Difference between revisions of "Science and Public Policy Institute"

From Powerbase
Jump to: navigation, search
(→‎Willie Soon and Energy Industry corporate connections)
m
 
(13 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
{{Template:Climate badge}}
 
==Background==
 
==Background==
 
The Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI) is a think tank based in the U.S. which promotes the views of global warming sceptics.
 
The Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI) is a think tank based in the U.S. which promotes the views of global warming sceptics.
Line 5: Line 6:
 
:<i>nonprofit institute of research and education dedicated to sound public policy based on sound science. Free from affiliation to any corporation or political party, we support the advancement of sensible public policies for energy and the environment rooted in rational science and economics.  Only through science and factual information, separating reality from rhetoric, can legislators develop beneficial policies without unintended consequences that might threaten the life, liberty, and prosperity of the citizenry</i><nowiki>[original italics]</nowiki><ref>Science and Public Policy Institute [http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/our_mission.html Our Mission] Accessed 15th January 2009</ref>.
 
:<i>nonprofit institute of research and education dedicated to sound public policy based on sound science. Free from affiliation to any corporation or political party, we support the advancement of sensible public policies for energy and the environment rooted in rational science and economics.  Only through science and factual information, separating reality from rhetoric, can legislators develop beneficial policies without unintended consequences that might threaten the life, liberty, and prosperity of the citizenry</i><nowiki>[original italics]</nowiki><ref>Science and Public Policy Institute [http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/our_mission.html Our Mission] Accessed 15th January 2009</ref>.
  
−
The SPPI claims to be free from affiliation from any corporation. However, its President [[Robert Ferguson]] headed the [[Center for Science and Public Policy]] (CSPP) in 2003 which received funding from oil company [[Exxon Mobil]] to the tune of $40,000 in 2001 and $230,000 in 2002<ref>Lee, J. (2003) [http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9802E1D91131F93BA15756C0A9659C8B63  Exxon Backs Groups That Question Global Warming] ''New York Times'' 28th May 2003. Accessed 15th January 2009</ref>. The CSPP is also a think tank working to dismiss the issues of global warming. According to its website, the CSPP is a project of [[Frontiers of Freedom]]<ref>Centre for Science and Public Policy [http://www.scienceandpublicpolicy.com/ Home Page] Accessed 15th January 2009</ref>, a right wing think tank with principles based on individual freedom, free enterprise and a limited government<ref>Frontiers of Freedom [http://www.ff.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=55&Itemid=69 What We Believe] Accessed 15th January 2009</ref>. Sourcewatch claims that the SPPI was formerly the CSPP<ref>SourceWatch [http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Science_and_Public_Policy_Institute Science and Public Policy Institute] Accessed 15th January 2009</ref>. Both the SPPI and the CSPP continue to operate, with the two organisations using separate websites. They both operate from units at 209 Pennsylvania Ave, Washington D.C.<ref>Kininmonth, W. (2007) [http://www.ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/20070330_kininmonth.pdf Unmasking “An Inconvenient Truth”] Centre for Science and Public Policy. February 2007. Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref> <ref>Science and Public Policy Institute [http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/contact.html Contact] Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref>, with [[Robert Ferguson]] as President with the SPPI and Executive Director with the CSPP and [[Willie Soon]] as Chief Science Researcher of both organisations<ref>Center for Science and Public Policy [http://www.ff.org/centers/csspp/misc/press1/hg/20040922.htm New Study Released on the Safety of the Fish We Eat] 22nd September 2004. Accessed 22nf Janaury 2009</ref> <ref>American Council on Science and Health [http://ff.org/centers/csspp/misc/opeds/hg/20050818.htm More on Eating More Fish] Centre for Science and Public Policy. 2005. Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref>.  
+
The SPPI claims to be free from affiliation from any corporation. However, its President [[Robert Ferguson]] heads the [[Center for Science and Public Policy]] (CSPP) which receives funding from oil company [[Exxon Mobil]]<ref>Lee, J. (2003) [http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9802E1D91131F93BA15756C0A9659C8B63  Exxon Backs Groups That Question Global Warming] ''New York Times'' 28th May 2003. Accessed 15th January 2009</ref>. According to its website, the CSPP is a project of [[Frontiers of Freedom]]<ref>Centre for Science and Public Policy [http://www.scienceandpublicpolicy.com/ Home Page] Accessed 15th January 2009</ref>, a right wing think tank with principles based on individual freedom, free enterprise and a limited government<ref>Frontiers of Freedom [http://www.ff.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=55&Itemid=69 What We Believe] Accessed 15th January 2009</ref>. The Frontiers of Freedom have received a staggering $1,037,000 from [[ExxonMobil]] between 2001 and 2006<ref>GreenPeace Investigations [http://research.greenpeaceusa.org/?a=view&d=4388 ExxonMobil Public Information and Policy Research 2001] 5th October 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009</ref> <ref>GreenPeace Investigations [http://research.greenpeaceusa.org/?a=view&d=4386 ExxonMobil Public Info and Policy Research 2002] 5th October 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009</ref> <ref>GreenPeace Investigations [http://research.greenpeaceusa.org/?a=view&d=4389 ExxonMobil Public Information and Policy Research 2003] 5th October 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009</ref> <ref>GreenPeace Investigation [http://research.greenpeaceusa.org/?a=view&d=4380 ExxonMobil '04 Worldwide contributions and community investments] 5th October 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009</ref> <ref>GreenPeace Investigations [http://research.greenpeaceusa.org/?a=view&d=4387 ExxonMobil Public Info and Policy Research 2005] 5th October 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009</ref> <ref>GreenPeace Investigations [http://research.greenpeaceusa.org/?a=view&d=4381 ExxonMobil '06 Contribustions and Community Investments] 5th October 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009</ref> . The CSPP is also a think tank working to dismiss the issues of global warming. Sourcewatch claims that the SPPI was formerly the CSPP<ref>SourceWatch [http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Science_and_Public_Policy_Institute Science and Public Policy Institute] Accessed 15th January 2009</ref>. Both the SPPI and the CSPP continue to operate, with the two organisations using separate websites. They both operate from units at 209 Pennsylvania Ave, Washington D.C.<ref>Kininmonth, W. (2007) [http://www.ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/20070330_kininmonth.pdf Unmasking “An Inconvenient Truth”] Centre for Science and Public Policy. February 2007. Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref> <ref>Science and Public Policy Institute [http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/contact.html Contact] Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref>, with [[Robert Ferguson]] as President with the SPPI and Executive Director with the CSPP and [[Willie Soon]] as Chief Science Researcher of both organisations<ref>Center for Science and Public Policy [http://www.ff.org/centers/csspp/misc/press1/hg/20040922.htm New Study Released on the Safety of the Fish We Eat] 22nd September 2004. Accessed 22nf Janaury 2009</ref> <ref>American Council on Science and Health [http://ff.org/centers/csspp/misc/opeds/hg/20050818.htm More on Eating More Fish] Centre for Science and Public Policy. 2005. Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref>.  
  
 
Chief Policy Advisor for the SPPI, [[Christopher Monckton]] also has connections with the CSPP where he wrote the 'IPCC Fourth Assessment Report 2007: Analysis and Summary' for the Center<ref>Monckton, C. (2007) [http://www.ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/20070201_monckton.pdf 'IPCC Fourth Assessment Report 2007: Analysis and Summary'] Center for Science and Public Policy. February 2007. Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref>. SPPI's Science Advisor, [[William Kininmonth]] also has connections with the CSPP publishing his book, 'Unmasking “An Inconvenient Truth'<ref>The Heartland Institute [http://www.globalwarmingheartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=21278 Unmasking “An Inconvenient Truth] Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref>. The connections between the two organisations are not easy to uncover. The CSPP does not advertise its Board or staff and the information to be found is scant and scattered. Could it be that the organisations are indeed one and the same? What is clear is that at the very least they are tightly connected to each other through being located in the same building and sharing of key personnel.
 
