ALEC on Climate Science: Where’s the Beef?

“A new ethic is needed for corporate America, one where cronyism, obvious or subtle, is uncovered, reported, and criticized by the media and the public. Corporations will do the right thing under the new norms of a free, civil society.”

Corporations can practice Principled Entrepreneurship™ wherein “good profits” are derived from private property rights and voluntary exchange. Common ethical standards are respected in this quest as well.

Or corporations can practice contra-capitalism, mixing rent-seeking (cronyism) with philosophic fraud and imprudence.

A major corporation, ExxonMobil, and a major trade association, the Edison Electric Institute, used their financial and membership powers at the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) to go contra-capitalist on the issue of a resolution challenging the science behind Obama’s 2009 Clean Power Plan.

As described by Sterling Burnett at Climate News:

A resolution calling on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to reopen and review its finding that carbon dioxide poses a danger to human health and the environment was presented to the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) Energy, Environment, and Agriculture Task Force (EEA) at the organization’s States and Nation Policy Summit in Nashville, Tennessee.

The resolution drew much media attention and was withdrawn by its sponsors after objections from environmental activist groups and from corporations that provide funding for ALEC, including green energy companies that profit from restrictions on energy supplied by coal.

This resolution, reproduced verbatim (below), was discussed at the ALEC meeting in Nashville, Tennessee on December 6, 2017.

RESOLUTION CALLING FOR EPA REVIEW OF THE 2009 ENDANGERMENT FINDING FOR GREENHOUSE GASES

WHEREAS, in 2009 the Environmental Protection Agency issued a flawed finding under the Clean Air Act that greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles threaten public health and welfare, known as the endangerment finding,

WHEREAS, the 2009 endangerment finding relied on three lines of evidence: (1) basic physical understanding of the effects of changing concentrations of greenhouse gases; (2) indirect, historical estimates of past climate that suggest recent temperature changes are unusual; and (3) computer-based climate models which project future climate changes

WHEREAS, since the 2009 endangerment finding, observed evidence and research has cast serious doubt on all three lines of evidence,

WHEREAS, estimates of climate sensitivity to increased concentrations of greenhouse gases appearing in the scientific literature since 2009 have fallen steadily below the estimates used by EPA, which contradicts the first line of evidence,

WHEREAS, research has shown that recent changes in temperatures, sea level rise, and the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events are not unusual in the historic and geophysical record, which contradicts the second line of evidence,

WHEREAS, the climate models relied upon by the EPA have forecast twice as much warming as has been reported by satellite, balloon, and even unadjusted surface monitors, which contradicts the third line of evidence,

WHEREAS, the 2009 endangerment finding has been used as the basis for subsequent efforts to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases,

WHEREAS, President Donald Trump and members of his administration have consistently stated that regulation of carbon dioxide under the Clean Air Act is unnecessary, ineffective, and economically destructive,

WHEREAS, so long as the endangerment finding remains in place, efforts to roll back unnecessary environmental regulations adopted in the name of fighting global warming will likely fail,

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the legislature of the State of _______ calls upon the Environmental Protection Agency to reopen and review the 2009 endangerment finding for carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

Final Comment

Oh how far ExxonMobil has fallen from the days of CEO Lee Raymond both in terms of public policy and financial results.  And beware of the Edison Electric Institute as they promote electric vehicles at the expense of the petroleum industry and consumers.

Tim Huelskamp, president of the Heartland Institute, said it best:

This result is disappointing, but not surprising. Big corporations like ExxonMobil and trade groups like EEI have long been members of the discredited and anti-energy global warming movement. They’ve put their profits and ‘green’ virtue signaling above sound science and the interests of their customers.

A new ethic is needed for corporate America, one where cronyism, obvious or subtle, is uncovered, reported, and criticized by the media and the public. Corporations will do the right thing under the new norms of a free, civil society.

 


[1] As summarized by Tim Huelskamp of the Heartland Institute (December 7, 2017): “Rep. Piscopo and Ms. Grande agreed to withdraw the resolution after corporate members of ALEC, led by ExxonMobil and Edison Electric Institute (EEI), packed the meeting room with lobbyists and allies and indicated they would vote against the resolution. Heartland’s discussions with state legislators on the task force, as well as a straw vote of elected officials attending the committee meeting, showed a majority of them supported the resolution.” Tim Huelskamp, Heartland Institute, December 7, 2017.

The post ALEC on Climate Science: Where’s the Beef? appeared first on Master Resource.

via Master Resource

http://ift.tt/2FFilvP

March 14, 2018 at 09:03AM

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: