CEI Today: EPA Lisa Jackson email scandal, BPA chemical study, and the Supreme Court on global warming
EPA LISA JACKSON EMAIL SCANDAL - CHRISTOPHER HORNER
Author Chris Horner on the secrets being kept in the White House.
BPA CHEMICAL STUDY
Science is a long-term process that only brings meaning when numerous, scientifically robust studies produce consistent results. But when it comes to politically loaded issues — such as chemical safety — a single study with a “weak association” and a small pool of subjects can capture headlines ad nauseam, creating the impression that consumers face a looming public health crisis where none really exists.
What will mainstream news outlets and anti-BPA activists make of one of the more recent studies, which reports that a prior study indicting BPA as an “obesogen” (a chemical that makes you fat!) is not reproducible.
It is worth noting, that this new study included 10 times the number of subjects (in this case mice), which makes its findings a bit more meaningful.
SUPREME COURT & GLOBAL WARMING - MARLO LEWIS
In 2011 a coalition of industry groups, states, and non-profits petitioned the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn all four greenhouse gas rules: endangerment, tailpipe, triggering, and tailoring.
In June 2012, a 3-judge panel decided the case, Coalition for Responsible Regulation v. EPA, in favor of the agency, upholding all four GHG rules.
In August, coalition members petitioned for an en banc (full court) rehearing.
On December 20, the court voted 5-2 to deny the petitions.
However, the dissenting opinions of Judges Janice Rogers Brown and Brett Kavanaugh are so cogently argued that the Supreme Court may decide to review the case. The Court might even reassess its ruling in Mass. v. EPA.