Not so random sites, articles, and ideas.
Because the debate isn’t over.
In fact, it’s just finally picking up steam!
What’s our stance at MPI? Of course we want a clean, safe world that future generations can enjoy as much as we have, but we also want an honest debate: one that looks at all the science, not just what’s politically popular; one that looks at all alternatives, not just those that favor specific industry sectors or that grow government; and one that considers both costs and benefits of policy proposals instead of just assuming that one ounce less of greenhouse gases is worth whatever costs to society, freedom, and treasure it takes to get there.
You can read the “we’re all going to die so send us your money” side of this debate in your morning paper, watch it on the evening news, or hear it from opportunists in industry and believers in big government. We want to give you some information and tools to provide an alternative view.
In addition, MPI conducted a study on the impacts of cap-and-trade on Montana’s economy. These include a 96% reduction in coal production, lost jobs (net of ‘green job’ gains) lost revenues, manufacturing, and more.
Impacts of Cap-and-Trade on Montana’s Economy (3-page policy note, pdf)
Montanans Are the Losers Under Cap-and-Trade (summary op ed)
MPI also completed a peer review of the state’s Montana Climate Change Action Plan (MCCAP) and found it to be a work of pure advocacy masquarading as analysis.
And here are the products MPI created to support fair, informed, and economically sustainable energy policy during the 2011 legislative session:
The Economic Impact of Montana’s Renewable Portfolio Standard
Full Study (548kb )
Two page Policy Note (470kb )
Urban Transit in Montana: Economically and Environmentally Unsound
Public Transit in Montana (1.4mb )
2 page Policy Note
We have many more links to other resources as well at the bottom of this page.
Latest Climate Change Resources
6/28/12: Toronto Sun: “Green ‘Drivel Exposed”
6/28/12: National Center for Policy Analysis: Europe’s Green Energy Suicide
6/28/12: National Legal and Policy Center: More Federal Officials Don’t LIke Natural Gas – This time in Gas Rich Zone
6/28/12: National Center for Policy Analysis: Sustainability Study
6/28/12: Heritage Foundation: Brightsource DOE Funding Exposes Obama Cronyism
5/17/12: Watchdog.org: Federal EPA rules Dimock, PA, water is safe; contamination not caused by gas drilling
5/17/12: National Center for Policy Analysis: Environmental Groups Collecting Millions from Federal Agencies They Sue
5/17/12: Real Clear Politics: The Fallacy of Blaming Oil “Speculators”
5/17/12: The Heritage Foundation: The Human Consequences of EPA’s War on Coal
5/17/12: Discovery News: Wind farms are warming the earth, researchers say
5/17/12: National Automobile Dealers Association: The Effect of Propsed MY 2017-2025 Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards on the New Vehicle Market Population
5/17/12: Forbes: How A Dumb Law Blocks A Great Way to Fuel America
5/17/12: National Center for Policy Analysis: Faulty Wells, Not Fracking, Blamed for Groundwater Pollution
5/17/12: ABC News: Green Firms Get Fed Cash, Give Execs Bonuses, Fail
5/17/12: Investor’s Business Daily Op-Ed: Medieval Warming Period Cools CLimate Change Alarmism
5/17/12: Texas Policy Institute: Learning from Others’ Mistakes: What Europe’s Experiences with Renewable Mandates & Subsidies can Teach Texas
5/17/12: The Wall Street Journal: Not-So-Vast Conspiracy
5/17/12: National Legal and Policy Center: Surprise! Another DOE Solar ‘Bet’ Produces Green Job Losses
5/17/12: Heritage Foundation: Wind Subsidies vs. Oil Subsidies
5/17/12: Master Resource: UT Study on Frac Water Contamination: “No Evidence” (Anti-drilling false alarm cut down to size)
2/14/12: Wall Street Journal Op-Ed: No Need to Panic About Global Warming
2/14/12: GlobalWarming.org: Drip, Drip, Drip: Yet Another Green Energy Stimulus Recipient Hits the Skids (the third this week!)
2/14/12: New York Post – Op-Ed: No Energy is Good to the Greens
2/14/12: The Market Oracle: Sun Down on Green Energy
2/14/12: Forbes – James Taylor: The EPA’s Shocking ‘Oops’ Moment – EPA can’t support “benefit” calculations.
2/14/12: Wall Street Journal Op-Ed – Terry Anderson: In Praise of ‘Enviropreneurs’ (Note: Subscription may be required.)
1/31/12: The American Spectator – William Tucker: Environmentalism and the Leisure Class
1/31/12: GlobalWarming.org: Shiver Me Timbers! World Not Burning Up After All.
1/31/12: American Enterprise Institute: Wind and Solar Power, Part I : Uncooperative Reality
1/31/12: Bloomberg: Solar Stocks Plunge as Germany Vows to Quicken Subsidy Cuts
1/20/12: National Legal and Policy Center: Energy Dept. Makes More Bad Bets with Taxpayer Money
1/20/12: GlobalWarming.org: EPA’s War on Transparency
1/20/12: The Hill.com Opinion – Rep. Lee Terry (Neb.) : Time to decide on Keystone pipeline. (Despite yesterday’s announcement from the feds, this is a worthwhile read.)
1/20/12: Forbes Op-Ed – James Taylor: Please, Global Warming Alarmists, Stop Denying Climate Change – And Science
1/10/12: The Washington Post – George Will : Ringing in a Conservative Year
1/10/12: Bret Stephens: The Great Global Warming Fizzle
1/10/12: Reason Foundation: Impacts of Transporation Policies on Greenhouse Gas Emissions in U.S. Regions
1/10/12: Investor’s Business Daily Editorial: Obama’s Electric Car Dream Short-Circuits
The National Association of Manufacturers did a state by state study on the economic impacts of HR 2454 (Waxman-Markey). A few highlights:
Lost jobs in MT by 2030: 5,000-6,800
Lost income per household: $414-$764
% decrease in coal production: 94% – 96.1 %
Lost State Gross Product: $900 million – $1.228 billion
It’s a concise two page info paper for the state. You can find it here.
Tom Mullikin at MPI’s Global Warming Freedom Forum Oct. 27th, 2009:
By Edwin Berry, PhD, Atmospheric Physicist
A great primer on how many in the environmental movement are using “climate change” as a vehicle to advance their agenda…and how you’re helping through tax dollars.
Here is the operative paragraph:
“Fast forward to today. The federal government is spending 1000 times more money to promote the global-warming charade than is available to those scientists who are arguing against it. Never before in history has it taken a massive publicity campaign to convince the public of a scientific truth. The only reason half the public thinks global warming may be true is the massive amount of money put into global-warming propaganda. The green eco-groups have their umbilical cords in the government’s tax funds. Aside from a few honest but duped scientists living on government money, the majority of the alarms about global warming – now called “climate change” because it’s no longer warming – come from those who have no professional training in atmospheric science. They are the environmentalists, the ecologists, the lawyers and the politicians. They are not the reliable atmospheric scientists whom I know.
Dr. Berry’s web site is full of good resources as well.
Continuing the Debate – Challenging the Economics of Montana’s Climate Change Action Plan
The debate isn’t over. Honest people still do disagree about the causes and consequences of climate change. For this reason, policy recommendations that rely upon debatable assumptions and flawed economic principles as a basis for drawing further conclusions deserve special scrutiny. This seems to be the case with the Montana Climate Change Advisory Group’s recently released Montana Climate Change Action Plan (MCCAP).
The Western Climate Initiative – Continuing the Practice of Advocacy Masquerading as Analysis
Seven Western states and four Canadian provinces released their Western Climate Initiative in the fall of 2009, and it appears to have been updated in the summer of 2010. When we did see it, though, its goal was to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 15% below their 2005 levels by 2020. Their plan, if you can call it a plan, is to accomplish this by raising prices, killing jobs, growing government, and taking away your right to decide how to live your life. Where have we heard that before?
Beacon Hill Institute – the same organization that provided a peer review of Montana’s Climate Change Action Plan above – has provided a thorough analysis of this plan and found it wanting from an economic and scientific standpoint. You can read the study below, but the bottom line is that we once again see advocacy masquerading as analysis. The WCI tallies potential benefits of its proposals with no attempt to measure the costs, and then presents itself as an honest policy recommendation. It’s like a salesman telling you everything that’s right with a car but nothing that’s wrong with it. You can’t make a buying decision with only one side of the story, and we shouldn’t let our elected officials make policy that way, either.
Regardless of your opinion on climate change and man’s role in it, decisions that affect our lives, our pocketbooks, and our posterity should be based on real analysis that weighs the costs and benefits of policy recommendations. If the case for massive government intervention and a lower standard of living is strong there shouldn’t be any problem making it. But so far an honest attempt hasn’t even been made. That’s kind of insulting, and we should hold our government officials to a higher standard . This will help.
Links to More Resources
We can’t take responsiblity for what’s on these sites, but they’ve provided useful information as we’ve tried to get smarter on the global warming issue and are great places to start. Most of them have links pages of their own that will keep you surfing all day.
MPI is proud to be part of the No Cap and Trade Tax Coalition at www.nocapandtrade.com. This site is kept up to date with the latest science, developments, and arguments.
http://www.climatedepot.com/ is probably one of the premier sites containing a multitude of data and information.
Montana’s Dr. Ed Berry has a great site at: http://www.climatephysics.com/index.html
Bozeman’s Foundation for Research in Economics & the Environment (FREE) has been running a good series of blogs on green jobs and other climate change issues.