ClimateScienceWatch

Promoting integrity in the use of climate science in government

Climate Science Watch is a nonprofit public interest education and advocacy project dedicated to holding public officials accountable for the integrity and effectiveness with which they use climate science and related research in government policymaking, toward the goal of enabling society to respond effectively to the challenges posed by global warming and climate change. See Details

U.S. Climate Change Science Program

The public interest calls for knowledgeable, independent investigation of the U.S. Climate Change Science Program, through which federal agencies coordinate $1.7 billion in annual support for research on climate and global change.

OSTP Director Marburger’s misleading testimony on NPOESS space-based climate observations

Posted on Saturday, July 07, 2007

In his testimony at a June 7 House Energy and Environment Subcommittee hearing on the development of the NPOESS satellite system, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy director John Marburger played down the extent to which the future of essential climate change observations from space has been jeopardized by the Pentagon’s elimination or downgrading of eight climate sensors originally planned for NPOESS. In addition to an internal NOAA-NASA report to the White House released in June by Climate Science Watch, a presentation to a National Research Council panel on NPOESS by the director of the NOAA Climate Program Office is another source that paints a more truthful picture.

Letter to the House Science and Technology Committee on global change research legislation

Posted on Sunday, July 01, 2007

On June 27 the House Science and Technology Committee reported the Global Climate Change Research Data and Management Act of 2007 (H.R. 906). Climate Science Watch and the Union of Concerned Scientists have communicated to the Committee our concern that the bill remains underdeveloped in two key respects: (1) It does not address the need to protect the integrity of scientific communication from political interference; and (2) It does not adequately address the need for an explicit focus on national assessment of U.S. climate change impacts and response strategies.

Senate appropriators share our distrust of NOAA and the White House on essential climate satellites

Posted on Friday, June 29, 2007

The Senate Appropriations Committee reported a FY2008 NOAA funding bill on June 28 that provides $400 million above the President’s request. “The committee is doubtful this administration will ever show the leadership and bold thinking required to address the true needs of our planet’s oceans and atmosphere,” the committee report says. The report also expresses doubt about whether the administration will commit to timely budget increases needed to fund the sensors for measuring essential climate variables that were dropped from the NPOESS satellite system by the Pentagon and NOAA. How best to mitigate this damage presents a dilemma.

Key points in NASA-NOAA report to White House science office on NPOESS de-scoping

Posted on Monday, June 04, 2007

The Associated Press reported on June 4: “A confidential report to the White House, obtained by The Associated Press, warns that U.S. scientists will soon lose much of their ability to monitor warming from space using a costly and problem-plagued satellite initiative begun more than a decade ago....’We’re going to start being blinded in our ability to observe the planet,’ said [Rick] Piltz, whose group provided the AP with the previously undisclosed report.” We have prepared a 7-page briefing paper NPOESS-Summary.pdf that summarizes key points that lead to this conclusion, drawn from the text of the 76-page internal report NPOESS-OSTPdec-06.pdf to the White House Office of Science Technology Policy by a team of senior science managers at NASA and NOAA.

Internal report to White House on implications of NPOESS climate observations crisis

Posted on Monday, June 04, 2007

On June 4 the Associated Press reported on the looming crisis in the U.S. satellite-based global climate observing system. An internal “pre-decisional” report to the White House by NASA and NOAA, which Climate Science Watch provided to AP, explains how the decision by the Pentagon and NOAA to drop key climate-monitoring sensors from the National Polar-orbiting Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS)—the core of the next generation of Earth-orbiting climate-monitoring instruments—places in grave jeopardy scientists’ future ability to monitor key variables necessary for understanding climate change and its consequences. We are making the report available here NPOESS-OSTPdec-06.pdf, to encourage wider attention to this problem and to increase pressure on the President and Congress to deal with it.

Hansen shoots back on NASA head Griffin’s “incredibly ignorant and arrogant statement”

Posted on Thursday, May 31, 2007

In response to NASA Administrator Michael Griffin’s incredible statement on NPR’s Morning Edition today questioning whether global warming is a problem or long-term concern needing to be dealt with, NASA’s James Hansen fired back with a straightforward and welcome example of speaking truth to power. “It’s an incredibly arrogant and ignorant statement,” Hansen told ABC News. “It indicates a complete ignorance of understanding the implications of climate change.” Now it would be good to hear from other NASA scientists, the U.S. Climate Change Science Program leadership, and the scientific research community. Jim Hansen should not be alone in calling Griffin down for misrepresenting the intelligence on climate science.

NASA Administrator Griffin “not sure” global warming is a problem or long-term concern

Posted on Wednesday, May 30, 2007

In an interview to be aired tomorrow morning, May 31, on NPR Morning Edition, NASA Administrator Michael Griffin says: “I’m aware that global warming exists....Whether that is a long term concern or not, I can’t say....To assume that it is a problem is to assume that the state of Earth’s climate today is the optimal climate, the best climate that we could have or ever have had....I think that’s a rather arrogant position for people to take.” Now there’s a framing that’s worthy of Phil Cooney.

