There is also the constant conflating of climate policy with climate science in order to make subjective and ideological policy choices seem as if the science dictates those choices. But science informs policy, it does not provide objective answers to policy questions. However, those who disagree with the climate policy choices favored by extremists are labeled with offensive terms like deniers.
The Competitive Enterprise Institute rejects climate policies that assume Americans and humans all over the world must sacrifice their quality of living, be guilted into radical life changes, and give up on improving their standard of living in the name of fighting climate change. Even if the United States no longer existed, there would be little to no meaningful impact on global temperatures. Therefore, the myriad of extreme policies are all costs and no gain.
Using the force of government to impose policies that severely hurt humans today, especially the poor, without any meaningful benefits is not just foolish but indefensible. And when such policies are advanced, the proponents of those policies should always be expected to explain how their policy choices would meaningfully affect global temperatures. When they are unable to provide answers, which will be the case, their policy choices should be quickly dismissed.
The best way to deal with any genuine climate concerns is to remove government obstacles that hinder innovation, reduce wealth, and undermine prosperity and opportunity. Economic liberty benefits Americans generally, and at the same time, it is also the world’s best climate policy. After all, the wealthiest and most prosperous nations are far more likely to develop solutions to such problems than other nations.
Featured Posts

Blog
UN report says tree planting can result in more greenhouse gas emissions
It is common knowledge that trees act as carbon sinks. Through the process of photosynthesis, trees take in carbon dioxide and release oxygen that we…

Blog
Congress can end California’s EV mandates
This week, the House is expected to vote on three important Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolutions of disapproval that would repeal California waivers granted…

Blog
Earth Day is broken—only private conservation can fix it
With this week’s 2025 Earth Day came the usual media and progressive lawmaker fanfare lauding government programs and regulatory solutions to environmental concerns. But…
Search Posts
Blog
Climate Risk, Climate Policy, and the Ukraine Crisis
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) sea-level rise report made a media splash when the agency released it in February. Headlines in the…
Fox and Friends First
VIDEO: Myron Ebell Joins Fox & Friends First
Director for the Center for Energy and Environment Myron Ebell joins ‘Fox & Friends First’ to discuss President Biden’s Russian oil ban and the need…
Blog
Climate Change as an “Existential Threat” Is So 2021
President Joe Biden confirmed in his State of the Union address to Congress on March 1 that climate change was last…
Blog
Clean Power Plan Litigation: The Supreme Court Should Rein in the EPA
On Monday, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency. Depending on how the Court decides it, the case…
Blog
Disregard the U.N.’s Latest Climate Screed
The second big part of the newly released Sixth Assessment Report of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)—also known as the…
Blog
FERC Ignores CEI’s Advice to Steer Clear of Climate Policy
The Social Cost of Carbon (SCC) is a deeply flawed attempt to assign a dollar value to the cumulative climate-related damages caused by…
Staff & Scholars

Sam Kazman
Counsel Emeritus
- Antitrust
- Automobiles and Roads
- Banking and Finance

Marlo Lewis, Jr.
Senior Fellow
- Climate
- Energy
- Energy and Environment

Ben Lieberman
Senior Fellow
- Climate
- Consumer Freedom
- Energy

Jacob Tomasulo
Policy Analyst
- Climate
- Energy
- Energy and Environment

Kevin D. Williamson
Writer in Residence
- Climate
- Energy and Environment