for public scrutiny under Pruitt’s new policy.
EPA is what is called an "independent agency, Pruitt can, and may well, go ahead with the Red Team exercise.
Heartland Institute Senior Fellow (and CFACT advisor) H. Sterling Burnett, Ph.D., reviews the achievements of President Trump's energy and environmental policies at the end of his first year in office, a list he says indicates "a tremendous start" -- as evidenced by the stock market, job growth, unemployment decline, business investment, and consumer confidence -- all helping to "make America great again."
Legally correct interpretation: “The CPP exceeds EPA’s statutory authority and must be repealed.” Read CFACT's full regulatory submission now.
CFACT Senior Policy Analyst Paul Driessen pulls no punches, calling today's ethanol and biofuels mandates and subsidies a fascistic scheme that harms both the economy and the environment and does nothing to conserve domestic energy while doing a lot to stifle economic growth. He urges the swift repeal of ethanol and biofuels mandates.
The second shoe has dropped in EPA's wondering about how to regulate CO2 emissions from power plants. As the shoe dropping metaphor suggests, EPA can now go to sleep for awhile. Everyone else is going to be very busy commenting on this complex issue. The first shoe dropped in October when EPA proposed repeal of the Obama Clean Power Plan. The Agency correctly cited the well known legal arguments against the CPP, especially that it illegally required States to regulate their entire electric power systems, not just their power plants. This meant changing (that is, restricting) people's use of electricity, a favorite [...]
Greg Walcher, President of the Natural Resources Group, lauds the recent decision by EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt to end two decades of the scurrilous "sue-and-settle" scam run by EPA for the benefit of environmentalist plaintiffs and the policies some EPA officials wanted but could not get regulatory authority to accomplish.
It looks like EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has a good procedural argument for reopening the Obama era false finding that CO2 emissions endanger human health and welfare.
New Zealander Bryan Leyland and Canadian Tom Harris, both of the International Climate Science Coalition, argue that the United States is setting a bad example and harming its own people -- and those in developing nations -- by continuing the EPA's war on coal, nuclear energy, and natural gas. Wind and solar have major problems with reliability, cost, and adverse health and environmental impacts that their proponents gloss over, whereas emissions from modern, highly efficient coal-fired power plants with stack gas cleanup consist almost entirely of water, CO2, and nitrogen.
Canadians Dr. Tim Ball and Tom Harris report from Bonn that the IPCC is now resorting to even more spurious "science" than ever in support of its wildly alarmist claims of climate catastrophe around the corner. They cite a vast lack of real-world data to support these claims, noting that there are no weather stations representing about 85% of the Earth's surface area.
CFACT Senior Policy Advisor Paul Driessen lauds President Trump and his administration for rolling back Obama era restrictions on fossil fuels that had already hurt the U.S. economy -- the rollbacks should unleash massive economic growth and create lots of jobs.
CFACT Senior Policy Analyst Paul Driessen reports on the legal and political war against glyphosate -- a pesticide claimed to be a "possible" carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer despite repeated peer-reviewed studies showing the opposite is true. The IARC finding was exposed as fraudulent by two Reuters reporters, for ignoring contrary evidence, manufacturing evidence, and suppressing access to their "research."