From The Washington Free Beacon, Lachlan Markay. Press release follows.
Internal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) emails show extensive collaboration between top agency officials and leading environmentalist groups, including overt efforts to coordinate messaging and pressure the fossil fuel industry.
The emails, obtained by the Energy and Environment Legal Institute (EELI) through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, could fuel an ongoing controversy over EPA policies that critics say are biased against traditional sources of energy.
Emails show EPA used official events to help environmentalist groups gather signatures for petitions on agency rulemaking, incorporated advance copies of letters drafted by those groups into official statements, and worked with environmentalists to publicly pressure executives of at least one energy company.
Nancy Grantham, director of public affairs for EPA Region 1, which covers New England, asked an organizer for the Sierra Club’s New Hampshire chapter to share the group’s agenda so EPA could adjust its messaging accordingly in an email dated March 12, 2012.
“If you could, it would great [sic] if you can send me an email describing what you would like to do in early April in NH–that way I can coordinate messaging with our air offices here and at HQ,” Grantham wrote.
Critics of the agency and its nonprofit allies were surprised by the cooperation.
“The level of coordination in these documents is shocking,” EELI said in a statement.
http://freebeacon.com/emails-show-extensive-collaboration-between-epa-environmentalist-orgs/
=============================================================
For Immediate Release:
January 14, 2014
Contact:
Craig Richardson
703-981-5553
Plans by EPA and Sierra Club to cripple coal industry exposed by FOIA Documents Obtained as a Result of E&E Legal FOIA Request
Washington, D.C. — A 2012 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed by the Energy & Environment Legal Institute (E&E Legal), under its former name, the American Tradition Institute, has produced several hundred documents affirming the uncomfortably close working relationship between the current U.S. Environmental Agency (EPA) and activist left-wing environmental groups in their effort to make abundant energy resources, particularly coal, much more scarce in America.
These records come in a series of productions in litigation spawned by two specific FOIA requests — a lawsuit filed after an EPA FOIA specialist admitted she and her colleague were instructed to do no work on the requests, as EELI counsel Chris Horner attested in a sworn affidavit. Mostly e-mails between EPA top officials and the Sierra Club, the records illustrate how certain EPA employees with backgrounds working for green pressure groups serve as liaisons to those groups in advancing a shared agenda. Other documents affirm the close advisory role the pressure groups play in key EPA actions, like EPA’s recently published New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for new coal-fired plants.
This collaboration takes place in many forms: emails providing, e.g., a list of coal plants the green groups insist any EPA standards block from coming or staying on-line, meetings at EPA and at the green groups’ offices where EPA comes to brief them, frequent conference calls, and at the Starbucks at Washington’s J.W. Marriott, across the street from EPA.
The latter is reminiscent of the Caribou Coffee revelations about this most transparent, White House, in history arranging off-site meetings with other lobbyists to avoid signing them in to the building (see, e.g., New York Times reportage of this subterfuge, here.)
The level of coordination in these documents is shocking, showing, for example, Sierra Club strategizing with EPA’s former green group activists, and other senior Obama appointees, about killing the coal and coal-fired electricity industries, even sharing a joke in one particular email saying EPA administrator Gina McCarthy had her “pants on fire” when assuring those parties they would remain viable under EPA’s regulations.
The e-mails show the central players to be two EPA officials who worked in the agency’s policy office at the time of the e-mails, Michael Goo (former legislative director of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) who left EPA for a senior Department of Energy post), Alex Baron, and EPA senior counsel Joe Goffman (a former EDF lawyer). They all work closely with John Coequyt, who heads the Sierra Club’s “Beyond Coal” campaign.
In one e-mail Coequyt sent to Goo and Barron, he said,
“Attached is a list of plants that companies said were shelved because of uncertainty around GHG [greenhouse gas] regulations. If a standard is set that these plants could meet, there is a small chance that they [sic] company could decide to revive the proposal.”
Coequyt is clearly signaling that that if the EPA sets achievable standards, proposed power plants on hold as the new standards are developed could ultimately be built, which is contrary to his group’s agenda.
Last week, the EPA finally released their New Source Performance Standards, four months after first announcing them.. The American Coalition for Clean Coal Energy (ACCCE), which plans to take the EPA to court over the new regulations, questioned what EPA was up to during those four months that it took the agency to post its NSPS.
Numerous other emails show close collaboration on EPA public hearings to generate support for the rule.
“ACCCE asks a very relevant question, if one that EPA’s own mail answers,” added Horner, the lawyer handling the lawsuit. “After reviewing the e-mails between one of the chief outside organizations in the war on coal, and their allies in the EPA, it’s clear that this process was one of trying to develop standards to kill the future of coal in America. And being less than honest about it, even according to their own allies in candid moments.”
Released documents as a result of E&E Legal’s FOIA request include:
· CCS PERMIT NEED, SO2 ROLLOUT.pdf
· COLLABORATION ON PUBLIC HEARINGS.pdf
· DOING EACH OTHERS HOMEWORK.pdf
· EPA COMING TO GREENS TO BRIEF.pdf
· GENERAL RE CLOSENESS: ALIGNMENT.pdf
· GREEN GROUPS AS PRIORITY PARTNERS.pdf
· MUST KILL COAL PRODUCTIONS.pdf
· PARTNERS ON CAIR: TRANSPORT.pdf
The Energy & Environment Legal Institute (E&E Legal) is a 501(c)(3) organization engaged in strategic litigation, policy research, and public education on important energy and environmental issues. Primarily through its petition litigation and transparency practice areas, E&E Legal seeks to correct onerous federal and state policies that hinder the economy, increase the cost of energy, eliminate jobs, and do little or nothing to improve the environment.
-30-
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
That’s good news especially now this “special relationship” between EPA and the Environmentalist groups is so well documented.
We will use this information at the American version of the upcoming “Neurenburg Trials” which will take place before we hang the bastards (LOL)
I’m sure the major news media will be VERY silent about this.
i believe this first of two programs, which conflates carbon & carbon dioxide from start to finish, needs a thread of its own and maximum exposure:
on BBC’s CAGW Central these days: BUSINESS, i repeat, BUSINESS Daily – with Justin Rowlatt. excerpts below begin about half-way through, with Chris Mottershead, Vice Principal for Research, Kings College, London, oil man, former head of Energy Security at BP:
Rowlatt: can we successfully deal with climate change & CLOSE DOWN these OLD, DIRTY coal-fired power stations & find clean ways of producing energy?
Mottershead: yes, there are more than enough solutions available. we could make serious inroads if we chose to: energy efficiency, renewables, nuclear, & of course you can use carbon capture, put the carbon back underground in a safe way… Kyoto tried, not the way to do it. China/US responsible for 42% of emissions, simple process, the two should sit down, agree & the world would follow their leadership.
Rowlatt: it would be sensible, but there’s no sign of them wanting to do it, is there?
Mottershead:i think there’s LOT OF SIGNS IN CHINA. China is going to build out an energy infrastructure. the cost of building one that’s a LOWER-CARBON infrastructure is a MARGINAL increase on what they were going to do…
Rowlatt: additional cost on consumers, tough sell for politicians.
Mottershead: yes, but if we don’t price the carbon emissions, we won’t make the necessary changes.
Rowlatt: so, are democracies capable of getting to grip to the challenge? I spoke to another oil man, John Hofmeister, former chairman of Shell Oil Company until 2008. is the world ready to make the leap to a CARBON-FREE ECONOMY.
Hofmeister: we’re going to use hydrocarbons into the future as far as we can see.
Rowlatt: but if u look at the science, we’re going to suffer very serious climate effects, harder to for humans to live on the planet &, by the time people realise that, & they DEMAND CHANGE from their leaders, it will be too late.
Hofmeister: and i agree with u. concern for the environment is now 22 out of 25 among priorities for the US public.
Rowlatt: are you saying, this is a failure of democracy
Hofmeister: it’s not the form, it’s the performance of govt that matters. democracy’s performance is TERRIBLE. largely because money influences the democratic outcomes.
Rowlatt: inherently politicans think short-term.
Hofmeister: i use the expression “political-time” meaning the time between elections trumps energy times or environmental time, all the time, ABSENT A CRISIS THAT PUSHES THE POPULAR WILL to do something very differently.
Rowlatt: is your argument that, until the climate gets really bad, there’ll be no political leadership.
Hofmeister: most of us alive today will be dead, but our children will suffer – we will have placed on our children & grandchildren a burden we were not willing to bear…
if govt doesn’t lead, we will really COOK OURSELVES, ALMOST LITERALLY, before we deal with this issue. it’s sad, but it is the case today.
education matters, information matters, grassroot conversation matters, but even that is hard to do sometimes because you have “THE DENIERS” ((LAUGHTER) & the deniers make the case every time there is a snowstorm in the United States.
Rowlatt: i have to say, this analysis of yours is very depressing.
Hofmeister: life’s hard & choices have to be made. the more people are aware of…the better choices can be made. any responsible person, parent, owes it to be children, owes it to employees to say what they think.