Chief Policy Advisor for the SPPI, [[Christopher Monckton]] also has connections with the CSPP where he wrote the 'IPCC Fourth Assessment Report 2007: Analysis and Summary' for the Center<ref>Monckton, C. (2007) [http://www.ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/20070201_monckton.pdf 'IPCC Fourth Assessment Report 2007: Analysis and Summary'] Center for Science and Public Policy. February 2007. Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref>. SPPI's Science Advisor, [[William Kininmonth]] also has connections with the CSPP publishing his book, 'Unmasking “An Inconvenient Truth'<ref>The Heartland Institute [http://www.globalwarmingheartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=21278 Unmasking “An Inconvenient Truth] Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref>. The connections between the two organisations are not easy to uncover. The CSPP does not advertise its Board or staff and the information to be found is scant and scattered. Could it be that the organisations are indeed one and the same? What is clear is that at the very least they are tightly connected to each other through being located in the same building and sharing of key personnel.
Line 13: Line 14:
 
==Campaign to undermine scientific consensus on climate change==
 
==Campaign to undermine scientific consensus on climate change==
 
===An Inconvenient truth===
 
===An Inconvenient truth===
−
In 2007, ''The Sunday Times''<ref>Leake, J. (1007) [http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/education/article2652851.ece Please, sir - Gore's got warming wrong] ''The Sunday Times''. 14th October 2007. Accessed 16th January 2009</ref> reported that The SPPI had funded [[Christopher Monckton]] in the making of a film ''Apocalypse No'', to be distributed to schools which 'attacked' the scientific consensus on climate change by denying that human impact was an issue. Monckton also funded the distribution of the film ''The Great Global Warming Swindle'' which too aimed to dispel the evidence of human impact. The making of such films was in reponse to [[Al Gore]]'s film 'An Inconvenient Truth', which won two Oscars and saw Gore receiving a joint Nobel prize.  
+
In 2007, ''The Sunday Times''<ref>Leake, J. (1007) [http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/education/article2652851.ece Please, sir - Gore's got warming wrong] ''The Sunday Times''. 14th October 2007. Accessed 16th January 2009</ref> reported that The SPPI had funded [[Christopher Monckton]] in the making of a film ''Apocalypse No'', to be distributed to schools which 'attacked' the scientific consensus on climate change by denying that human impact was an issue. Monckton also funded the distribution of the film ''The Great Global Warming Swindle'' which too aimed to dispel the evidence of human impact. The making of such films was in reponse to [[Al Gore]]'s film ''An Inconvenient Truth'', which won two Oscars and saw Gore receiving a joint Nobel prize.  
  
 
Gore's film had been distributed to schools in England. Monckton then backed [[Stewart Dimmock]], who took the government to court for sending copies of Gore’s film to schools. The court ruled that Gore's film contained nine errors, but that it was 'broadly correct'. This is in contrast to the SPPI's report which claims 35 errors<ref>Science and Public Policy Institute [http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/goreerrors.html 35 Inconvenient Truths:The Errors in Al Gore's Movie] Accessed 16th January 2009</ref>. Monckton and Dimmock are connected through the right wing [[New Party]], which advocates liberalism and free trade as amoungst its aims.     
 
Gore's film had been distributed to schools in England. Monckton then backed [[Stewart Dimmock]], who took the government to court for sending copies of Gore’s film to schools. The court ruled that Gore's film contained nine errors, but that it was 'broadly correct'. This is in contrast to the SPPI's report which claims 35 errors<ref>Science and Public Policy Institute [http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/goreerrors.html 35 Inconvenient Truths:The Errors in Al Gore's Movie] Accessed 16th January 2009</ref>. Monckton and Dimmock are connected through the right wing [[New Party]], which advocates liberalism and free trade as amoungst its aims.     
Line 26: Line 27:
  
 
In an article covering the launch of a book by SPPI's Kininmonth, Fyfe reports that 'Climate change is about science, but not just about science. It's about business and politics and wielding influence'. It is also reported that there is concern amongst climate experts that 'sceptics will delay action on climate change for another decade, using the same tools of hired guns and questionable scientific evidence as the tobacco industry wielded to deny cancer links in the 1970s and 1980s'<ref>Melissa Fyfe (2004) [http://www.theage.com.au/news/Science/The-global-warming-sceptics/2004/11/26/1101219743320.html ‘The global warming sceptics’] ‘’The Age’’. 27th November 2004 . Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref>.
 
In an article covering the launch of a book by SPPI's Kininmonth, Fyfe reports that 'Climate change is about science, but not just about science. It's about business and politics and wielding influence'. It is also reported that there is concern amongst climate experts that 'sceptics will delay action on climate change for another decade, using the same tools of hired guns and questionable scientific evidence as the tobacco industry wielded to deny cancer links in the 1970s and 1980s'<ref>Melissa Fyfe (2004) [http://www.theage.com.au/news/Science/The-global-warming-sceptics/2004/11/26/1101219743320.html ‘The global warming sceptics’] ‘’The Age’’. 27th November 2004 . Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref>.
 +
 +
According to the SPPI, the 'real problem' facing humankind is not global warming (which they argue is normal with human impact being of little significance), but that 'Primary energy sources, particularly fossil fuels, are becoming scarce and expensive, and are increasingly in the hands of unstable regimes that are unfriendly to the West'<ref>Science and Public Policy Institute [http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/a_proper_focus_in_the_climate_change_debate.html A Proper Focus in the Climate Change Debate] Accessed 5th February 2009</ref>
  
 
==Corporate Connections==
 
==Corporate Connections==
Line 37: Line 40:
 
A further connection Soon has to Exxon, is through his involvement with the [[Frontiers of Freedom]] who have received substantial funding from the oil company. In 2004, Soon was paid $60,000 as the Frontier of Freedom's highest paid independent contractor for professional services<ref>Department of the Treasury Inland Revenue Service [http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/2004/541/773/2004-541773197-01fbf28b-9.pdf From 990 Return of Organization Exempt from Income Tax: Frontiers of Freedom Institute] GuideStar.org. 2004. Accessed 29th January 2009</ref>  
 
A further connection Soon has to Exxon, is through his involvement with the [[Frontiers of Freedom]] who have received substantial funding from the oil company. In 2004, Soon was paid $60,000 as the Frontier of Freedom's highest paid independent contractor for professional services<ref>Department of the Treasury Inland Revenue Service [http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/2004/541/773/2004-541773197-01fbf28b-9.pdf From 990 Return of Organization Exempt from Income Tax: Frontiers of Freedom Institute] GuideStar.org. 2004. Accessed 29th January 2009</ref>  
  
−
The ''News Journal'' reports criticism from the [[Union of Concerned Scientists]] in 2007, who accuse [[ExxonMobil]] 'of funneling $16 million to advocacy groups over a seven-year period in an effort to "confuse the public on global warming science,"'. ExxonMobil reponded to such claims as being "deeply offensive and wrong," and described its position on climate change as "misunderstood."<ref>Montgomery, J. (2007) [http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007702060367 'Del. scientist's view on climate criticized:Ties to big oil, industry-funded lobbies draw criticism'] ''The News Journal''. 6th February 2007. Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref>
+
The ''News Journal'' reports criticism from the [[Union of Concerned Scientists]] in 2007, which accuses [[ExxonMobil]] "of funneling $16 million to advocacy groups over a seven-year period in an effort to 'confuse the public on global warming science'". ExxonMobil reponded to such claims as being "deeply offensive and wrong," and described its position on climate change as "misunderstood".<ref>Montgomery, J. (2007) [http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007702060367 'Del. scientist's view on climate criticized:Ties to big oil, industry-funded lobbies draw criticism'] ''The News Journal''. 6th February 2007. Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref>
  
 
In 2006, Britain's 'premier scientific academy', the [[Royal Society]] is reported to have written to [[ESSO]] (The UK arm of [[ExxonMobil]]) demanding 'that the company withdraws support for dozens of groups that have "misrepresented the science of climate change by outright denial of the evidence".<ref>Adam, D. (2006) [http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2006/sep/20/oilandpetrol.business Royal Society tells Exxon: stop funding climate change denial] ''The Guardian'' 20th September 2006. Accessed 5th February 2009</ref>' The Royal Society conducted a survey which found that [[ExxonMobil]] had distributed $2.9m to 39 groups in 2005 alone: groups that the Society identifies as misrepresenting the science of climate change. These groups also include the [[International Policy Network]] and the [[George C Marshall Institute]], which in 2004, published a report jointly with the UK group the [[Scientific Alliance]] claiming 'that global temperature rises were not related to rising carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere'.
 
In 2006, Britain's 'premier scientific academy', the [[Royal Society]] is reported to have written to [[ESSO]] (The UK arm of [[ExxonMobil]]) demanding 'that the company withdraws support for dozens of groups that have "misrepresented the science of climate change by outright denial of the evidence".<ref>Adam, D. (2006) [http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2006/sep/20/oilandpetrol.business Royal Society tells Exxon: stop funding climate change denial] ''The Guardian'' 20th September 2006. Accessed 5th February 2009</ref>' The Royal Society conducted a survey which found that [[ExxonMobil]] had distributed $2.9m to 39 groups in 2005 alone: groups that the Society identifies as misrepresenting the science of climate change. These groups also include the [[International Policy Network]] and the [[George C Marshall Institute]], which in 2004, published a report jointly with the UK group the [[Scientific Alliance]] claiming 'that global temperature rises were not related to rising carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere'.
  
 
===Willie Soon, James O'Brien and Corporate PR Connections===
 
===Willie Soon, James O'Brien and Corporate PR Connections===
−
[[Willie Soon]] is also Science Director for [[Tech Central Station]] (TCS)<ref>Heartland Institute [http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results.html?artId=16208 Article - 'Consensus Can Be Bad for Climate Science'] reproduced from ''Environment & Climate News''. Published by the Hearland Institute. January 2005. Accessed 29th January 2009</ref> and SPPI's Science Advisor [[James O'Brien]] is reported as one of its writers<ref>Eilperin, J. (2005) [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/15/AR2005091502234_pf.html Severe Hurricanes Increasing, Study Finds] ''The Washington Post''. 16th September 2005. Accessed 29th January 2009</ref>  
+
[[Willie Soon]] is also Science Director for [[Tech Central Station]] (TCS)<ref>Heartland Institute [http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results.html?artId=16208 Article - 'Consensus Can Be Bad for Climate Science'] reproduced from ''Environment & Climate News''. Published by the Hearland Institute. January 2005. Accessed 29th January 2009</ref> and SPPI's Science Advisor [[James O'Brien]] is reported as being one of its writers.<ref>Eilperin, J. (2005) [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/15/AR2005091502234_pf.html Severe Hurricanes Increasing, Study Finds] ''The Washington Post''. 16th September 2005. Accessed 29th January 2009</ref>  
 
The TCS is published by prominent Washington "public affairs" firm, the [[DCI Group]]. According to the ''Washington Monthly''<ref>Confessore, N. (2003) [http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2003/0312.confessore.html  How James Glassman reinvented journalism--as lobbying.] ''Washington Monthly''. December 2003. Accessed 29th January 2009</ref>, DCI specialises in 'P.R., lobbying, and so-called "Astroturf" organizing, generally on behalf of corporations...'. TCS was set up in 2000 by [[James K Glassman]] (who has been a fellow at the [[American Enterprise Institute]] since 1996) and 'public relations maestro' [[Charles Francis]]. The report states that both TCS and DCI 'share most of the same owners, some staff, and even the same suite of offices in downtown Washington, a block off K Street. As it happens, many of DCI's clients are also "sponsors" of the site it houses. TCS not only runs the sponsors' banner ads; its contributors aggressively defend those firms' policy positions, on TCS and elsewhere'. The report continues:
 
The TCS is published by prominent Washington "public affairs" firm, the [[DCI Group]]. According to the ''Washington Monthly''<ref>Confessore, N. (2003) [http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2003/0312.confessore.html  How James Glassman reinvented journalism--as lobbying.] ''Washington Monthly''. December 2003. Accessed 29th January 2009</ref>, DCI specialises in 'P.R., lobbying, and so-called "Astroturf" organizing, generally on behalf of corporations...'. TCS was set up in 2000 by [[James K Glassman]] (who has been a fellow at the [[American Enterprise Institute]] since 1996) and 'public relations maestro' [[Charles Francis]]. The report states that both TCS and DCI 'share most of the same owners, some staff, and even the same suite of offices in downtown Washington, a block off K Street. As it happens, many of DCI's clients are also "sponsors" of the site it houses. TCS not only runs the sponsors' banner ads; its contributors aggressively defend those firms' policy positions, on TCS and elsewhere'. The report continues:
−
:'Lobbying firms that once specialized in gaining person-to-person access to key decision-makers have branched out. The new game is to dominate the entire intellectual environment in which officials make policy decisions, which means funding everything from think tanks to issue ads to phony grassroots pressure groups. But the institution that most affects the intellectual atmosphere in Washington, the media, has also proven the hardest for K Street to influence--until now'.  
+
:Lobbying firms that once specialized in gaining person-to-person access to key decision-makers have branched out. The new game is to dominate the entire intellectual environment in which officials make policy decisions, which means funding everything from think tanks to issue ads to phony grassroots pressure groups. But the institution that most affects the intellectual atmosphere in Washington, the media, has also proven the hardest for K Street to influence--until now.  
  
 
As The ''Washington Monthly'' states, at first glance, TCS resembles a 'think tank-cum-opinion magazine', but unlike traditional think tanks, Tech Central Station is a limited liability corporation, which means it is a for-profit business. 'As an LLC, there is little Tech Central Station must publicly disclose about itself save for the names and addresses of its owners, and there is no presumption, legal or otherwise, that it exists to serve the public interest'. 'On closer inspection', the report continues, 'Tech Central Station looks less like a think-tank-cum-magazine than a kind of lobbying practice'. 4 (out of 5) of the TCS's owners also co-own the DCI and the 5th owner is a senior lobbyist with DCI. several of TCS's sponsors are also clients of DCI who cater for their lobbying needs. These sponsors are [[AT&T]], [[General Motors]] and [[PhRMA]]. Other sponsors are reported to include [[Intel]], [[McDonalds]], [[NASDAQ]], [[National Semiconductor]] and [[Qualcomm]], with 'earlier' sponsors listed as including [[ExxonMobil]] and [[Microsoft]].   
 
