Press Releases


Entries in EPA (557)






WASHINGTON, D.C. --  Today, Congressman Frank Guinta (NH-1) re-introduced the Great Bay Regulatory Improvement Act (H.R. 3615) to save a coalition of towns on New Hampshire’s Great Bay as much as $250 million, a cost that could severely strain their finances.  “Towns on our seacoast face an enormous tab, because of an unfunded federal mandate, based on shoddy science,” he said.


    His bipartisan legislation would require the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to delay enforcement of its order that towns from Exeter to Dover add costly infrastructure to decrease nitrogen levels in the local estuary to three milligrams per liter from eight. Newmarket , Rochester and Portsmouth also dispute the more than 60 percent drop would solve an overgrown eelgrass problem. “We’re looking at a dramatic tax increase to solve a problem that does not exist,” said Rep. Guinta (NH-1).


    Manchester’s former two-term mayor and current member of the House Financial Services Committee said that the EPA bypassed the usual regulatory process to enact its aggressive agenda. “We care as much about our environment as anyone, but we also care about our municipal budgets, jobs and the economy, in addition to legal due process,” said Rep. Guinta.


    The Congressman first introduced his legislation in the 112th Congress and said that he will not stop fighting federal encroachment into state affairs. “The EPA needs to listen to Granite Staters’ concerns and stop this reckless overreach,” he said.


    The New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services reports that EPA methods to justify new nitrogen requirements do not show sufficient linkage between Great Bay nitrogen levels and eelgrass growth.





Cooler Heads Digest 25 September 2015 


25 September 2015


The Heritage Foundation this week published a paper on “Obama’s Plan to Avoid Senate Review of the Paris Protocol,” by Steven Groves.

In the News

Air Pope One
Henry Payne,, 25 September 2015

September Was Cruelest Month for Jonathan Chait’s Feature on Climate Change Policy
William Yeatman,, 24 September 2015

Shale Revolution Revitalizing U.S. Manufacturing
William Shughart, San Diego Union Tribune, 24 September 2015

None Dare Call It Conspiracy: Obama’s Coordinated Climate Campaign
Chris Horner, Investor’s Business Daily, 23 September 2015

Pope Misses the Mark on Economics
James Taylor & Jim Lakely, Forbes, 23 September 2015

Obama’s Interview on Climate Change
Jeff Goodell, Rolling Stone, 23 September 2015

An Addition to AP Stylebook Entry on Global Warming
Paul Colford, Associated Press, 22 September 2015

Not All Energy Is Created Equal
Marita Noon, Oil Price, 21 September 2015

Putting People Ahead of Climate Hysteria
Donn Dears, Master Resource, 21 September 2015

E&E Legal on the Capture of the EPA
Jim DeLong, Forbes, 18 September 2015

News You Can Use
EPA Spares No Expense on Office Furniture

The Washington Times this week reported that the Environmental Protection Agency over the past decade has spent a whopping $92.4 million to purchase, rent, install and store office furniture, or about $6,000 for every one of the agency’s 15,492 employees

Inside the Beltway

Pope Francis Barely Mentions Climate Change in Speeches at the United Nations, Congress, and the White House
Myron Ebell

Pope Francis cooled his rhetoric on climate change and the need to de-industrialize the world in order to help the poor in his three speeches to political bodies during his first trip to the United States this past week.  Francis and his Vatican entourage arrived direct from Cuba on 22nd September at Andrews Air Force Base, where he was greeted by President and Mrs. Obama.

Appearing the next morning on the White House lawn with the President, the Pope said, “I find it encouraging that you are proposing an initiative for reducing air pollution. Accepting the urgency, it seems clear to me also that climate change is a problem which can no longer be left to a future generation.”

On Thursday morning, Francis became the first Pope to address a joint meeting of Congress.  He didn’t mention climate change once, although he did call on Congress to exert itself to “to avert the most serious effects of the environmental deterioration caused by human activity.”

In his address to the United Nations Sustainable Development Summit at UN headquarters in New York City on 24th September, Pope Francis spoke at length on the connection between protecting the environment and “putting an end to exclusion.”  Francis uses “the excluded” as a catchall term for various categories of downtrodden people. 

His argument is convoluted, but here is perhaps the key passage:

“The misuse and destruction of the environment are also accompanied by a relentless process of exclusion. In effect, a selfish and boundless thirst for power and material prosperity leads both to the misuse of available natural resources and to the exclusion of the weak and disadvantaged….  Economic and social exclusion is a complete denial of human fraternity and a grave offense against human rights and the environment. The poorest are those who suffer most from such offenses, for three serious reasons: they are cast off by society, forced to live off what is discarded and suffer unjustly from the abuse of the environment. They are part of today’s widespread and quietly growing ‘culture of waste’.”

In an indication of his charming naivete, the Pope continued: “The adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development at the World Summit, which opens today, is an important sign of hope. I am similarly confident that the Paris Conference on Climatic Change will secure fundamental and effective agreements.” 

Hilary Clinton Opposes Keystone XL Pipeline
Marlo Lewis

Campaigning in Iowa on Tuesday, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced she opposes the Keystone XL Pipeline. Keystone foes had pressed her for months to declare her opposition, but until this week she took no side in the controversy, explaining that, as former head of the department reviewing the project, she did not want to “second guess” President Obama and Secretary Kerry, and would “wait and see” what they decide. In July, she told a New Hampshire voter who queried her on Keystone, “If it’s still undecided when I become President, I will answer your question.”

Well, officially it’s still undecided, so Clinton’s action confirms what many of us suspected – Obama and Kerry long ago decided to kill the pipeline through a deny-by-delay strategy.

On announcing her opposition, Clinton criticized Keystone as “a distraction from important work we have to do on climate change.” She offered a fuller explanation the next day in a blog post on

“We shouldn’t be building a pipeline dedicated to moving North America’s dirtiest fuel through our communities — we should be focused on what it will take to make America the clean energy superpower of the 21st century. For too long, the Keystone XL pipeline has been a distraction from the real challenges facing our energy sector — and the job-creating investments that we should be making to meet them.”

The Keystone project would be funded solely by private investors putting their own capital at risk. “We” – that is, political elites – shouldn’t allow that. “We” should only allow investment in “clean energy.” Sounds like central planning.

Perhaps Clinton also means Keystone has become a political distraction for self-styled progressives. Keystone was useful when it mobilized green activists after the death of cap-and-trade in 2010, but the big game now is the “Clean Power” Plan and Paris climate treaty. Time to move on.

Clinton says she had to speak out on “an issue that matters so much to so many” because “the effects of climate change have grown more acute,” citing recent U.S. forest fires, the California drought, and “more severe storms and heat waves” around the world. Actually, there is no solid evidence carbon dioxide emissions are increasing the frequency or intensity of extreme weather, and fossil-fueled development remains indispensable for making our naturally-dangerous climate system more livable.

“Over the past five years, a 20-fold increase in the amount of oil shipped by rail has led to devastating accidents,” Clinton remarked, proving that irony can be pretty ironic sometimes. The State Department’s environmental review concluded that blocking the Keystone pipeline would dramatically increase shipments of crude-by-rail, leading to more frequent oil spills, accidents, and fatalities.

Around the World
Myron Ebell

American and Chinese Presidents Agree To Continue To Work Together To Raise U. S. Energy Prices

President Barack Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping issued a three-and-a-half page joint statement on climate change on 25th September during the Chinese leader’s state visit to Washington, DC.  This follows the climate agreement that Presidents Obama and Xi made on 12th November 2014 when Obama visited China.   

Both leaders commit “to work together and with others toward an ambitious, successful Paris outcome” that makes progress toward keeping the increase in the global mean temperature below 2 degrees centigrade.  “Paris outcome” refers to the new international agreement to succeed the Kyoto Protocol that is currently being negotiated and is due to be signed at COP-21 (the seventeenth Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change) in Paris in December.

Press reports have focused on the announcement that China will begin an emissions trading (or cap-and-trade) system for greenhouse gas emissions from electric generation and most industries by 2017.  But just as with the Obama-Xi deal last year, China does not commit to actual emissions reductions. 

Instead, the statement re-affirms “their commitment to reach an ambitious agreement in 2015 that reflects the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, in light of different national circumstances.”  Translated from UN-speak, this means that, as with the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, developed countries will be expected to undertake targets and timetables for reducing emissions, while developing countries will not.

Left unresolved by the joint statement is whether China will continue as a developing country (known as Non-Annex I countries in the UNFCCC) or will move on to the developed country list (Annex I).  The Chinese position has consistently been that they will remain a developing country for several more decades.