22.20: R: if this week’s Element program has left you depressed, fear not. tune in next week, for PART TWO of CARBON, in which we explore the many amazing properties of CARBON MATERIAL, some of which could help us overcome our addiction to fossil fuels.
(this is a longer version than at iPlayer)
23 mins: 15 Jan: BBC Business Daily: Elemental Business – Carbon
with Justin Rowlatt
Wed, 15 Jan 14
Carbon, the fundamental building block of life, source of virtually all our energy and a source of incredible world-wide wealth; but what happens when we hit a carbon crunch?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/bizdaily
15 Jan: BBC iPlayer Version 17 mins: Elemental Business – Carbon
In our series examining the world economy from the perspective of the chemical elements, we look at how the industrial revolution was really an energy revolution driven by carbon-based fossil fuels. Chemistry professor Andrea Sella of University College London and his geology colleague professor Mark Maslin explain the chemical wizardry that makes carbon the ultimate fuel. We hear from Dr Paul Warde an industrial historian at the University of East Anglia, about how the ‘C’ element has powered the longest and most sustained economic boom in the history of humanity. But how long can it last? Can we expect the mother of all crashes when the carbon crunch finally comes? Two former oil men, Chris Mottershead, former head of energy security at BP and now vice principal for research at King’s College in London and John Hofmeister, former president of Shell Oil, give us their perspectives on the whether the world is ready to tackle its addiction to fossil fuels, before the fuel runs out and in time to avert a looming climate change disaster.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p01pgpz3/Business_Daily_Elemental_Business_Carbon/
Justin Rowlatt’s two guests above:
CAMAC ENERGY: John Hofmeister, Director
The former president of Shell Oil Company and veteran of multiple industries for over 35 years, Mr. Hofmeister has held key leadership positions at General Electric, Nortel and AlliedSignal (now Honeywell International).
He currently serves as Chairman of the National Urban League and is a member of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technical Advisory Committee.
Upon retirement from Shell Oil, Mr. Hoifmeister founded the not-for-profit Citizens for Affordable Energy, a nationwide membership association, which promotes sound U.S. energy security solutions…
OVERVIEW: CAMAC Energy Inc. (NYSE MKT: CAK) operates as an independent oil and gas exploration and production company focused on energy resources in Africa. Its asset portfolio consists of 8 licenses covering an area of 41,000 square kilometers, including production and other projects offshore Nigeria, as well as exploration licenses offshore and onshore Kenya, and offshore Gambia. CAMAC Energy is headquartered in Houston, Texas.
http://www.camacenergy.com/john-hofmeister.php
Chris Mottershead: King’s College: Vice-Principal (Research and Innovation)
He joined King’s College London in 2009 after retiring from BP, where he worked for 30 years, most recently as their Global Advisor on Energy Security and Climate Change.
Prior to this he was Technology Vice President for the Global Gas, Power and Renewables businesses, and was also the technical manager for its North Sea exploration and production activities…
As well as his College accountabilities, he is a non-Executive Director of the Carbon Trust, Francis Crick Institute and Imanova, a Governor of King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and a member of the Scientific Advisory Group of the Department of Energy and Climate Change in the UK as well as the Advisory Board of the National Center of Atmospheric Research in the US.
http://www.kcl.ac.uk/aboutkings/principal/centralteam/vpri.aspx
This collusion is why progressives always ASSUME their “enemies” are doing the same thing.
They assume everyone is as corrupt (for a cause of course) as they are.
It’s why they believe others can’t be trusted with guns, because they know THEY can’t be trusted.
Do you know how the Chinese solved their drug problem in the 30s? Let’s pass on the Holder’s “justice system”.
The rot is deep in DC. But the revelation that there is no science in the EPA is not a surprise. That has been apparent since they decided CO2 was a pollutant.
Karma? Where are you! Karma?….
Is anyone Shocked? Well is anyone surprised then? or did you at least raise an eyebrow? Me neither.
EPA derives its big size bureaucracy and power from those groups so that is not a surprise.
Under the powers enumerated in Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution, the federal government has absolutely no power or authority to implement environmental policy. Under the 9th and 10th Amendments, the individual States have the right to set pollution standards for their state.
If individual states set their own pollution standards, the people and corporations would vote with their feet and their dollars to determine what environmental policies meet their constituent’s needs. If pollution standards are too severe, the citizens may enjoy cleaner air/water but fewer industrial jobs, if pollution standards are too lax, they’ll live in a cesspool and no one in their right mind would live there.
