Climate Politics

Will.i.am. releases new video for Obama

Among those I know, reaction to this new will.i.am video has been unanimous: “Is that Theo Huxtable?!”

Scientist with concerns about chemical removed from EPA panel

An award-winning toxicologist was removed from a U.S. EPA panel reviewing the potential health dangers of deca, a flame retardant widely used in electronics, after the American Chemistry Council claimed she was biased. Deborah Rice had testified for the Maine legislature in support of a state ban on deca; EPA officials cited “the perception of […]

Clinton talks up clean energy at Houston energy summit

The Greater Houston Partnership held an energy forum Thursday to which all of the presidential candidates were invited and only one showed up: Hillary Clinton. Surrounded by folks from the energy industry, days before the crucial Texas primary, Clinton elected not to tell Big Oil what it wanted to hear. “I do not believe that […]

ABEC ads in Ohio

Listen Play a creepy coal ad, by ABEC Speaking of fossil shenanigans, check out the blitz of advertising coal front group ABEC is running in Ohio in advance of the presidential primary there. I’ve been trying to pick the creepiest one, but’s pretty tough. I think the two winners are the audio ad to your […]

Greenpeace and others protest Heathrow Airport expansion

Greenpeace and other eco-activists have been protesting mightily against a planned third runway for London’s Heathrow Airport, which would demolish the nearby town of Sipson and, say activists, be completely counter to Britain’s ambitious carbon-cutting goals. The airport-expansion plan has brought significant opposition from both politicians and residents; the British government has yet to make […]

The EPA’s phony explanation of its rejection of California

After more than two months, the Bush administration today finally articulated its legal case for rejecting California's greenhouse-gas standards for motor vehicles. The argument is here.

It reads like something written up in the boardroom of General Motors or a law firm working for car companies. It even cites arguments made by the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers as justification for the decision!

It's a phony argument designed to protect the auto industry -- and it's typical of the Bush administration to dump out bad news like this on a Friday to minimize media coverage.

‘Responsible Resources’ is the new ‘sound science’

Oh goodness, there are fossil shenanigans going on everywhere you look. You have to read this article in The Hill with talmudic attention to detail to figure out what’s going on with this new "educational" group — "Responsible Resources" — formed by ex-House staffers. Here’s a hint: In its ad, Responsible Resources says, however, that […]

EPA releases unconvincing justification for denying California waiver

For the long wait that preceded it, the U.S. EPA’s just-released justification for disallowing California to regulate vehicle greenhouse-gas emissions is rather anticlimactic. The 48-page document argues that California lacks the “compelling and extraordinary conditions” required for special regulatory permission, because the rest of the nation is also affected by climate change. Critics of the […]

California sues Forest Service over road building, drilling plans

California sued the U.S. Forest Service this week, claiming that it violated federal environmental laws and ignored state policies prohibiting road building in roadless areas of national forests. At stake are over 500,000 acres in four national forests in the state that the Bush administration plans to open up to road building, as well as […]

VP hopeful Pawlenty fails energy/climate conservative litmus test

Just in case you thought conservatives might be warming up to climate action and clean energy with the impending nomination of John McCain, uber-conservative columnist Bob Novak explains otherwise in a column titled "How Not to Run for Vice President."

As a nonconservative, I know I can't do justice to Novak's "logic" by summarizing it, and I suspect many readers would think I was taking his argument out of context, since it seems so ... well ... judge for yourself. I'll just reprint most of it: