14 November 2014

In the News
Fossil Fuels: The Moral Choice
Alex Epstein, Fox News, 14 November 2014
The Wind Lobbys Case against the PTC Extension
Robert Bradley, Jr., Master Resource, 14 November 2014
Obama Touts Energy Taxes as a Way To Fight Global Warming
Michael Bastasch, Daily Caller, 14 November 2014
Dr. Mann, Super-Villain
Mark Steyn, Steyn Online, 14 November 2014
Interstellars Rejection of Climate Change Hysteria
Sonny Bunch, Washington Free Beacon, 14 November 2014
Tom Steyer Provides a Lesson in How To Waste $67 Million
Thomas Pyle, Investors Business Daily, 13 November 2014
Study: Energy Jobs Lead the Recovery
Joshua Cain, Fuel Fix, 13 November 2014
The Audacity of Climate Cynicism
Washington Examiner editorial, 13 November 2014
Carbon Tax Advocates Discuss Post-Election Prospects
Marlo Lewis, GlobalWarming.org, 12 November 2014
The Coming Climate Onslaught
Andrew Restuccia & Erica Martinson, Politico, 11 November 2014
IPCCs Latest Report: The End Is Nigh Unless Mankind Repents Its Fuelish Ways
Marlo Lewis, CNS News, 10 November 2014
Unquestionably One-Sided Climate Change Coverage
Tom Harris, Washington Times, 10 November 2014

News You Can Use

The One Statistic Climate Catastrophists Dont Want You to Know
According to the Cato Institutes Pat Michaels, in the decade from 2004 to 2013, worldwide climaterelated deaths (including droughts, floods, extreme temperatures, wildfires, and storms) plummeted to
a level 88.6 percent below that of the peak decade, from 1930 to 1939.

Inside the Beltway

Myron Ebell

Reid Rushes Senate Vote on Keystone Pipeline To Try To Save

Landrieu
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reids (D-Nev.) strategy to keep Democratic incumbents from being voted
out of office by keeping floor votes to a minimum failed miserably on 4th November. Voters sent
Democratic incumbents packing in Arkansas, Colorado, Alaska, and North Carolina. As a result of those
defeats plus Democratic losses in open seat races in West Virginia, Montana, Iowa, and South Dakota,
Republicans will take control of the Senate when the 114th Congress is sworn in on 3rd January
Now, to try to save Senator Mary Landrieu (D-La.) from defeat in a 6th December runoff with Rep. Bill
Cassidy (R-La.), Reid wants to have a vote on a bill to approve construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline
from Albertas oil sands, across the Canada-U.S. border and down to Cushing, Okla., where it would
hook up with the southern leg of the pipeline that has already been constructed and is operating
(because pipelines that dont cross an international border dont require presidential approval). The
Senate is currently scheduled to vote on the bill on Tuesday, 18th November. However, with Reid in
control of the Senate schedule, that could change several times.
It can be seen from past votes that all 45 Republican Senators and 12 Democratic Senators will vote yes
on Keystone. That is three votes short of the 60 needed to surmount procedural hurdles and pass the
bill. So Senator Landrieu, chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, has been lobbying
several Democratic colleagues furiously to come up with three more votes. As of Friday afternoon,
Senators Thomas Carper (D-Del.) and Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) have announced that they will switch.
It really doesnt matter whether Landrieu finds the sixtieth vote or not. She is almost certain to lose to
Cassidy in the runoff because she got 42% of the vote on election day, while Cassidy got 41% and Rob
Maness, the other Republican in the race, got 14%. Nor is it clear what passing Keystone out of the
Democratic-controlled Senate will do to help Landrieu. The White House is still signaling that President
Obama may veto the bill. And if it doesnt reach the presidents desk this month, it surely will early next
year when Republicans control the Senate.
Thats why the Republican leadership in the House did not stand in the way. On Friday, 14th November,
the House voted 252 to 161 in favor of H. R. 5682, which approves the Keystone Pipeline. Thirty-one

Democrats votes Yes. This is the ninth time the House has passed a Keystone bill. Oh, and by the way,
the sponsor of H. R. 5682 is Rep. Bill Cassidy.
If the Senate goes along next Tuesday, expect anti-Keystone activists led by billionaire Democratic donor
Tom Steyer and Bill McKibbens 350.org to form a human chain around the White House, as they did on
4th March. Currently, 350.org is planning a rally on the Mall in Washington on 17th February 2015,
which is Presidents Day.

Across the States

William Yeatman

Southern Co. CEO: EPAs Clean Power Plan Would Cause Rolling
Blackouts
In an interview two days ago with Bloomberg, Thomas Fanning, the CEO of Southern Company, which
provides electricity service to a four state region in the southeast, said that I dont think we have the
ability to maintain a reliable system and also comply with EPAs Clean Power Plan.
Fannings statement is only the latest warning about the threat to electric reliability posed by EPAs rule.
In recent testimony before the House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission Commissioner Philip Moeller voiced his concern about the possibility of
cascading blackouts within the 15 state region served by the Midcontinent Independent Service
Operator. And in October comments to the EPA, the Southwest Power Pool, a regional transmission
organization that serves an 8 state region, warned that the rule, if left unchanged, would cause rolling
blackouts within its footprint. Thus, grid operators from 27 States have issued warnings that the EPAs
Clean Power Plan could turn out the lights.

Around the World

Myron Ebell

Obama, Xi Agree on Meaningless Climate Deal

U. S. President Barack Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping announced a commitment by both
countries to limit greenhouse gas emissions by 2025-30, at the end of the APEC summit meeting in China
on Wednesday. President Obama pledged that the United States would reduce it emissions by 26-28%
below 2005 levels by 2025, while President Xi pledged that Chinas emissions would peak by around
2030, with the intention to try to peak early, and to increase the share of non-fossil fuel share of all
energy to around 20% by 2030. That quote is from the White House fact sheet on the agreement.
The Obama Administrations long-stated goal has been to reduce emissions by 17% below 2005 levels by
2020. That works out to an annual cut of 1.2% from 2005 onward. The new goal would require a much

faster rate of cuts. The White House calculated that if the faster rate doesnt begin until 2020, then the
annual cut would work out to 2.3-2.8% from 2020 to 2025.
It is not clear what President Xis commitment means, but President Obamas signature on the deal has
no legal force. And it will be up to future Presidents and Congresses after he leaves office in January
2017 to decide whether to require the emissions reductions agreed to.
Leaders of the official climate establishment quickly claimed that the U. S.-China agreement will provide
new momentum to the international negotiations on a successor agreement to the Kyoto Protocol,
which will continue at the annual United Nations climate conference in December in Lima. A new
international agreement is supposed to be signed at the next UN conference scheduled for December
2015 in Paris.
Here for example is what former Senator Timothy Wirth said in a written statement: Todays
announcement is the political breakthrough weve been waiting for. If the two biggest players on
climate are able to get together, from two very different perspectives, the rest of the world can see that
its possible to make real progress. Wirth is the vice chairman of Ted Turners United Nations
Foundation and served as Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs during the Clinton Administration,
where he prepared the groundwork for the Kyoto Protocol in 1997.
However, it doesnt appear that there is much that is new in the agreement. The Reuters story by David
Stanway reporting from the APEC (Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation) summit in Beijing got it right in
the headline: China, US agree limits on emissions, but experts see little new.
Stanway continues:
For China, the targets add little to its existing commitments to wean itself off carbon, environmental
experts said. The statement is an upbeat signal to motivate other countries, but the timeline China has
committed to is not a binding target, said Li Junfeng, an influential Chinese climate policy adviser linked
to Chinas state planning agency, the National Development and Reform Commission.
There is also the little obstacle of Congress. Republicans take control of the Senate in
January. Majorities in both the House and Senate will be opposed to the Obama Administrations
climate agenda. It seems certain that they will be even more opposed to the new 26% cut by 2025 goal
than they are to the 17% by 2020 goal. My guess is that there will be votes on a resolution disavowing
President Obamas new commitments in both the House and Senate early in the 114th Congress.
That would complicate the State Departments plans to announce its commitments that will be part of
the Paris accord by the end of March. In fact, if the House and Senate do disavow the deal with China, it
would be a major international embarrassment to President Obama and would be a severe blow to the
chances for a significant agreement in Paris in December 2015.

Reactions to Obama-Xi Climate Agreement

Among many insightful commentaries on the O-Xi deal, I recommend my CEI colleague Chris Horners
post on GlobalWarming.org on the potential legal consequences and Rupert Darwalls post on National
Review Online on the economic consequences. The Onion had the best headline: China Vows To Begin
Aggressively Falsifying Air Pollution Numbers.
The establishment press and leftist columnists were ecstatic. Heres a sample. New York Times editorial
headline: A major breakthrough on climate change. Washington Post editorial headline: A landmark
climate deal. Paul Krugman in the NY Times: We have a deal, and its pretty big. Fred Krupp,
president of the Environmental Defense Fund, in a Wall Street Journal op-ed: A game-changing climate
deal. And Al Gores group, the Climate Reality Project, began its e-mail on the O-Xi deal: Climate wins
dont come much bigger.
Politico reporter Michael Grunwald damped down the enthusiasm in a long article that points out the
agreement was just words. Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani gave Politico this pithy
analysis: "We have plans to continue to reduce emissions and we have agreed to continue to increase
those plans to reduce emissions. And we have, over the years, shown our good faith by actually doing
that. So, that's our quid. What's the pro quo? They're going to continue to emit carbon and then after
16 years, they're going to freeze that emission, as far as I can tell, at the level they bring it up to in 16
years. Investors Business Daily had a good editorial slamming the deal that included a useful graph.
Republican leaders in Congress were quick to announce that the Presidents climate deal with China
didnt stand a chance in Congress. Senator James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.) called it a charade. And here is
Senator Mitch McConnells (R-Ky.) reaction. Inhofe will become chairman of the Environment and Public
Works Committee in January. McConnell will become majority leader of the Senate.