To me, the most surprising area of agreement is over transparency.  The joint statement reads: “Both sides support the inclusion in the Paris outcome of an enhanced transparency system to build mutual trust and confidence and promote effective implementation including through reporting and review of action and support in an appropriate manner. It should provide flexibility to those developing countries that need it in light of their capacities.”  The Chinese government has long resisted calls from the European Union and the U. S. to open its internal emissions data to outside inspection and verification.  We’ll have to see what “an enhanced transparency system” amounts to.

Presidents Obama and Xi are also committed to achieving full funding for the Green Climate Fund (or GCF), which is $100 billion per year starting in 2020.  The U. S. share of the GCF will be roughly $30 billion per year.  President Obama’s budget for FY 2016 requests $3 billion over the next four years to help get the GCF off the ground, but the House version of the State Department Appropriations bill prohibits sending any money to the GCF.  China announced that it will provide $3.1 billion “to help developing countries combat climate change.”  It appears that China will distribute funds directly to favored countries and not through the GCF.  

The Cooler Heads Digest is the weekly e-mail publication of the Cooler Heads Coalition. For the latest news and commentary, check out the Coalition’s website,


Cooler Heads Digest 18 September 2015 


18 September 2015

In the News

Dear House: Say NO to the Wind Subsidy
Robert Bradley, Jr., Master Resource, 18 September 2015

20 Climate Scientists Ask Justice Department To Conduct RICO Investigation into Deniers
Judith Curry, Climate Etc., 17 September 2015

Why Democrats Are Wrong To Use the Crude Oil Export Ban as a Bargaining Tactic
Nicolas Loris, The Daily Signal, 17 September 2015

Obama’s Not-So-Grand Energy Strategy: Aimless Authoritarianism
William Yeatman,, 16 September 2015

The President’s Decarbonization Fantasy
Luke Popovich, Washington Examiner, 16 September 2015

Naomi Klein’s Great Leap Backwards
Peter Foster, Financial Post, 15 September 2015

German Energiewende vs. American Fracking: A Tale of Two Energy Revolutions
Isaac Orr, Townhall, 15 September 2015

Is It Time To Stop the Insanity of Wasting Time and Money on More Climate Models
Tim Ball, Watts Up With That? 14 September 2015

News You Can Use
Malaria Deaths Down 60% from 2000, Despite Accelerating AGW

Despite runaway and accelerating anthropogenic global warming, the United Nations this week announced that malaria cases worldwide have been reduced 60% since 2000.

Inside the Beltway
William Yeatman

Historical Perspective on 11 House Republicans Who Support “Doing Something” on Climate Change

On Thursday, 10 republicans in the House of Representatives announced their support for a Sense of Congress Resolution on “conservative environmental stewardship" authored by Rep. Chris Gibson (R-N.Y.). The nonbinding resolution calls for action on climate change that doesn’t hurt the economy, which is a policy contradiction (see Around the World: Decoupling Belied, below). Rep. Gibson’s resolution sidesteps this incongruity and, in fact, provides no specifics at all. Over at, my colleague Marlo Lewis expertly dismantles the ultra-weak logic underlying this latest Constructive Republican Alternative Proposal for “doing something” on climate change.

To Marlo's post, I’d add only an historical perspective. The number of republicans who support Rep. Gibson’s shallow resolution is one-fourth the number of House democrats (43) who voted against a cap-and-trade (the American Clean Energy and Security Act) during Obama’s first term. Eight republicans voted for that bill.

Wind & Solar Industries: They're Mature, and They Can't Cut It as Adults

Last week, the American Wind Energy Association, which serves as wind power’s top lobbying shop, released a report warning that the industry would face a “sharp decline” in 2016, if the Congress does not extend a single subsidy by the end of 2015.

This week, Bloomberg New Energy Finance released a report stating that the solar industry in the U.S. will “nosedive” in 2017, if the Congress fails to extend the industry’s primary subsidy by the end of 2016. The sector’s chief lobbying outfit, the Solar Energy Industries Association, issued a press release supporting the report’s conclusions, and urging the Congress to act.

These reports are impossible to square with the claims, often made by green energy proponents and lobbyists, that solar or wind energy has achieved parity with fossil fuels. (Consider this New York Times headline: “Solar and Wind Energy Start to Win on Price vs. Conventional Fuels.”). If an industry’s existence would come to an end with the expiration of a single tax break, then it cannot be competitive.