As The ''Washington Monthly'' states, at first glance, TCS resembles a 'think tank-cum-opinion magazine', but unlike traditional think tanks, Tech Central Station is a limited liability corporation, which means it is a for-profit business. 'As an LLC, there is little Tech Central Station must publicly disclose about itself save for the names and addresses of its owners, and there is no presumption, legal or otherwise, that it exists to serve the public interest'. 'On closer inspection', the report continues, 'Tech Central Station looks less like a think-tank-cum-magazine than a kind of lobbying practice'. 4 (out of 5) of the TCS's owners also co-own the DCI and the 5th owner is a senior lobbyist with DCI. several of TCS's sponsors are also clients of DCI who cater for their lobbying needs. These sponsors are [[AT&T]], [[General Motors]] and [[PhRMA]]. Other sponsors are reported to include [[Intel]], [[McDonalds]], [[NASDAQ]], [[National Semiconductor]] and [[Qualcomm]], with 'earlier' sponsors listed as including [[ExxonMobil]] and [[Microsoft]].   
Line 60: Line 63:
  
 
===Robert Carter and the oil and tobacco industries===
 
===Robert Carter and the oil and tobacco industries===
−
Robert Carter is reported to be on the research committee at the [[Institute of Public Affairs]], which is described as 'a think tank that has received funding from oil and tobacco companies, and whose directors sit on the boards of companies in the fossil fuel sector'<ref>Frew, W. (2007) [http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/minchin-denies-climate-change-manmade/2007/03/14/1173722560417.html Minchin denies climate change man-made] ''The Sydney Morning Herald'' 15th March 2007. Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref>. In 2007, shortly after the United Nation's [[Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]] (IPCC) strongly warned of the human impact of global warming, Carter stated that the IPCC 'had uncovered no evidence the warming of the planet was caused by human activity'. In the report, Carter is said to have argued that 'whether or not a scientist had been funded by the fossil fuel industry was irrelevant to the validity of research'<ref>Frew, W. (2007) [http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/minchin-denies-climate-change-manmade/2007/03/14/1173722560417.html Minchin denies climate change man-made] ''The Sydney Morning Herald'' 15th March 2007. Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref>. The report continues by stating [[Graeme Pearman]] of [[Monash University]] as saying that 'Carter was not a credible source on climate change. "If he has any evidence that [global warming over the past 100 years] is a natural variability he should publish through the peer review process," Dr Pearman said. "That is what the rest of us have to do."' According to Pearman, Carter 'was letting the fossil fuel industry off the hook'.
+
Robert Carter is reported to be on the research committee at the [[Institute of Public Affairs]], which is described as 'a think tank that has received funding from oil and tobacco companies, and whose directors sit on the boards of companies in the fossil fuel sector'<ref>Frew, W. (2007) [http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/minchin-denies-climate-change-manmade/2007/03/14/1173722560417.html Minchin denies climate change man-made] ''The Sydney Morning Herald'' 15th March 2007. Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref>. In 2007, shortly after the United Nation's [[Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]] (IPCC) strongly warned of the human impact of global warming, Carter stated that the IPCC 'had uncovered no evidence the warming of the planet was caused by human activity'. In the report, Carter is said to have argued that 'whether or not a scientist had been funded by the fossil fuel industry was irrelevant to the validity of research'<ref>Frew, W. (2007) [http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/minchin-denies-climate-change-manmade/2007/03/14/1173722560417.html Minchin denies climate change man-made] ''The Sydney Morning Herald'' 15th March 2007. Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref>. The report continues by stating [[Graeme Pearman]] of [[Monash University]] as saying that 'Carter was not a credible source on climate change. "If he has any evidence that [global warming over the past 100 years] is a natural variability he should publish through the peer review process," Dr Pearman said. "That is what the rest of us have to do."' According to Pearman, Carter 'was letting the fossil fuel industry off the hook'. According to the report, 'Carter, whose background is in marine geology, appears to have little, if any, standing in the Australian climate science community'.
  
 
==Funding and finances==
 
==Funding and finances==
 +
Whilst the exact nature of the connection between the Science and Public Policy Institute and the [[Centre for Science and Public Policy]] is not entirely clear, it has been claimed that they are one and the same<ref>SourceWatch [http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Science_and_Public_Policy_Institute Science and Public Policy Institute] Accessed 15th January 2009</ref>. As both organisations operate from units in the same building<ref>Kininmonth, W. (2007) [http://www.ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/20070330_kininmonth.pdf Unmasking “An Inconvenient Truth”] Centre for Science and Public Policy. February 2007. Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref> <ref>Science and Public Policy Institute [http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/contact.html Contact] Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref> and share the same key personnel<ref>Center for Science and Public Policy [http://www.ff.org/centers/csspp/misc/press1/hg/20040922.htm New Study Released on the Safety of the Fish We Eat] 22nd September 2004. Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref> <ref>American Council on Science and Health [http://ff.org/centers/csspp/misc/opeds/hg/20050818.htm More on Eating More Fish] Centre for Science and Public Policy. 2005. Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref> <ref>Monckton, C. (2007) [http://www.ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/20070201_monckton.pdf 'IPCC Fourth Assessment Report 2007: Analysis and Summary'] Center for Science and Public Policy. February 2007. Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref> <ref>The Heartland Institute [http://www.globalwarmingheartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=21278 Unmasking “An Inconvenient Truth] Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref>, at the very least these two organisations are very closely and tightly connected. The SPPI do not advertise their funders, however donations to the CSPP are easier to identify. The CSPP is a project of the [[Frontiers of Freedom]]<ref>Centre for Science and Public Policy [http://www.scienceandpublicpolicy.com/ Home Page] Accessed 15th January 2009</ref> who have received $1,037,000 from [[ExxonMobil]] between 2001 and 2006. This breaks down as $40,000 in 2001<ref>GreenPeace Investigations [http://research.greenpeaceusa.org/?a=view&d=4388 ExxonMobil Public Information and Policy Research 2001] 5th October 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009</ref> $232,000 in 2002<ref>GreenPeace Investigations [http://research.greenpeaceusa.org/?a=view&d=4386 ExxonMobil Public Info and Policy Research 2002] 5th October 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009</ref>, $195,000 in 2003<ref>GreenPeace Investigations [http://research.greenpeaceusa.org/?a=view&d=4389 ExxonMobil Public Information and Policy Research 2003] 5th October 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009</ref>, $250,000 in 2004<ref>GreenPeace Investigation [http://research.greenpeaceusa.org/?a=view&d=4380 ExxonMobil '04 Worldwide contributions and community investments] 5th October 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009</ref>, $140,000 in 2005<ref>GreenPeace Investigations [http://research.greenpeaceusa.org/?a=view&d=4387 ExxonMobil Public Info and Policy Research 2005] 5th October 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009</ref> and $180,000 in 2006<ref>GreenPeace Investigations [http://research.greenpeaceusa.org/?a=view&d=4381 ExxonMobil '06 Contribustions and Community Investments] 5th October 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009</ref>.
  
 +
The SPPI claims to be 'a nonprofit institute of research and education dedicated to sound public policy based on sound science. Free from affiliation to any corporation or political party'. This statement, coupled with its connection to the CSPP and its shyness at disclosing its funders, could lead one to speculate that diversionary tactics are being used. Industry has been accused of misleading science and public policy and opinion through a 'deliberate -- and extremely reckless -- campaign of deception and disinformation'<ref>Nesmith. J, (2003) [http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/124642_warming02.html Foes of global warming theory have energy ties] ''Seatle Post Intelligencer''. 2nd June 2003. Accessed 16th January 2009</ref>. Blurring the boundaries and presenting themselves as impartial, could give the Institute an air of credibility with their vested interests remaining hidden.
  
 
==People==
 
==People==
Line 76: Line 81:
 
* [[William Kininmonth]] - Science Adviser. Kininmonth is also a member of another group which denies the human impact of climate change, the [[Lavoisier Group]]<ref>Melissa Fyfe (2004) [http://www.theage.com.au/news/Science/The-global-warming-sceptics/2004/11/26/1101219743320.html ‘The global warming sceptics’] ‘’The Age’’. 27th November 2004 . Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref>. In 2007, he wrote a paper <i>Unmasking “An Inconvenient Truth”</i> for the [[Centre for Science and Public Policy]] under the auspices of [[Australasian Climate Research]]<ref>Kininmonth, W. (2007) [http://www.ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/20070330_kininmonth.pdf Unmasking “An Inconvenient Truth”] Centre for Science and Public Policy. February 2007. Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref>. Further inspection shows that Australasian Climate Research is the trading name of Kininmonth, listed with the Australian Government as an 'individual/sole trader' set up in 2003<ref>Australian Government [http://www.abr.business.gov.au/(wipxfj55v35ytindllibis45)/abnDetails.aspx?ABN=81287283607&ResultListURL=..%252fsearch.aspx%253fSearchRequest%253dAustralasian%25252bclimate%25255eAll%25252c1%25252c0%25252c0%25252c0%25252c0%25252c1%25252c0%25252c0%25252c0%25252c0%25252c0%25252c0%25252c0%25252c0%25252cTypical%25252cTypical%2526start%253d0 Current details for 81 287 283 607] business.gov.au. Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref>. Kininmonth was also part of the writing team for the [[Fraser Institute]]'s publication called the 'Independent Summary for Policymakers: IPCC Fourth Assessment Report' along with fellow SPPI advisors [[James J O'Brien]] and [[Joe D'Aleo]]<ref>Fraser Institute [http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/ISPM.pdf Independent Summary for Policymakers:IPCC Fourth Assessment Report] March 2007. Accessed 29th January 2009</ref>   
 
* [[William Kininmonth]] - Science Adviser. Kininmonth is also a member of another group which denies the human impact of climate change, the [[Lavoisier Group]]<ref>Melissa Fyfe (2004) [http://www.theage.com.au/news/Science/The-global-warming-sceptics/2004/11/26/1101219743320.html ‘The global warming sceptics’] ‘’The Age’’. 27th November 2004 . Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref>. In 2007, he wrote a paper <i>Unmasking “An Inconvenient Truth”</i> for the [[Centre for Science and Public Policy]] under the auspices of [[Australasian Climate Research]]<ref>Kininmonth, W. (2007) [http://www.ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/20070330_kininmonth.pdf Unmasking “An Inconvenient Truth”] Centre for Science and Public Policy. February 2007. Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref>. Further inspection shows that Australasian Climate Research is the trading name of Kininmonth, listed with the Australian Government as an 'individual/sole trader' set up in 2003<ref>Australian Government [http://www.abr.business.gov.au/(wipxfj55v35ytindllibis45)/abnDetails.aspx?ABN=81287283607&ResultListURL=..%252fsearch.aspx%253fSearchRequest%253dAustralasian%25252bclimate%25255eAll%25252c1%25252c0%25252c0%25252c0%25252c0%25252c1%25252c0%25252c0%25252c0%25252c0%25252c0%25252c0%25252c0%25252c0%25252cTypical%25252cTypical%2526start%253d0 Current details for 81 287 283 607] business.gov.au. Accessed 22nd January 2009</ref>. Kininmonth was also part of the writing team for the [[Fraser Institute]]'s publication called the 'Independent Summary for Policymakers: IPCC Fourth Assessment Report' along with fellow SPPI advisors [[James J O'Brien]] and [[Joe D'Aleo]]<ref>Fraser Institute [http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/ISPM.pdf Independent Summary for Policymakers:IPCC Fourth Assessment Report] March 2007. Accessed 29th January 2009</ref>   
  
−
* [[Robert M Carter]] - Science Adviser
+
* [[Robert M Carter]] - Science Adviser. Carter is reported to be part of the research committee at the [[Institute of Public Affairs]], 'a think tank that has received funding from oil and tobacco companies, and whose directors sit on the boards of companies in the fossil fuel sector'<ref>Frew, W. (2007) [http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/minchin-denies-climate-change-manmade/2007/03/14/1173722560417.html Minchin denies climate change man-made] ''The Sydney Morning Herald''. 15th March 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009</ref>.
  
 
* [[Craig Idso]] - Science Advisor. Idso is Chairman for the [[Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change]], a member of the [[American Association for the Advancement of Science]], [[American Geophysical Union]], [[American Meteorological Society]], [[Arizona-Nevada Academy of Sciences]], [[Association of American Geographers]], [[Ecological Society of America]], and The [[Honor Society of Phi Kappa Phi]]. He formerly served as Director of Environmental Science with [[Peabody Energy]]<ref>Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change [http://www.co2science.org/about/chairman.php About/Chairman] Accessed 16th January 2009</ref>
 
* [[Craig Idso]] - Science Advisor. Idso is Chairman for the [[Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change]], a member of the [[American Association for the Advancement of Science]], [[American Geophysical Union]], [[American Meteorological Society]], [[Arizona-Nevada Academy of Sciences]], [[Association of American Geographers]], [[Ecological Society of America]], and The [[Honor Society of Phi Kappa Phi]]. He formerly served as Director of Environmental Science with [[Peabody Energy]]<ref>Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change [http://www.co2science.org/about/chairman.php About/Chairman] Accessed 16th January 2009</ref>
Line 94: Line 99:
  
 
==Affiliations==  
 
==Affiliations==  
 +
* [[Heartland Institute]] - SPPI's Chief Science Advisor, Willie Soon, is also a writer for the Heartland Institute<ref>Heartland Institute [http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results.html?artId=16208 Article - 'Consensus Can Be Bad for Climate Science'] reproduced from ''Environment & Climate News''. Published by the Hearland Institute. January 2005. Accessed 29th January 2009</ref>. SPPI's website also contains a direct link to the Heartland Institute from its site navigation section on its homepage<ref>Science and Public Policy Institute [http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/ Home Page] Accessed 5th February </ref>.
 +
 +
* [[Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change]] (Known as [[CO2 Science]]) website is also accessed directly from a link on the SPPI's homepage navigation section<ref>Science and Public Policy Institute [http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/ Home Page] Accessed 5th February</ref>. SPPI's Science Advisor [[Craig Idso]] is also Chairman with the Centre<ref>Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change [http://www.co2science.org/about/chairman.php About/Chairman] Accessed 16th January 2009</ref>.
  
 
===Subsidiaries===
 
===Subsidiaries===
Line 132: Line 140:
  
 
[[Category:Think Tanks]]
 
[[Category:Think Tanks]]
 +
[[Category:Climate Change Sceptics]] [[Category:Climate Change]] [[Category:Climate]] [[Category:Climate: Industry Lobby Groups]]

Latest revision as of 10:55, 7 July 2010

Global warming.jpg This article is part of the Climate project of Spinwatch.

Background

The Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI) is a think tank based in the U.S. which promotes the views of global warming sceptics.

In its mission statement on its website, the SPPI's claims that it is a

nonprofit institute of research and education dedicated to sound public policy based on sound science. Free from affiliation to any corporation or political party, we support the advancement of sensible public policies for energy and the environment rooted in rational science and economics. Only through science and factual information, separating reality from rhetoric, can legislators develop beneficial policies without unintended consequences that might threaten the life, liberty, and prosperity of the citizenry[original italics][1].

The SPPI claims to be free from affiliation from any corporation. However, its President Robert Ferguson heads the Center for Science and Public Policy (CSPP) which receives funding from oil company Exxon Mobil[2]. According to its website, the CSPP is a project of Frontiers of Freedom[3], a right wing think tank with principles based on individual freedom, free enterprise and a limited government[4]. The Frontiers of Freedom have received a staggering $1,037,000 from ExxonMobil between 2001 and 2006[5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] . The CSPP is also a think tank working to dismiss the issues of global warming. Sourcewatch claims that the SPPI was formerly the CSPP[11]. Both the SPPI and the CSPP continue to operate, with the two organisations using separate websites. They both operate from units at 209 Pennsylvania Ave, Washington D.C.[12] [13], with Robert Ferguson as President with the SPPI and Executive Director with the CSPP and Willie Soon as Chief Science Researcher of both organisations[14] [15].

Chief Policy Advisor for the SPPI, Christopher Monckton also has connections with the CSPP where he wrote the 'IPCC Fourth Assessment Report 2007: Analysis and Summary' for the Center[16]. SPPI's Science Advisor, William Kininmonth also has connections with the CSPP publishing his book, 'Unmasking “An Inconvenient Truth'[17]. The connections between the two organisations are not easy to uncover. The CSPP does not advertise its Board or staff and the information to be found is scant and scattered. Could it be that the organisations are indeed one and the same? What is clear is that at the very least they are tightly connected to each other through being located in the same building and sharing of key personnel.

History

Campaign to undermine scientific consensus on climate change

An Inconvenient truth

In 2007, The Sunday Times[18] reported that The SPPI had funded Christopher Monckton in the making of a film Apocalypse No, to be distributed to schools which 'attacked' the scientific consensus on climate change by denying that human impact was an issue. Monckton also funded the distribution of the film The Great Global Warming Swindle which too aimed to dispel the evidence of human impact. The making of such films was in reponse to Al Gore's film An Inconvenient Truth, which won two Oscars and saw Gore receiving a joint Nobel prize.

Gore's film had been distributed to schools in England. Monckton then backed Stewart Dimmock, who took the government to court for sending copies of Gore’s film to schools. The court ruled that Gore's film contained nine errors, but that it was 'broadly correct'. This is in contrast to the SPPI's report which claims 35 errors[19]. Monckton and Dimmock are connected through the right wing New Party, which advocates liberalism and free trade as amoungst its aims.

Complaints have been made by the scientists interviewed for the The Great Global Warming Swindle, which was created by Martin Durkin. The Times reports that 'two of the scientists who took part have complained that the editing gave a misleading impression of critical data and their own viewpoints'. Ofcom, which regulates broadcast media, is also reported to be examining other complaints from scientists in relation to this film.

Deliberate campaign of deception?

Former Boston Globe reporter Ross Gelbspan (who in 1997 wrote the book, The Heat is On, which details industry efforts to discredit climate change science), is reported to have said that the "conclusions that greenhouse gases are causing the planet to heat up are the result of the "most rigorously peer-reviewed scientific collaboration in history". He continues, "The contradictory statements of a tiny handful of discredited scientists, funded by big coal and big oil, represent a deliberate -- and extremely reckless -- campaign of deception and disinformation."[20]

Climate Institute President John Topping shed further light on the situation when he argued that 'By relying on the news media's inclination to include both sides of a story, the industries were able to create the impression that scientists were deeply divided over climate change' adding that "It was all very shrewdly done,"[21].

In an article covering the launch of a book by SPPI's Kininmonth, Fyfe reports that 'Climate change is about science, but not just about science. It's about business and politics and wielding influence'. It is also reported that there is concern amongst climate experts that 'sceptics will delay action on climate change for another decade, using the same tools of hired guns and questionable scientific evidence as the tobacco industry wielded to deny cancer links in the 1970s and 1980s'[22].

According to the SPPI, the 'real problem' facing humankind is not global warming (which they argue is normal with human impact being of little significance), but that 'Primary energy sources, particularly fossil fuels, are becoming scarce and expensive, and are increasingly in the hands of unstable regimes that are unfriendly to the West'[23]

Corporate Connections

Willie Soon and Energy Industry corporate connections

SPPI's Chief Scientific Advisor, Willie Soon, has clear corporate connections with the energy industry. In 2003, He authored a study alongside Sallie Baliunas and three others, which dismissed concerns regarding climate change. The study, called Reconstructing Climatic and Environmental Changes of the Past 1,000 Years: A Reappraisal, was published in the British scientific journal, Energy and Environment. According to a report in the Seattle Post Intelligencer[24], The research was underwritten by the American Petroleum Institute, the trade association of the world's largest oil companies. They also reported that 'two of the five authors are scientists who have been linked to the coal industry and have received support from the ExxonMobil Foundation', whilst a further two of the authors are affiliated with the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and are 'senior scientists' with Washington-based organization the George C Marshall Institute, which received support from ExxonMobil Corp. It is also worth noting that the Marshall Institute's President is William O'Keefe, a former executive of the American Petroleum Institute and President of 'the Global Climate Coalition, a now-defunct organization created by oil and coal interests to lobby against U.S. participation in climate treaties, such as the Kyoto Protocol'.

Soon has close links with the George C Marshall Institute, having served on the Institute’s Science Advisory Board[25]. According to Greenpeace project 'Exxon Secrets', the Marshall Institute received $715,000 in funding from Exxon Mobil between 1998 and 2006[26].

Both the SPPI and the Marshall Institute puts vast amounts of energy and resources into denying human involvement in climate change. One publication, called Shattered Consensus sums up what they are about in its description which states that 'Shattered Consensus will also shatter commonly held opinions about global warming and leave the reader with serious doubts about whether policies to "fight" climate change are warranted at all'.[27]. This implies business as usual for the industry which finances the Institute and frees them from any responsibility towards finding the solutions.

A further connection Soon has to Exxon, is through his involvement with the Frontiers of Freedom who have received substantial funding from the oil company. In 2004, Soon was paid $60,000 as the Frontier of Freedom's highest paid independent contractor for professional services[28]

The News Journal reports criticism from the Union of Concerned Scientists in 2007, which accuses ExxonMobil "of funneling $16 million to advocacy groups over a seven-year period in an effort to 'confuse the public on global warming science'". ExxonMobil reponded to such claims as being "deeply offensive and wrong," and described its position on climate change as "misunderstood".[29]

In 2006, Britain's 'premier scientific academy', the Royal Society is reported to have written to ESSO (The UK arm of ExxonMobil) demanding 'that the company withdraws support for dozens of groups that have "misrepresented the science of climate change by outright denial of the evidence".[30]' The Royal Society conducted a survey which found that ExxonMobil had distributed $2.9m to 39 groups in 2005 alone: groups that the Society identifies as misrepresenting the science of climate change. These groups also include the International Policy Network and the George C Marshall Institute, which in 2004, published a report jointly with the UK group the Scientific Alliance claiming 'that global temperature rises were not related to rising carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere'.

Willie Soon, James O'Brien and Corporate PR Connections

Willie Soon is also Science Director for Tech Central Station (TCS)[31] and SPPI's Science Advisor James O'Brien is reported as being one of its writers.[32] The TCS is published by prominent Washington "public affairs" firm, the DCI Group. According to the Washington Monthly[33], DCI specialises in 'P.R., lobbying, and so-called "Astroturf" organizing, generally on behalf of corporations...'. TCS was set up in 2000 by James K Glassman (who has been a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute since 1996) and 'public relations maestro' Charles Francis. The report states that both TCS and DCI 'share most of the same owners, some staff, and even the same suite of offices in downtown Washington, a block off K Street. As it happens, many of DCI's clients are also "sponsors" of the site it houses. TCS not only runs the sponsors' banner ads; its contributors aggressively defend those firms' policy positions, on TCS and elsewhere'. The report continues:

Lobbying firms that once specialized in gaining person-to-person access to key decision-makers have branched out. The new game is to dominate the entire intellectual environment in which officials make policy decisions, which means funding everything from think tanks to issue ads to phony grassroots pressure groups. But the institution that most affects the intellectual atmosphere in Washington, the media, has also proven the hardest for K Street to influence--until now.

