Climate change policy of the George W. Bush administration

Last updated

The climate change policy of the United States under the presidency of George W. Bush can be categorized into two major components: a technological strategy to reduce carbon emissions and one with an emission intensity target to reduce carbon emissions by 18 percent. Bush backed out on the promises on the campaign trail to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, within two months of taking office he walked away from his commitment. [1] One of the most notable policies during his administration is his opposition to the Kyoto Protocol.

Contents

The administration prioritized technological solutions to combat climate change, such as the $1.2 billion Hydrogen Fuel Initiative and the FreedomCAR program, aimed at reducing carbon emissions from vehicles and promoting energy independence. Internationally, Bush launched the Generation IV International Forum to advance nuclear energy as a cleaner alternative to fossil fuels and supported debt-for-nature swaps to conserve tropical forests. Domestically, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 balanced energy independence with environmental goals, providing incentives for renewable energy, biofuels, and clean coal technologies. [2]

The Bush administration was criticized for undermining scientific research and promoting industry interests. [3] [4] Reports emerged of political pressure on scientists to downplay the threat of global warming, edits to scientific documents, and suppression of key findings related to climate change. The administration's close ties to fossil fuel industries and business lobbyists further fueled accusations of prioritizing economic and corporate interests over environmental concerns. This contentious approach to climate policy had lasting implications, affecting both U.S. efforts to mitigate global warming and its international standing in climate governance.

Campaign promises

During the George W. Bush's 2000 Presidential Campaign, he pledged to regulate emissions of carbon dioxide coming from power plants and would establish carbon dioxide as a pollutant. [5] Two months later, in March 2001, the Bush Administration backed down of this promise. [6] [7] [8] In a letter sent to Senator Chuck Hagel, he cited increasing energy costs [9] [10] , and an "incomplete state of scientific knowledge of the causes of, and solutions to, global climate change and the lack of commercially available technologies for removing and storing carbon dioxide". [11] This change in policy reflected a Department of Energy report, that stated that including carbon dioxide as a pollutant "would lead to an even more dramatic shift from coal to natural gas for electric power generation and significantly higher electricity prices, compared to scenarios in which only sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides were reduced." [5] Bush states that he supported a "comprehensive and balanced energy policy that takes into account the importance of improving air quality." [9] White House spokesman Scott McClellan, stated that including this campaign promise was "a mistake" [6] .

This campaign reversal was widely criticized by environmentalists and legislators from both Republican and Democratic parties. Critics include Senators Max Baucus and Lincoln Chafee, stating that the reversal was "very unfortunate" and that the president's stance was "concerning", respectively. Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club, a notable environmental organization, stated "During the campaign, Governor Bush tried to claim an environmental mantle, but in the White House he's bowing to big business instead of honoring his commitment to our children."

Kyoto Protocol

In March 2001, the Bush administration announced that it would not implement the Kyoto Protocol, an international treaty signed in 1997 in Kyoto, Japan, that would require nations to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, claiming that ratifying the treaty would create economic setbacks in the U.S. and does not put enough pressure to limit emissions from developing nations. [12] [13] [14] [15] In June 2001, Bush stated he will continue to oppose the Kyoto accord. [16] [17]

In February 2002, Bush announced his alternative to the Kyoto Protocol, by bringing forth a plan to reduce the intensity of greenhouse gases by 18 percent over 10 years. The intensity of greenhouse gases specifically is the ratio of greenhouse gas emissions and economic output, meaning that under this plan, emissions would still continue to grow, but at a slower pace. Bush stated that this plan would prevent the release of 500 million metric tons of greenhouse gases, which is about the equivalent of 70 million cars from the road. This target would achieve this goal by providing tax credits to businesses that use renewable energy sources. [18] [19]

Critics have stated that withdrawing from the Kyoto Protocol would undermine the legitimacy of the United States in regard to international climate governance. They have argued by withdrawing from the Kyoto Protocol, this would make the United States vulnerable to strained. [20] There were also concerns that the Bush Administration's policies were too lax and not enough to combat climate change compared to the Kyoto Protocol. [21]

Policy initiatives

The Bush Administration emphasized market-based solutions and voluntary approaches to address the issue of climate change. In 2002, the Bush Administration released its Global Climate Change policy book, which detailed the initiatives that the administration would take. Such initiatives included the Climate Change Technology Program (CCTP), which was created to help allocate $3 billion of annual investment in climate policy research. Bush also proposed a number of international policies such as debt-for-nature programs, which would encourage developing nations to conserve tropical forest in exchange for debt relief, increasing the amount of funding of transferring clean energy and sequestration technologies to developing countries, and Joint Research Initiatives. [22]

Technological initiatives

The Bush Administration emphasized technological and market-based solutions to help solve the issue to climate change. During Bush's 2003 State of the Union address, he announced a $1.2 billion hydrogen fuel initiative to promote research into hydrogen fuel cells in order to reduce the amount of carbon emissions from automotive vehicles. [23] His administration argued that this will allow the United States to be less dependent on foreign oil and achieve energy independence. This also coincides with Bush's initiative of FreedomCAR, which is a partnership to advance hydrogen fuel research for vehicles. [24] [25]

Bush also helped create the Generation IV International Forum (GIF) in 2001. [26] [27] [28] This forum sought to expand the use of nuclear energy as an alternative to fossil fuels internationally by encouraging cooperation in research and development for Generation IV reactors. Current signatories include Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, France, Japan, South Korea, China, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

Legislative initiatives

The Bush Administration’s legislative agenda included bills that helped shape the energy and environmental landscape of the United States. His administration also opposed legislation such as the America's Climate Security Act of 2007, stating that it would increase taxes and harm the economy. [29]

Energy Policy Act of 2005

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 was signed by President Bush on August 8, 2005. The Energy Policy Act focused on balancing energy independence with environmental goals, offering tax incentives for renewable energy, supporting "clean coal" and nuclear technologies, and advancing biofuels as an alternative source of energy. The Energy Policy Act also created the Climate Change Technology Program, which was effectively dissolved during the Obama Administration. [30]

Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA)

The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 was signed by President Bush on December 19, 2007. The Energy Independence and Security Act sought to increase fuel economy vehicles, incentivise car manufacturers to build more electric vehicles, increase the total amount of biofuels in gasoline, and set standards for energy efficiency. [31]

Influence of industry groups

In 2001, petroleum company executives, which includes ExxonMobil, Conoco, Shell Oil, and BP America met with Vice President Dick Cheney's Energy Task Force. [32]

In June 2005, US State Department papers showed the Bush administration thanking Exxon executives for the company's "active involvement" in helping to determine climate change policy, including the U.S. stance on Kyoto. Input from the business lobby group Global Climate Coalition was also a factor. [33]

The Bush administration implemented an industry-formulated disinformation campaign designed to actively mislead the American public on global warming and to forestall limits on "climate polluters," according to a report in Rolling Stone magazine which reviews hundreds of internal government documents and former government officials. [34]

"'They've got a political clientele that does not want to be regulated,' says Rick S. Piltz, a former Bush climate official who blew the whistle on White House censorship of global-warming documents in 2005. 'Any honest discussion of the science would stimulate public pressure for a stronger policy. They're not stupid.'

Bush's do-nothing policy on global warming began almost as soon as he took office. By pursuing a carefully orchestrated policy of delay, the White House blocked even the most modest reforms and replaced them with token investments in futuristic solutions like hydrogen cars. 'It's a charade,' says Jeremy Symons, who represented the EPA on Dick Cheney's energy task force, the industry-studded group that met in secret to craft the administration's energy policy. 'They have a single-minded determination to do nothing—while making it look like they are doing something.' . . .

The CEQ became Cheney's shadow EPA, with industry calling the shots. To head up the council, Cheney installed James Connaughton, a former lobbyist for industrial polluters, who once worked to help General Electric and ARCO skirt responsibility for their Superfund waste sites.

...two weeks after Bush took office - ExxonMobil's top lobbyist, Randy Randol, demanded a housecleaning of the scientists in charge of studying global warming. . .

...Exxon's wish was the CEQ's command. [35]

Political pressure on scientists

Also according to testimony taken by the U.S. House of Representatives, the Bush White House pressured American scientists to suppress discussion of global warming. [3] [4]

"High-quality science" was "struggling to get out," as the Bush administration pressured scientists to tailor their writings on global warming to fit the Bush administration's skepticism, in some cases at the behest of an ex-oil industry lobbyist. "Nearly half of all respondents perceived or personally experienced pressure to eliminate the words 'climate change,' 'global warming' or other similar terms from a variety of communications."

Similarly, according to the testimony of senior officers of the Government Accountability Project, the White House attempted to bury the report "National Assessment of the Potential Consequences of Climate Variability and Change," produced by U.S. scientists pursuant to U.S. law. [36] Some U.S. scientists resigned their jobs rather than give in to White House pressure to underreport global warming. [3]

Also, the White House removed key portions of a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) report given to the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee about the dangers to human health of global warming. [37] According to one CDC official familiar with both the CDC version and the version given to the Senate, the version given to the Senate was "eviscerated." The White House prevented the Senate and thus the public from receiving key CDC estimates in the report about diseases likely to flourish in a warmer climate, increased injuries and deaths from severe weather such as hurricanes, more respiratory problems from drought-driven air pollution, an increase in waterborne diseases including cholera, increases in vector-borne diseases including malaria and hantavirus, mental health problems such as depression and post-traumatic stress, and how many people might be adversely affected because of increased warming.

US officials, such as Philip Cooney, have repeatedly edited scientific reports from US government scientists, [38] many of whom, such as Thomas Knutson, have been ordered to refrain from discussing climate change and related topics. [39] [40] [41]

Climate scientist James E. Hansen, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, claimed in a widely cited New York Times article [42] in 2006 that his superiors at the agency were trying to "censor" information "going out to the public." NASA denied this, saying that it was merely requiring that scientists make a distinction between personal, and official government, views in interviews conducted as part of work done at the agency. Several scientists working at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration have made similar complaints; [43] once again, government officials said they were enforcing long-standing policies requiring government scientists to clearly identify personal opinions as such when participating in public interviews and forums.

In 2006, the BBC's long-running current affairs series Panorama investigated the issue, and was told that "scientific reports about global warming have been systematically changed and suppressed." [44]

According to an Associated Press release on January 30, 2007,

...climate scientists at seven government agencies say they have been subjected to political pressure aimed at downplaying the threat of global warming. The groups presented a survey that shows two in five of the 279 climate scientists who responded to a questionnaire complained that some of their scientific papers had been edited in a way that changed their meaning. Nearly half of the 279 said in response to another question that at some point they had been told to delete reference to "global warming" or "climate change" from a report. [45]

Critics writing in the Wall Street Journal editorial page claim that the survey [46] was itself unscientific. [47]

Attempts to suppress scientific information on global warming and other issues have been described by Chris Mooney as constituting a Republican War on Science. [48]

In 2008, Jason Burnett, who was senior adviser on climate change in the EPA, claimed Dick Cheney's office had sought to remove references to climate change in a testimony given to Congress by CDC Director Julie Gerberding. [49] [50] [51]

Attempts to undermine U.S. and state efforts

The Bush administration worked to undermine state efforts to mitigate global warming. At the beginning of his presidency, he pledged to let states and the federal government work cooperatively. [52] The administration’s early actions, such as supporting the 2002 Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act, suggested a willingness to empower states. However, this changed throughout his time in office. Federal contributions to state environmental programs declined, dropping from 70% in the 1970s to roughly 30% by the mid-2000s. Simultaneously, the administration imposed additional mandates on states, often without providing proportional funding or flexibility, placing significant strain on state environmental agencies. These actions demonstrated a preference for federal oversight, limiting states' autonomy to innovate and address pressing environmental concerns on their own terms.

The Bush Administration’s policies frequently undermined state-led environmental efforts. One prominent example was the administration’s reinterpretation of the Clean Air Act, which aimed to reduce the scope of regulatory authority granted to states. Legal challenges further constrained state initiatives, as federal agencies sought to preempt state policies deemed more stringent than national standards. [52]

Mary Peters, the transportation secretary at that time, personally directed US efforts to urge governors and dozens of members of the House of Representatives to block California's first-in-the-nation limits on greenhouse gases from cars and trucks, according to e-mails obtained by Congress. [53]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Global Climate Coalition</span> Lobbyist group against reduction of greenhouse gas emissions

The Global Climate Coalition (GCC) (1989–2001) was an international lobbyist group of businesses that opposed action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and engaged in climate change denial, publicly challenging the science behind global warming. The GCC was the largest industry group active in climate policy and the most prominent industry advocate in international climate negotiations. The GCC was involved in opposition to the Kyoto Protocol, and played a role in blocking ratification by the United States. The coalition knew it could not deny the scientific consensus, but sought to sow doubt over the scientific consensus on climate change and create manufactured controversy.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Kyoto Protocol</span> 1997 international treaty to reduce greenhouse gas emissions

The Kyoto Protocol (Japanese: 京都議定書, Hepburn: Kyōto Giteisho) was an international treaty which extended the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) that commits state parties to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, based on the scientific consensus that global warming is occurring and that human-made CO2 emissions are driving it. The Kyoto Protocol was adopted in Kyoto, Japan, on 11 December 1997 and entered into force on 16 February 2005. There were 192 parties (Canada withdrew from the protocol, effective December 2012) to the Protocol in 2020.

The United Kingdom's Climate Change Programme was launched in November 2000 by the British government in response to its commitment agreed at the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED). The 2000 programme was updated in March 2006 following a review launched in September 2004.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Climate change mitigation</span> Actions to reduce net greenhouse gas emissions to limit climate change

Climate change mitigation (or decarbonisation) is action to limit the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere that cause climate change. Climate change mitigation actions include conserving energy and replacing fossil fuels with clean energy sources. Secondary mitigation strategies include changes to land use and removing carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere. Current climate change mitigation policies are insufficient as they would still result in global warming of about 2.7 °C by 2100, significantly above the 2015 Paris Agreement's goal of limiting global warming to below 2 °C.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Politics of climate change</span> Interaction of societies and governments with current climate change

The politics of climate change results from different perspectives on how to respond to climate change. Global warming is driven largely by the emissions of greenhouse gases due to human economic activity, especially the burning of fossil fuels, certain industries like cement and steel production, and land use for agriculture and forestry. Since the Industrial Revolution, fossil fuels have provided the main source of energy for economic and technological development. The centrality of fossil fuels and other carbon-intensive industries has resulted in much resistance to climate friendly policy, despite widespread scientific consensus that such policy is necessary.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Business action on climate change</span> Range of activities by businesses relating to climate change

Business action on climate change is a topic which since 2000 includes a range of activities relating to climate change, and to influencing political decisions on climate change-related regulation, such as the Kyoto Protocol. Major multinationals have played and to some extent continue to play a significant role in the politics of climate change, especially in the United States, through lobbying of government and funding of climate change deniers. Business also plays a key role in the mitigation of climate change, through decisions to invest in researching and implementing new energy technologies and energy efficiency measures.

<i>Hell and High Water</i> (book) 2006 book by Joseph J. Romm

Hell and High Water: Global Warming – the Solution and the Politics – and What We Should Do is a book by author, scientist, and former U.S. Department of Energy official Joseph J. Romm, published December 26, 2006. The author is "one of the world's leading experts on clean energy, advanced vehicles, energy security, and greenhouse gas mitigation."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Greenhouse gas emissions</span> Greenhouse gases emitted from human activities

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from human activities intensify the greenhouse effect. This contributes to climate change. Carbon dioxide, from burning fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and natural gas, is the main cause of climate change. The largest annual emissions are from China followed by the United States. The United States has higher emissions per capita. The main producers fueling the emissions globally are large oil and gas companies. Emissions from human activities have increased atmospheric carbon dioxide by about 50% over pre-industrial levels. The growing levels of emissions have varied, but have been consistent among all greenhouse gases. Emissions in the 2010s averaged 56 billion tons a year, higher than any decade before. Total cumulative emissions from 1870 to 2022 were 703 GtC, of which 484±20 GtC from fossil fuels and industry, and 219±60 GtC from land use change. Land-use change, such as deforestation, caused about 31% of cumulative emissions over 1870–2022, coal 32%, oil 24%, and gas 10%.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Greenhouse gas emissions by the United States</span> Climate changing gases from the North American country

The United States produced 5.2 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in 2020, the second largest in the world after greenhouse gas emissions by China and among the countries with the highest greenhouse gas emissions per person. In 2019 China is estimated to have emitted 27% of world GHG, followed by the United States with 11%, then India with 6.6%. In total the United States has emitted a quarter of world GHG, more than any other country. Annual emissions are over 15 tons per person and, amongst the top eight emitters, is the highest country by greenhouse gas emissions per person.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fossil fuels lobby</span> Lobbying supporting the fossil fuels industry

The fossil fuels lobby includes paid representatives of corporations involved in the fossil fuel industry, as well as related industries like chemicals, plastics, aviation and other transportation. Because of their wealth and the importance of energy, transport and chemical industries to local, national and international economies, these lobbies have the capacity and money to attempt to have outsized influence on governmental policy. In particular, the lobbies have been known to obstruct policy related to environmental protection, environmental health and climate action.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Environmental policy of the United States</span> Governmental action to protect the environment