Will wind or solar power be competitive, ever? When their tax breaks are secure, the wind and solar lobbies claim they’re vibrant industries; but every time their tax breaks are set to expire, they claim that market maturity is just around the corner, and that they need just one more extension of handouts.

But government support for wind and solar power is not new. Its roots reach back to the Carter administration. Way back then, wind and solar power’s primary problem was their intermittent production of energy. That remains true today. In this fashion, the success of the wind and solar industries is less a function of the wind and solar industries, and more so of the energy storage industry.

In this light, wind and solar energy has matured. It has progressed as far as it can go, and its best effort was to fall well short of market viability. So they’re doomed to perpetual market unreadiness, for as long as the government props them up. This should come as no surprise to anyone who doubts the government’s ability to pick winners in any market.

By extending taxpayer handouts (again) to wind and solar power industries, the Congress would compound (again) its initial mistake by throwing good money after bad (again). For more, see Robert Bradley, Jr.’s excellent post today on Master Resource, “Dear House: Say NO to Wind PTC (10th extension crucial for Obama’s energy/climate agenda).”

Around the World
Decoupling Belied

In 2014, the International Energy Agency reported that global greenhouse gas emissions had stalled, despite positive economic growth. Proponents of “doing something” about climate change seized on this announcement to claim that economic growth had become “decoupled” from increasing greenhouse gas emissions. If true, it suggested that climate change mitigation could be achieved without harming economic growth.

It turns out it wasn’t true. According to an exclusive Reuters report this week, China’s emissions were almost certainly underestimated, and, when more accurate data is used, global emissions actually increased in 2014, in lockstep with economic growth.

The Cooler Heads Digest is the weekly e-mail publication of the Cooler Heads Coalition. For the latest news and commentary, check out the Coalition’s website,


ALG - House to hold oversight hearing on EPA Animas River toxic spill 


Sept. 16, 2015, Fairfax, Va.—Americans for Limited Government President Rick Manning today issued the following statement praising the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) for holding a Sept.17 hearing on the EPA Animas River toxic spill:


"We praise the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the House Resources Committee for holding this important joint hearing on the EPA's Animas River toxic spill, and urge Chairmen Chaffetz and Bishop to use their respective committees' full subpoena powers to get to the bottom of the agency's gross negligence that now endangers the livelihoods of farmers and the Navajo nation."


To view online:




"When will EPA tell the truth about Colorado's Animas River spill?" By ALG President Rick Manning, Sept. 9, 2015 at



Americans for Limited Government is a non-partisan, nationwide network committed to advancing free market reforms, private property rights and core American liberties. For more information on ALG please visit our website at


Watchdog - Did the EPA lie to Congress?


CO mine owner: EPA lied in congressional hearing

The owner of the Gold King Mine says an EPA official lied during a congressional hearing when he said the agency responded to a mine “cave-in,” when in fact EPA contractors created the disaster by barricading the mine last summer.
Read more
Trending Articles
Big guns, big money coming out as battle over the crude oil export ban intensifies
What do Vladimir Putin, Robert Menendez and 10 other members of the U.S. Senate have in common? They’re all targets of a massive and expensive media campaign waged over the 40-year-old ban on U.S. crude oil exports.


Why shouldn’t Missouri become the 26th right-to-work state?
Union organizers who couldn’t persuade a majority of Missouri lawmakers to vote against right-to-work are bent on stopping a two-thirds majority from overriding Gov. Jay Nixon’s veto.


Nanny State
Michigan becomes second state to lose its mind over beer label
You'd think people would be able to tell the difference between baby formula and beer. But common sense hasn't stopped Michigan and New Hampshire from losing their minds over the label on Founders Brewery’s Oatmeal Breakfast Stout,


Overruled: Judge orders Christie to release 'valuable asset'

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie has lost another court battle in his attempt to keep his strategic list of 2,500 media contacts secret. The list is a key cog in his taxpayer-funded publicity machine.
Read more
Watchdog Arena

Can a third party win statewide elections? Here’s one state where it could happen


A third party organization called the Independent Party of Oregon is making waves after registering 5 percent of the electorate. But can the party win a statewide election?



Watchdog Opinion

Decriminalization: The way forward for New Jersey municipalities

The Asbury Park city council has supported legalizing marijuana, but given Governor Chris Christie's opposition to legalization, it is largely a symbolic gesture.

Get on Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube!
Know something we don't? Email us at is a project of Franklin Center for Government and Public Integrity