As The Washington Monthly states, at first glance, TCS resembles a 'think tank-cum-opinion magazine', but unlike traditional think tanks, Tech Central Station is a limited liability corporation, which means it is a for-profit business. 'As an LLC, there is little Tech Central Station must publicly disclose about itself save for the names and addresses of its owners, and there is no presumption, legal or otherwise, that it exists to serve the public interest'. 'On closer inspection', the report continues, 'Tech Central Station looks less like a think-tank-cum-magazine than a kind of lobbying practice'. 4 (out of 5) of the TCS's owners also co-own the DCI and the 5th owner is a senior lobbyist with DCI. several of TCS's sponsors are also clients of DCI who cater for their lobbying needs. These sponsors are AT&T, General Motors and PhRMA. Other sponsors are reported to include Intel, McDonalds, NASDAQ, National Semiconductor and Qualcomm, with 'earlier' sponsors listed as including ExxonMobil and Microsoft.

In its disclaimer, it is reported that TCS claims that "the opinions expressed on these pages are solely those of the writers and not necessarily those of any corporation or other organization." But as the report highlights, 'it is startling how often the opinions of TCS's writers and sponsors converge'. One such 'convergence' is described as occuring shortly after ExxonMobil became a sponsor, when the TCS site 'published a flurry of content attacking both the Kyoto accord to limit greenhouse gasses and the science of global warming'. At the time these where among ExxonMobil's chief policy concerns in Washington. other convergences reported in the article relate to PhRMA, Microsoft and AT&T. As The Washington Monthly reports, 'TCS's coverage of particular issues has had the appearance of a well-aimed P.R. blitz'.

In a telephone interview, Glassman is reported as responding to the question of whether TCS would ever run a story which contradicted the views of their sponsors, by saying that "Frankly, we think that other points of view are well represented everywhere else," he responded cheerfully. "To have one point of view on an issue like telecom is something that we don't have a problem with." He added, "We're an advocacy group. There's no doubt about that. I don't think we ever had pretenses of being an academic think tank."

Craig Idso and Energy Industry corporate connections

SPPI's Science Advisor Craig Idso also has connections with the corporate energy industry. Idso is former Director of Environmental Science with Peabody Energy[34], which describes itself as the 'world's largest private-sector coal company, with 2007 sales of 238 million tons and $4.6 billion in revenues'. Peabody's coal products are reported to fuel approximately 10% of all U.S. electricity generation and 2% of worldwide electricity[35].

Idso is also Chairman for the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, another think tank critical of global warming issues with a stance of arguing that 'there is no compelling reason to believe that the rise in temperature was caused by the rise in CO2'[36]. This organisation too is funded my Exxon Mobil. Greenpeace project 'Exxon Secrets' reports that the Centre received $100,000 from Exxon between 1998 to 2006[37]. In response to criticism at such funding by industry, the Centre released a statement in which they refused to discuss their funding[38], describing it as irrelevant to their work and dismissing any conflict of interests. They did acknowledge having received funds from Exxon, describing it simply as 'some donations... a few times in the past'. According to Greenpeace, these 'few' times were $10,000 in 1998, $15,000 in 2000, $40,000 in 2003, $25,000 in 2005 and £10,000 in 2006[39]

Accoding to Greepeace project ExxonSecrets, in 1998 Idso co-authored (with his brother Keith Idso) a report, "The Greening of Planet Earth:Its Progression from Hypothesis to Theory," for the Western Fuels Association[40]. The report also states that Craig Idso is son to Sherwood Idso President of the Center for the Study of CO2 and Climate Change.

Robert Carter and the oil and tobacco industries

Robert Carter is reported to be on the research committee at the Institute of Public Affairs, which is described as 'a think tank that has received funding from oil and tobacco companies, and whose directors sit on the boards of companies in the fossil fuel sector'[41]. In 2007, shortly after the United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) strongly warned of the human impact of global warming, Carter stated that the IPCC 'had uncovered no evidence the warming of the planet was caused by human activity'. In the report, Carter is said to have argued that 'whether or not a scientist had been funded by the fossil fuel industry was irrelevant to the validity of research'[42]. The report continues by stating Graeme Pearman of Monash University as saying that 'Carter was not a credible source on climate change. "If he has any evidence that [global warming over the past 100 years] is a natural variability he should publish through the peer review process," Dr Pearman said. "That is what the rest of us have to do."' According to Pearman, Carter 'was letting the fossil fuel industry off the hook'. According to the report, 'Carter, whose background is in marine geology, appears to have little, if any, standing in the Australian climate science community'.

Funding and finances

Whilst the exact nature of the connection between the Science and Public Policy Institute and the Centre for Science and Public Policy is not entirely clear, it has been claimed that they are one and the same[43]. As both organisations operate from units in the same building[44] [45] and share the same key personnel[46] [47] [48] [49], at the very least these two organisations are very closely and tightly connected. The SPPI do not advertise their funders, however donations to the CSPP are easier to identify. The CSPP is a project of the Frontiers of Freedom[50] who have received $1,037,000 from ExxonMobil between 2001 and 2006. This breaks down as $40,000 in 2001[51] $232,000 in 2002[52], $195,000 in 2003[53], $250,000 in 2004[54], $140,000 in 2005[55] and $180,000 in 2006[56].

The SPPI claims to be 'a nonprofit institute of research and education dedicated to sound public policy based on sound science. Free from affiliation to any corporation or political party'. This statement, coupled with its connection to the CSPP and its shyness at disclosing its funders, could lead one to speculate that diversionary tactics are being used. Industry has been accused of misleading science and public policy and opinion through a 'deliberate -- and extremely reckless -- campaign of deception and disinformation'[57]. Blurring the boundaries and presenting themselves as impartial, could give the Institute an air of credibility with their vested interests remaining hidden.

People

In 2009, SPPI list their Personnel as[58]:

  • Robert Ferguson - President. Ferguson has 26 years experience on Capitol Hill, working in both the House and Senate. This includes serving the House Republican Study Committee and the Senate Republican Policy Committee: as Chief of Staff to Congressman Jack Fields (R-TX) (1981-1997), to Congressman John E. Peterson (R-PA) (1997-2002) and to Congressman Rick Renzi (R-AZ) (2002). According to Greenpeace, Ferguson has been a Board member for the National Center for Public Policy Research[59]
  • Christopher Monckton (Third Viscount Monckton of Brenchley) - Chief Policy Adviser. Monckton previously served as Special Advisor to Margaret Thatcher (1982 to 1986)
  • Robert M Carter - Science Adviser. Carter is reported to be part of the research committee at the Institute of Public Affairs, 'a think tank that has received funding from oil and tobacco companies, and whose directors sit on the boards of companies in the fossil fuel sector'[67].

