LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Archives


SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Archives

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Archives


SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE@LIST.UVM.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Home

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Home

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE  June 2005

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE June 2005

Subject:

Bush aide joins ExxonMobil

From:

Phil Gasper <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Science for the People Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Fri, 17 Jun 2005 21:27:05 -0700

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (188 lines)

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/jun2005/coon-j18.shtml

Bush aide who doctored global warming documents joins ExxonMobil

By Joseph Kay
18 June 2005

A Bush aide who reportedly altered government climate reports to favor
the interests of the oil industry has resigned from the administration
to take a job at ExxonMobil, the world’s largest energy company and most
fervent opponent of carbon emissions regulations. For the aide, Philip
Cooney, the move completes a cycle in which he has served the interests
of the oil giants both in and out of government.

The New York Times reported June 8 that, during his tenure as chief of
staff for the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), Cooney
repeatedly altered government scientific reports to deemphasize the link
between carbon emissions and global warming, and cast doubt on the
science of climate change.

The newspaper obtained the internal government documents from the
Government Accountability Project, which is representing Rick Piltz, a
former associate at the federal Climate Change Science Program that
coordinates government research on global warming and related issues.
Piltz’s office issued the documents that were later altered by Cooney.

One example of Cooney’s changes cited by the Times comes from an October
2002 draft entitled “Our Changing Planet.” The draft originally read,
“Many scientific observations indicate that the Earth is undergoing a
period of relatively rapid change.” This was modified to read, “Many
scientific observations point to the conclusion that the Earth may be
undergoing a period of relatively rapid change.”

Many of the changes were of a similar character—subtle rewordings that
cast greater doubt on the conclusiveness of scientific understandings of
climate change. On one occasion, he deleted a paragraph describing
projected effects of global warming on glacial melting, on the grounds
that the paragraph strayed “into speculative musings/findings.”

Cooney has no scientific training. Before taking the post of chief of
staff at the CEQ, he worked as a lawyer and lobbyist for the American
Petroleum Institute, the main oil industry lobbying group, which is
heavily funded by Exxon. The API has worked consistently to promote
doubts about the validity of climate change research and has opposed
legislation that would require the energy industry to reduce carbon
dioxide emissions.

This is not the first exposure of the CEQ’s efforts to tone down
government reports on climate change. In June 2003, the council modified
an Environmental Protection Agency report on the environment, excising
parts of a long section on global warming. The original draft stated,
“Climate change has global consequences for human health and the
environment.” This was changed to say that climate change “may have
potentially profound consequences,” but that “the complexity of the
earth system ... makes it a scientific challenge to document change.”

The CEQ demanded that the EPA remove a reference to a National Academy
of Science review confirming that climate change is caused by human
activity, in particular the production of carbon dioxide through the
burning of fossil fuels. It also had the EPA add a reference to a
discredited study funded in part by the API that discounted the evidence
of climate change.

Commenting on the latest revelations, Piltz wrote in a memorandum to top
government officials responsible for climate change policy, “I have not
seen a situation like the one that has developed under this
administration during the past four years, in which politicization by
the White House has fed back directly into the science program in such a
way as to undermine the credibility and integrity of the program.” A
senior EPA scientist told the Times that the administration’s direct
interference on scientific issues “has somewhat of a chilling effect and
has created a sense of frustration” among scientists.

Perhaps more than any other energy company, Exxon—by some measures the
most valuable US company—has exerted direct influence on American
policy. Vice President Dick Cheney reportedly met with the company’s
head, Lee Raymond, within weeks of Cheney’s inauguration. Exxon also
featured prominently in the energy task force discussions headed by
Cheney in 2001, during which the Bush administration’s energy policy was
planned and, reportedly, maps of Iraqi oilfields were examined. Records
of these discussions remain secret after a federal appeals court in May
dismissed a lawsuit seeking their release.

According to a June 8 article in the British Guardian, Exxon was
particularly active in urging the administration to oppose the Kyoto
protocol on global warming, a relatively mild international agreement
that sets out some standards for carbon dioxide emissions reductions.
The US decided to withdraw from the protocol in the spring of 2001, one
of the Bush administration’s first policy decisions.

The Guardian cites US Undersecretary of State for Global Affairs Paula
Dobriansky’s briefing paper for her meeting with the Global Climate
Coalition, an industry organization dominated by Exxon and other energy
giants. The paper, one of several documents obtained by Greenpeace
through a Freedom of Information Act request, states, “Potus [President
of the United States] rejected Kyoto in part based on input from you
[the GCC].” Dobriansky was further briefed to the effect that the
administration considered Exxon “among the companies most actively and
prominently opposed to binding approaches to cut greenhouse gas emissions.”

According to the Guardian, “Other papers suggest that Ms. Dobriansky
should sound out Exxon executives and other anti-Kyoto business groups
on potential alternatives to Kyoto.”

Recent reports demonstrate that the Bush administration continues an
active policy aimed at scuttling any international agreements or
documents that address global warming, including ongoing discussions
among the eight major industrialized countries on methods to confront
climate change. Citing documents it obtained relating to these
discussions, the Washington Post reported June 17: “Under US pressure,
negotiators in the past month have agreed to delete language that would
detail how rising temperatures are affecting the globe, set ambitions
targets to cut carbon dioxide emissions and set stricter environmental
standards for World Bank-funded power projects.”

According to the Post, the US pressured the other countries to delete a
section pointing to “increasingly compelling evidence of climate change”
and warning that unless “urgent action is taken, there will be a growing
risk of adverse effects on economic development, human health and the
natural environment, and of irreversible long-term changes to our
climate and oceans.” In its place was inserted the sentence: “Climate
change is a serious long term challenge that has the potential to affect
every part of the globe.”

The attempt by the Bush administration and the energy giants to cast
doubt on the reality of global warming contrasts sharply with the
scientific consensus that has emerged over the past several years. This
consensus has concluded that not only is human-caused global warming
taking place, but it is having a serious and potentially catastrophic
effect on the environment.

Earlier this year, 200 of the world’s leading climate scientists meeting
in Britain issued an urgent warning that “the point of no return” for
climate change could be reached within a decade. The scientists reported
that carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere must be kept below
400 parts per million if global warming is to be contained. The average
concentration already exceeds 370 ppm and is increasing rapidly.

The year 2004 was the fourth warmest year on record, following 1998,
2002 and 2003, which were the first, second and third warmest years
respectively. A study published by the journal Nature in February found
that, based upon indirect temperature records found in tree rings and
other natural phenomena, the global warming trend since 1990 has not
been matched for at least 2,000 years.

In January 2005, Rajendra Pachauri, the chairman of the United Nations
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which comprises more than
2,000 of the world’s scientific experts on global warming, warned, “We
are risking the ability of the human race to survive.”

The Bush administration’s attempt to undermine the science of global
warming is only one of many examples of the government’s contempt for
science when it conflicts with the interests of big business and the
dogma of the administration’s Christian fundamentalist base. A report
from the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) in March 2004 pointed to “a
well-established pattern of suppression and distortion of scientific
findings by high-ranking Bush administration political appointees across
numerous federal agencies.”

A survey conducted by the UCS, released in February 2005, found that
more than 200 scientists employed by the US Fish and Wildlife Service
said they had been directed to change their findings in a way that would
reduce environmental protections.

The service Cooney has rendered the oil industry, both in and out of
public office, is only one example of the extremely close ties between
the government and big business.

A June 17 New York Times editorial points to three other examples of the
so-called revolving door: William Myers III, who served as a lobbyist
for the mining and cattle industries before becoming a top lawyer in the
Interior Department and now a nominee for a federal appeals court that
oversees Western states; Mark Rey, a lobbyist for the logging industry
who is now undersecretary for natural resources and the environment in
the Agriculture Department; and Robert McCallum, a former lawyer for a
firm that did business with RJ Reynolds, who, as associate attorney
general, played a major role in undermining the government’s own case
against the tobacco industry earlier this month.

Another example is that of Larisa Dobiansky, the sister of Paula
Dobriansky, the under secretary for global affairs cited above. Larisa
currently works at the Energy Department as the deputy assistant
secretary for national energy policy. Before this she worked on climate
change for ExxonMobil as part of the law firm, Akin Gump.

At no time in American history has there been a government so openly
composed of the direct representatives of big business.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
May 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LIST.UVM.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager