A Daily Caller Article Gave the EPA Ammo to Lie About the National Climate Assessment

Illustration for article titled A Daily Caller Article Gave the EPA Ammo to Lie About the National Climate Assessmentem/em
Photo: AP

The Environmental Protection Agency press shop was an abomination under Scott Pruitt. And it’s not much better under Andrew Wheeler.

Advertisement

On Wednesday, the EPA put out a press release attempting to smear the National Climate Assessment, the landmark federal report that clearly lays out the choices the U.S. faces when it comes to climate change. It all started in the morning, when Wheeler trotted out a lie that’s become now standard in the Trump administration’s inept assault on the report. Speaking with the Washington Post Live, here’s what he had to say:

“I wouldn’t be surprised if the Obama administration told the report’s authors to take a look at the worst-case scenario for this report.”

Advertisement

This is statement falls in line with talking points from the administration that have attempted to cast the report as only considering one scenario, something that is demonstrably false. Wheeler’s remark was widely covered (as was his inability to name three environmental accomplishments under Trump). In an effort to back up the off-base claim, the EPA blasted out a press release “fact checking” the acting administrator’s statement, using not scientific literature or planning documents to back up its claim. It went to an article by the Daily Caller News Foundation, a right-wing news site founded by Tucker Carlson and foundation largely funded by the Koch brothers. It’s a well Trump’s EPA has visited before.

Illustration for article titled A Daily Caller Article Gave the EPA Ammo to Lie About the National Climate Assessmentem/em
Screenshot: EPA

If you read the Daily Caller report, you would find it cites a 2015 memo that says the National Climate Assessment “will focus on RCP 8.5 as a high-end scenario and RCP 4.5 as a low-end scenario.” So yes, technically it is accurate to say the Obama administration asked the authors to look at the worst case scenario, just as it is also accurate to say it suggested they explore a scenario where emissions begin to decline by mid-century. But wait! There’s more! The memo continues, emphasis ours:

“Other scenarios (e.g., RCP 2.6) may be used in addition where instructive, such as in analyses of mitigation issues. The use of RCPs 8.5 and RCP 4.5 as core scenarios is generally consistent with the range of emission scenarios used in the Third National Climate Assessment (NCA3). In addition, using a low-end and a high-end scenario will facilitate communications of assessment findings...

The use of a range of future scenarios has become common in studies of the long-term implications of climate outcomes that result from different emission pathways.  

Advertisement

The insinuation that the Obama administration only cared about a scenario where carbon emissions proceed unchecked is false. The report includes a range of scenarios that are possible to show what our choices are (and they’re pretty stark).

“The Obama administration didn’t push for any particular scenario, as far as I am aware,” Robert Kopp, a Rutgers climate scientist who was an author on the first volume of the fourth National Climate Assessment, told Earther. “The choice of RCP 8.5 as a high-end scenario follows standard practice in the climate science community.”

Advertisement

The EPA is choosing to ignore this information—easily available if it talked to any of the climate scientists it employed—and instead is operating like an upside-down world version of Politifact. It would laughable if the stakes weren’t so high.

Update: This article’s headline has been updated to clarify that ‘lie’ refers to what was said by the EPA, not the Daily Caller.

Advertisement

Managing editor, Earther

Share This Story

Get our newsletter

DISCUSSION

dnapl
Dense non aqueous phase liquid

Good stuff, Brian. Keep on ‘em.

Warning!!!! Long rant to follow.

Industry and finance will pay lawyers anything to not clean up (treat, remediate, mitigate, etc) their messes. Lawyers will through various channels directly or indirectly contract all types of folks like environmental consultants, publicists, lobbyist, image consultants, centrist neoliberal environmental nonprofits, PR folks, etc to persuade folks that whatever was dumped or being discharged doesn’t need to be cleaned up (treated, remediated, mitigated, etc). To get around all that spending to not clean up - it looks like industry and finance just bought the fucking regulator (US EPA) instead. Now that’s MAGA!

The amount of effort (time and money) that goes into taking no action or not cleaning up a fucking mess is staggering. Like more money is sometimes spent on the aforementioned group of folks than actually cleaning the shit up. The reason being is typically precedent. As in, if we clean up this one mess we’ll have to cleanup our other messes.

Don’t underestimate the effectiveness of what the New MAGA EPA is doing, regardless of how stupid it seems. Stupid works. And let’s face it - whether we’re talking a landfill, a gas station leaking underground storage tank, or excessive anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gasses from fossil fuel combustion - it’s all the fucking same - dumping shit in the commons (land, water and atmosphere) and wanting to do that for free and without consequence.

In better times we could sort of felt comfortable the US EPA looked out for betterment of human health and the environment. Sort of. Let’s not be too naive.

The sad fact of the matter is we liberals/democrats/concerned citizens dropped the ball over the past ten to twenty years. Way to many folks thought that neoliberal capitalism would keep it clean so we don’t need a regulator. As in corporations will do the right thing out of money and public spiritedness. Idiots.

At this point in time, US EPA is nothing more that an industry PR flack spreading bullshit for client(s). EPA use to work for both citizenry and industry. Maybe swing towards one or the either depending on a republican or democrat in charge of the White House (thusly in charge of US EPA). MAGA EPA is pretty much a fucking corporate shill staffed with a bunch of industry interest group thugs, i.e. frat boys from Midwestern state schools working at US Chamber of Commerce, etc.

Not good. Like real bad.