The environmental policy of the United States is a federal governmental action to regulate activities that have an environmental impact in the United States. The goal of environmental policy is to protect the environment for future generations while interfering as little as possible with the efficiency of commerce or the liberty of the people and to limit inequity in who is burdened with environmental costs. Framing of environmental issues often influences how policies are developed, especially when economic concerns or national security are used to either justify or contest actions. As his first official act bringing in the 1970s, President Richard Nixon signed the U.S. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) into law on New Year's Day, 1970. Also in the same year, America began celebrating Earth Day, which has been called "the big bang of U.S. environmental politics, launching the country on a sweeping social learning curve about ecological management never before experienced or attempted in any other nation." NEPA established a comprehensive US national environmental policy and created the requirement to prepare an environmental impact statement for "major federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the environment." Author and consultant Charles H. Eccleston has called NEPA the world's "environmental Magna Carta".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2008 United Nations Climate Change Conference</span>

The 2008 United Nations Climate Change Conference took place at PIF Congress Centre, Poznań International Fair (PIF), in Poznań, Poland, between December 1 and December 12, 2008. Representatives from over 180 countries attended along with observers from intergovernmental and nongovernmental organizations.

The climate change policy of the United States has major impacts on global climate change and global climate change mitigation. This is because the United States is the second largest emitter of greenhouse gasses in the world after China, and is among the countries with the highest greenhouse gas emissions per person in the world. Cumulatively, the United States has emitted over a trillion metric tons of greenhouse gases, more than any country in the world.

Although it is a worldwide treaty, the Kyoto Protocol has received criticism.

The Kyoto Protocol was an international treaty which extended the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. A number of governments across the world took a variety of actions.

The Kyoto Protocol was an international treaty which extended the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">The Hartwell Paper</span>

The Hartwell Paper called for a reorientation of climate policy after the perceived failure in 2009 of the UNFCCC climate conference in Copenhagen. It was a response to the United Nations' Kyoto Protocol, a previous international agreement meant to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The paper was published in May 2010 by the London School of Economics in cooperation with the University of Oxford. The authors are 14 natural and social scientists from Asia, Europe and North America, including Mike Hulme, Roger A. Pielke (Jr), Nico Stehr and Steve Rayner, who met under the Chatham House Rule.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">ExxonMobil climate change denial</span> Overview of climate-related ExxonMobil controversies

From the 1980s to mid 2000s, ExxonMobil was a leader in climate change denial, opposing regulations to curtail global warming. For example, ExxonMobil was a significant influence in preventing ratification of the Kyoto Protocol by the United States. ExxonMobil funded organizations critical of the Kyoto Protocol and seeking to undermine public opinion about the scientific consensus that global warming is caused by the burning of fossil fuels. Of the major oil corporations, ExxonMobil has been the most active in the debate surrounding climate change. According to a 2007 analysis by the Union of Concerned Scientists, the company used many of the same strategies, tactics, organizations, and personnel the tobacco industry used in its denials of the link between lung cancer and smoking.

References

  1. ↑ Revkin, Douglas Jehl With Andrew C. (March 14, 2001). "Bush, in Reversal, Won't Seek Cut In Emissions of Carbon Dioxide". The New York Times. Retrieved July 4, 2023.
  2. ↑ Abraham, Spencer (July 30, 2004). "The Bush Administration's Approach to Climate Change". Science. 305 (5684): 616–617. doi:10.1126/science.1098630. ISSN   0036-8075. PMID   15286350.
  3. 1 2 3 Reuters, January 30, 2007, free archived version at http://www.commondreams.org/headlines07/0130-10.htm Archived 2007-02-02 at the Wayback Machine , last visited Jan. 30, '07
  4. 1 2 Written testimony of Dr. Grifo before the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the U.S. House of Representatives on January 30, 2007, archived at "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on August 5, 2009. Retrieved December 15, 2009.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  5. 1 2 MASTERSON, BILL DAWSON and KAREN (March 14, 2001). "Bush backs off pledge to limit carbon dioxide". Chron. Retrieved December 17, 2024.
  6. 1 2 Revkin, Douglas Jehl With Andrew C. (March 14, 2001). "Bush, in Reversal, Won't Seek Cut In Emissions of Carbon Dioxide". The New York Times. Retrieved July 4, 2023.
  7. ↑ Schrope, Mark (March 1, 2001). "Bush U-turns on pledge for carbon dioxide emissions". Nature. 410 (6827): 401. Bibcode:2001Natur.410..401S. doi:10.1038/35068695. ISSN   1476-4687. PMID   11260677.
  8. ↑ "Bush Changes Pledge on Emissions". archive.globalpolicy.org. Retrieved December 18, 2024.
  9. 1 2 News, A. B. C. "Bush Reverses Course on Carbon Dioxide". ABC News. Retrieved December 17, 2024.{{cite web}}: |last= has generic name (help)
  10. ↑ "Bush Changes Pledge on Emissions". archive.globalpolicy.org. Retrieved December 17, 2024.
  11. ↑ Schrope, Mark (March 1, 2001). "Bush U-turns on pledge for carbon dioxide emissions". Nature. 410 (6827): 401. Bibcode:2001Natur.410..401S. doi:10.1038/35068695. ISSN   1476-4687. PMID   11260677.
  12. ↑ "U.S. Won't Follow Climate Treaty Provisions, Whitman Says". The New York Times. March 28, 2001. Retrieved July 7, 2024.
  13. ↑ "U.S. Aims to Pull Out of Warming Treaty". The Washington Post. March 28, 2001. Retrieved July 7, 2024.
  14. ↑ "US blow to Kyoto hopes". BBC News. March 28, 2001. Retrieved February 28, 2023.
  15. ↑ Cohen, Maurie J. (January 2004). "George W. Bush and the Environmental Protection Agency: A Midterm Appraisal". Society & Natural Resources. 17 (1): 69–88. Bibcode:2004SNatR..17...69C. doi:10.1080/08941920490247254. ISSN   0894-1920.
  16. ↑ "Bush Will Continue to Oppose Kyoto Pact on Global Warming". The New York Times. June 12, 2001. Retrieved July 7, 2024.
  17. ↑ "Bush Turns His Back on Global Warming Treaty". Los Angeles Times. June 12, 2001. Retrieved July 7, 2024.
  18. ↑ Bush unveils voluntary plan to reduce global warming Archived December 12, 2008, at the Wayback Machine , CNN.com, 2002-02-14.
  19. ↑ Blanchard, Odile; Perkaus, James F. (December 2004). "Does the Bush Administration's climate policy mean climate protection?". Energy Policy. 32 (18): 1993–1998. Bibcode:2004EnPol..32.1993B. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2004.05.004.
  20. ↑ Eckersley, Robyn (March 2007). "Ambushed: The Kyoto Protocol, the Bush Administration's Climate Policy and the Erosion of Legitimacy". International Politics. 44 (2–3): 306–324. doi:10.1057/palgrave.ip.8800190. ISSN   1384-5748.
  21. ↑ Bassetti, Francesco (December 8, 2022). "Success or failure? The Kyoto Protocol's troubled legacy". Foresight. Retrieved December 19, 2024.
  22. ↑ "Executive Summary - Climate Change". georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov. Retrieved December 18, 2024.
  23. ↑ "Fact Sheet: Hydrogen Fuel: a Clean and Secure Energy Future | The American Presidency Project". www.presidency.ucsb.edu. Retrieved December 9, 2024.
  24. ↑ "Fact Sheet: Hydrogen Fuel: a Clean and Secure Energy Future | The American Presidency Project". www.presidency.ucsb.edu. Retrieved December 18, 2024.
  25. ↑ Abraham, Spencer (July 30, 2004). "The Bush Administration's Approach to Climate Change". Science. 305 (5684): 616–617. doi:10.1126/science.1098630. PMID   15286350.
  26. ↑ Issues (April 1, 2015). "Clean Energy Diplomacy from Bush to Obama". Issues in Science and Technology. Retrieved December 18, 2024.
  27. ↑ "Hydrogen Economy Fact Sheet". June 25, 2003.
  28. ↑ Van Buren, Jason (February 28, 2005). "Bush Administration Moves Forward to Develop Next Generation Nuclear Energy Systems" (PDF).