The States are perfectly capable of determining and enforcing suitable environmental policies that meet the desires of their constituents and product liability/class action suits are capable of keep businesses in check that choose to act irresponsibly.
The EPA is obviously run by leftist eco-warriors that have no have no concept of cost/benefit analysis and has destroyed entire industries. The EPA ha made manufacturing in the US extremely difficult, time consuming, expensive and uncompetitive, and contributed to: the US losing 10’s of millions of good-paying manufacturing jobs, much higher costs of goods and lowered our standards of living.
Well of course they are. They all have the same terrible goal.
Next they’ll be telling us AlGore uses a lot of energy.
There seems to be no repercussions for anything that happens in America.
Where is your justice department? Where is your opposition party? Where is your media?
My deepest condolences.
Do not give up on the MSM before giving them a chance. Go to every news website and search on “epa foi” or something like that a few times over the next few days.
These are only the communications where the EPA folks used their official e-mail addresses – we can only guess as to the content of the messages which were delivered via the alternate (i.e. illegal) e-mail accounts that are used to avoid compliance with legal requirements. Those might be a bit juicier…
As usual nothing will come of this…. The ATI is wasting its time and money. The only thing is to boot him out next election and put a staunch ant AGW person in. This is doubtful too knowing the Republicans…It may take 50 years or more before changes occur…
Dave in Canmore,
Opposition party? Are you kidding me? The sheep do not need an opposition party.. The justice department and the media are in with the rest of the politicians here…Just wrote an article today about this very issue..Sad state I tell you..
Well, for one thing, any politician that tries to attack the EPA will be seen as anti-environment and, thanks to 30 years of green-washing, that is political suicide. Hopefully the media can put their green-bias aside and just focus on the corruption.
OK, what to we do as voters to counteract this??? Write letters, emails? And to who?
Getting and dealing with the truth is hard. I saw this posted on a media climate news story by “alpha2actual” of disqus and liked it, since I am a fan of movies, if not always the messages conveyed. Maybe you will like it too. Kudos to alpha2:
“We live in a republic that has walls. And those walls have to be guarded by men with thermometers. Who’s gonna do it? You, TouristTurkey? You, Dr Mann? You, Dr Hansen? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for those Polar Bears and you curse the temperature takers. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. My existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves useless expenditure of national treasure and retards the genocidal effects of the policies you want to implement.
You don’t want the truth. Deep down, in places you don’t talk about when your are sleeping alone late at night after those Georgetown cocktail parties after chowing down on limp quiche and swilling a third rate California Chardonnay devoid of pretension, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like Little Ice Age, Medieval Warming Period, and The Pause …we use these words as the backbone to a life devoted to taking temperature. We don’t use terms like grant chasing, scientific tourism, transnational progressivism, or Crony Socialism. You use them as punch lines. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the electric blanket powered by the very electricity I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it. I’d prefer you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a thermometer and stand a post. Either way, I don’t give a damn what you think you’re entitled to.”
This is nothing new. Back at the dawn of the solid-state electronics industry in the bay area, Ecoloon lawyers and the brand new EPA got a Court order to strangle the baby in its’ crib. The first commercial silicon wafer plant at Healdsburg could not be permitted if its’ NOx output exceeded the exhaust of 2-1970 cars on the street in front of the plant, by court order! Everyone at the EPA knew that the NOx exhaust from the crystal growing chambers could not be scrubbed to this level. The owners of the plant asked a self educated plumber G.P.Savko, that had solved several other problems in this new industry, if he could solve this problem. After a crash course in fume scrubbing he created a fume scrubber system that cleaned the exhaust to a NOx level less then 1 car, as tested by the EPA! and the plant was permitted, by court order.
Some International Oligarchs were not pleased. They had planned to make Singapore the heart of the new silicon industry. pg
EPAGate.
“of the people, by the people, for the people, ” – whether the people like it or not.
Pay attention,,,,,,,
This is important stuff that directly impacts your future!
No matter who you are!
The who, where and when of government employee contacts and outsiders trying to influence events has to be identified first.
A federal grandjury could also be used.
J. Philip Peterson says:
January 15, 2014 at 7:14 pm
OK, what to we do as voters to counteract this??? Write letters, emails? And to who?
===========
Just spread the word to anyone you can.
Put a link on your website ?, tell your friends, inform the voters ?
Let them read for themselves.
Strangely enough, the same Greek civilization, that brought us the word Democracy also coined the descriptor; Kleptocracy.
What the bureaus are doing here is classic government by thieves.
They steal the authority of the people.they steal public wealth,they destroy private wealth to benefit their chosen few.