24 House members call for new National Climate Impacts Assessment

Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006

On December 11, Rep. Jay Inslee (D-WA), Rep. Wayne Gilchrest (R-MD), and 22 House co-signers sent a letter to William Brennan of NOAA, the Acting Director of the Climate Change Science Program, in which they say: “The failure of the CCSP to produce a National Assessment report within the time frame required by law has made it more difficult for Congress to develop a comprehensive policy response to the challenge of global climate change.” The Members are on the right track here. The National Climate Impacts Assessment is a key issue for oversight of the CCSP in the new Congress, and one we have been raising for some time.

Concerns raised about NOAA deputy administrator nominee stall confirmation process

Posted on Tuesday, December 05, 2006

Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Stevens (R-AK) took the nomination of Jane Luxton to be NOAA deputy administrator and possible Climate Change Science Program director off the agenda of a committee hearing today after deciding not to proceed further with the confirmation process this year. This step resulted from intervention by several members of the committee, showing responsiveness to concerns raised about the appropriateness of the nomination. We have criticized this nomination. The committee is wise to step back and, when they take up this matter in 2007, members should consider this position in the context of a serious examination of the important position of Climate Change Science Program director, its place in the overall structure, and how it should be filled.

Upcoming confirmation vote a threat to the integrity of the Climate Change Science Program

Posted on Monday, December 04, 2006

On December 5 the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee will hold a hearing on the nomination of corporate lawyer Jane Luxton to the position of Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere (thus, also the NOAA deputy administrator). If confirmed, Luxton would take the position previously held by Jim Mahoney, who retired last spring. Mahoney was also the director of the U.S. Climate Change Science Program from 2002 until his retirement. We raised concerns about this nomination in our September 26 post and in this morning’s Environment & Energy Daily. Luxton has no apparent professional experience with climate change issues and, unlike all former directors of U.S. climate and global change research, she appears to have no scientific credentials. Nothing personal here, really, but why is she even being considered for a position as director of the U.S. Government program that supports the nation’s scientific effort to understand global climate change and its potential consequences?

Michael MacCracken’s 2002 letter to the ExxonMobil board of directors

Posted on Thursday, November 23, 2006

ExxonMobil had attacked the National Assessment of Climate Change Impacts and had called on the incoming Bush administration to purge four specific individuals involved in climate change activities. In September 2002, in his final week in the U.S. Global Change Research Program Office, National Assessment coordinator Michael MacCracken, one of the “ExxonMobil Four,” sent a letter to each member of the ExxonMobil board of directors. With ExxonMobil’s global warming denial campaign behavior and the Bush administration’s suppression of the National Assessment process coming under greater critical scrutiny, Dr. MacCracken has authorized us to post his letter as part of the record.

Press coverage and comment on the National Assessment lawsuit

Posted on Thursday, November 16, 2006

The suit filed in federal court on November 14 by the Center for Biological Diversity et al. to require the production of a second National Assessment of Climate Change Impacts (see our November 14 post) was reported by the Associated Press ("White House Sued Over Global Warming"), the San Francisco Chronicle ("White House sued for not doing report on warming"), and others. “The Bush administration has failed to comply with the law,’’ said attorney Julie Teel of the Center for Biological Diversity, which is a plaintiff in the lawsuit. “I think the administration’s afraid to release this information because it makes climate change real for people.’’ The NOAA press office responded on behalf of the government, with the official party line that offers 21 topical reports as an alternative to an integrative, independent assessment.

Sen. Kerry statement in support of lawsuit on National Assessment of Climate Change Impacts

Posted on Tuesday, November 14, 2006

Senator Kerry issued a statement on November 14 supporting a lawsuit filed by conservation advocates—the Center for Biological Diversity, Greenpeace, and Friends of the Earth—calling for the administration to issue an overdue National Assessment on the impacts of climate change on the United States. Climate Science Watch encourages Congressional interest and oversight on this issue, to undo almost six years of allowing the administration to suppress the National Assessment process, and almost six years of allowing the first National Assessment to be slandered by the global warming denial machine without a principled defense by the leadership of the U.S. Climate Change Science Program.

Conservation groups file suit against Bush administration to compel second National Assessment

Posted on Tuesday, November 14, 2006

The Center for Biological Diversity, along with other conservation groups, filed suit November 14 in federal district court for the Northern District of California against the Bush administration for refusing to conduct a second U.S. National Climate Change Impacts Assessment. The suit contends that such an integrated scientific assessment, due in November of 2004, is required by the Global Change Research Act of 1990. The suit names Dr. William Brennan, acting director of the U.S. Climate Change Science Program, and Dr. John Marburger, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, as defendants. We have repeatedly and strongly criticized the Bush administration for officially suppressing the National Assessment process, and the leadership of the Climate Change Science Program for their silence on this central climate science scandal of the administration.

The “Vanishing” National Climate Change Assessment, Part 1: The Administration

Posted on Sunday, October 08, 2006

An October 3 story in Greenwire on the continuing controversy over the administration’s actions to bury the first National Assessment of the Potential Consequences of Climate Variability and Change quotes Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute as saying: “To the extent that it has vanished, we have succeeded.” Here we clarify a few points about the actions of the administration to make the National Assessment “vanish”.

Page 3 of 7 pages « First < 1 2 3 4 5 > Last »