  29. ↑ "STATEMENT OF A DMINISTRATION POLICY S. 3036 – Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act" (PDF). June 2, 2008.
  30. ↑ Issues (April 1, 2015). "Clean Energy Diplomacy from Bush to Obama". Issues in Science and Technology. Retrieved December 18, 2024.
  31. ↑ "Fact Sheet: Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007". georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov. Retrieved December 19, 2024.
  32. ↑ Milbank, Dana; Blum, Justin (November 16, 2005). "Document Says Oil Chiefs Met With Cheney Task Force".
  33. ↑ Vidal, John (June 8, 2005). "Revealed: how oil giant influenced Bush". The Guardian. London. Retrieved January 24, 2010.
  34. ↑ Dickinson, Tim (June 8, 2007). "The Secret Campaign of President Bush's Administration To Deny Global Warming". Rolling Stone. Archived from the original on June 26, 2007. Retrieved January 24, 2010.
  35. ↑ "Dan Froomkin - Cheney: Neither Here Nor There?". The Washington Post . June 21, 2007. ISSN   0190-8286 . Retrieved April 28, 2023.
  36. ↑ written testimony of Rick Piltz before the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the U.S. House of Representatives on January 30, 2007, archived at http://oversight.house.gov/Documents/20070130113813-92288.pdf Archived 2007-01-31 at the Wayback Machine last visited Jan. 30, 07
  37. ↑ Associated Press, Oct. 24, 2007, http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/G/GLOBAL_WARMING_HEALTH?SITE=NVREN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT; also archived at http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/10/24/4772/ Archived 2012-10-05 at the Wayback Machine
  38. ↑ Campbell, D. (June 20, 2003) "White House cuts global warming from report" Guardian Unlimited
  39. ↑ Donaghy, T., et al. (2007) "Atmosphere of Pressure:" Archived June 14, 2007, at the Wayback Machine a report of the Government Accountability Project (Cambridge, Mass.: UCS Publications)
  40. ↑ Rule, E. (2005) "Possible media attention" Email to NOAA staff, July 27. Obtained via FOIA request on July 31, 2006. Archived August 7, 2008, at the Wayback Machine and Teet, J. (2005) "DOC Interview Policy" Email to NOAA staff, September 29. Originally published by Alexandrovna, L. (2005) "Commerce Department tells National Weather Service media contacts must be pre-approved" Archived 2006-10-19 at the Wayback Machine The Raw Story, October 4. Accessed December 22, 2006
  41. ↑ Zabarenko, Deborah (March 8, 2007). "'Don't discuss polar bears:' memo to scientists", Reuters
  42. ↑ Revkin, Andrew C. (January 29, 2006). "Climate Expert Says NASA Tried to Silence Him". The New York Times . Retrieved April 14, 2007.
  43. ↑ Eilperin, Julie (April 6, 2006). "Climate Researchers Feeling Heat From White House". The Washington Post. Retrieved January 24, 2010.
  44. ↑ "Climate chaos: Bush's climate of fear". BBC Panorama. June 1, 2006. Retrieved April 14, 2007.
  45. ↑ "Groups Say Scientists Pressured On Warming". CBS News and Associated Press. January 30, 2007. Retrieved April 14, 2007.
  46. ↑ Donaghy, Timothy; Jennifer Freeman; Francesca Grifo; Karly Kaufman; Tarek Maassarani; Lexi Shultz (February 2007). "Appendix A: UCS Climate Scientist Survey Text and Responses (Federal)" (PDF). Atmosphere of Pressure – Political Interference in Federal Climate Science (PDF). Union of Concerned Scientists & Government Accountability Project . Retrieved April 14, 2007.
  47. ↑ Taranto, James (February 1, 2007). "They Call This Science?". OpinionJournal.com. Archived from the original on February 26, 2007. Retrieved April 14, 2007.
  48. ↑ Mooney, Chris (2005). The Republican war on science. New York: Basic Books. ISBN   978-0-465-04675-1.
  49. ↑ "Cheney's office accused of editing climate change testimony". The New York Times. July 9, 2008. Retrieved July 7, 2024.
  50. ↑ "Cheney accused of EPA interference". Los Angeles Times. July 9, 2008. Retrieved July 7, 2024.
  51. ↑ "Ex-Aide: Cheney Nixed CDC Report Testimony". CBS News. July 8, 2008. Retrieved July 7, 2024.
  52. 1 2 Rabe, Barry (2007). "Environmental Policy and the Bush Era: The Collision between the Administrative Presidency and State Experimentation". Publius. 37 (3): 413–431. doi:10.1093/publius/pjm007. ISSN   0048-5950. JSTOR   4624802.
  53. ↑ "How the White House Worked to Scuttle California's Climate Law", San Francisco Chronicle, September 25, 2007 http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/09/25/4099/ Archived 2013-06-17 at the Wayback Machine
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.