Events

In March 2008, the SPPI co-sponsored an international conference on climate change in New York called 'Global Warming:Truth or Swindle? This was advertised as an event where '400 scientists, economists, and experts will meet in New York on March 2-4 to challenge the claim that global warming is a “crisis.”' and that there is 'no scientific consensus on the causes or likely consequences of global warming'[72]

The other co-sponsers of this event where:

Alternate Solutions Institute, Americans for Prosperity, Americans for Tax Reform, Asociacion de Consumidores Libres, Association for Liberal Thinking, Business & Media Institute, Carbon Sense Coalition, Cascade Policy Institute, Cathay Institute for Public Affairs, Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise, Center for the Dissemination of Economic Knowledge, Center of the American Experiment, Centro de Innovación y Desarrollo Humano, Centro de Investigaciones de Instituciones y Mercados de Argentina, Citizens Alliance for Responsible Energy, Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, Competitive Enterprise Institute, Congress of Racial Equality, Discovery Institute, Doctors for Disaster Preparedness, Economic Thinking, European Center for Economic Growth, Freedom Foundation of Minnesota, Free Enterprise Action Fund, Free Market Foundation, Frontiers of Freedom Institute, Fundacion Atlas 1853, Hayek Institute, Idea Channel, Independent Institute, Institute of Public Affairs, Institut für Unternehmerische Freiheit, Instituto de Libre Empresa, [[Instituto Liberdade], International Climate Science Coalition, International Policy Network, Istituto Bruno Leoni, JunkScience.com, Liberty Institute, Lion Rock Institute, John Locke Foundation, George C Marshall Institute, Minimal Government Institute, National Center for Policy Analysis, New Zealand Business Roundtable, Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, Pacific Research Institute, Science and Environmental Policy Project and Sovereignty International.

Speakers at the event were advertised as including:

Václav Klaus, Roy Innis, John Stossel, Tim Ball, Robert Balling, David Bellamy, Bob Carter, Vincent Gray, David Henderson, Yuri A Izrael, David Legates, Patrick Michaels, Fred Michel, James J O’Brien, Tim Patterson, Benny Peiser, Andreas Prokoph, Roy Spencer, Frederick Seitz, S Fred Singer, George Taylor, Miklos Zagoni and the SPPI's own Chief Scientific Advisor Willie Soon.

Affiliations

  • Heartland Institute - SPPI's Chief Science Advisor, Willie Soon, is also a writer for the Heartland Institute[73]. SPPI's website also contains a direct link to the Heartland Institute from its site navigation section on its homepage[74].

Subsidiaries

Publications

Contact details, Resources, Notes

Contact

  • Address:
Primary Address
Robert Ferguson
Science and Public Policy Institute
5501Merchants View Square
  1. 209
Haymarket, VA 20169

Secondary Address

Robert Ferguson
SPPI
209 Pennsylvania Ave. SE
Suite 299
Washington, D.C. 20003
  • Phone:

(202) 288-5699

  • Fax:
  • Email:
Primary: bferguson@sppinstitute.org
Secondary: ferguson3490@hotmail.com
  • Website:

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org

External Resources

Notes

  1. ↑ Science and Public Policy Institute Our Mission Accessed 15th January 2009
  2. ↑ Lee, J. (2003) Exxon Backs Groups That Question Global Warming New York Times 28th May 2003. Accessed 15th January 2009
  3. ↑ Centre for Science and Public Policy Home Page Accessed 15th January 2009
  4. ↑ Frontiers of Freedom What We Believe Accessed 15th January 2009
  5. ↑ GreenPeace Investigations ExxonMobil Public Information and Policy Research 2001 5th October 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009
  6. ↑ GreenPeace Investigations ExxonMobil Public Info and Policy Research 2002 5th October 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009
  7. ↑ GreenPeace Investigations ExxonMobil Public Information and Policy Research 2003 5th October 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009
  8. ↑ GreenPeace Investigation ExxonMobil '04 Worldwide contributions and community investments 5th October 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009
  9. ↑ GreenPeace Investigations ExxonMobil Public Info and Policy Research 2005 5th October 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009
  10. ↑ GreenPeace Investigations ExxonMobil '06 Contribustions and Community Investments 5th October 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009
  11. ↑ SourceWatch Science and Public Policy Institute Accessed 15th January 2009
  12. ↑ Kininmonth, W. (2007) Unmasking “An Inconvenient Truth” Centre for Science and Public Policy. February 2007. Accessed 22nd January 2009
  13. ↑ Science and Public Policy Institute Contact Accessed 22nd January 2009
  14. ↑ Center for Science and Public Policy New Study Released on the Safety of the Fish We Eat 22nd September 2004. Accessed 22nf Janaury 2009
  15. ↑ American Council on Science and Health More on Eating More Fish Centre for Science and Public Policy. 2005. Accessed 22nd January 2009
  16. ↑ Monckton, C. (2007) 'IPCC Fourth Assessment Report 2007: Analysis and Summary' Center for Science and Public Policy. February 2007. Accessed 22nd January 2009
  17. ↑ The Heartland Institute Unmasking “An Inconvenient Truth Accessed 22nd January 2009
  18. ↑ Leake, J. (1007) Please, sir - Gore's got warming wrong The Sunday Times. 14th October 2007. Accessed 16th January 2009
  19. ↑ Science and Public Policy Institute 35 Inconvenient Truths:The Errors in Al Gore's Movie Accessed 16th January 2009
  20. ↑ Nesmith. J, (2003) Foes of global warming theory have energy ties Seatle Post Intelligencer. 2nd June 2003. Accessed 16th January 2009
  21. ↑ Nesmith, J. (2001) Foes of global warming theory have energy ties Seattle Post Intelligencer. 2nd June 2003. Accessed 29th January 2009
  22. ↑ Melissa Fyfe (2004) ‘The global warming sceptics’ ‘’The Age’’. 27th November 2004 . Accessed 22nd January 2009
  23. ↑ Science and Public Policy Institute A Proper Focus in the Climate Change Debate Accessed 5th February 2009
  24. ↑ Nesmith, J. (2003) Foes of global warming theory have energy ties Seattle Post Intelligencer. 2nd June 2003. Accessed 16th January 2009
  25. ↑ George C Marshall Institute Washington Roundtable on Science and Policy 2001. Accessed 16th January 2009
  26. ↑ Exxon Secrets FACTSHEET: George C. Marshall Institute Accessed 16th January 2009
  27. ↑ George C Marshall Institute Shattered Consensus: The True State of Global Warming 14th December 2005. Accessed 16th January 2009
  28. ↑ Department of the Treasury Inland Revenue Service From 990 Return of Organization Exempt from Income Tax: Frontiers of Freedom Institute GuideStar.org. 2004. Accessed 29th January 2009
  29. ↑ Montgomery, J. (2007) 'Del. scientist's view on climate criticized:Ties to big oil, industry-funded lobbies draw criticism' The News Journal. 6th February 2007. Accessed 22nd January 2009
  30. ↑ Adam, D. (2006) Royal Society tells Exxon: stop funding climate change denial The Guardian 20th September 2006. Accessed 5th February 2009
  31. ↑ Heartland Institute Article - 'Consensus Can Be Bad for Climate Science' reproduced from Environment & Climate News. Published by the Hearland Institute. January 2005. Accessed 29th January 2009
  32. ↑ Eilperin, J. (2005) Severe Hurricanes Increasing, Study Finds The Washington Post. 16th September 2005. Accessed 29th January 2009
  33. ↑ Confessore, N. (2003) How James Glassman reinvented journalism--as lobbying. Washington Monthly. December 2003. Accessed 29th January 2009
  34. ↑ Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change About/Chairman Accessed 16th January 2009
  35. ↑ Peabody Energy Home Page Accessed 16th January 2009
  36. ↑ Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change Mission Statement Accessed 16th January 2009
  37. ↑ Exxon Secrets Exxon Mobil Factsheet Accessed 16th January 2009
  38. ↑ Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change What Motivates the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change? Accessed 16th January 2009
  39. ↑ Exxon Secrets Exxon Mobil Factsheet Accessed 16th January 2009
  40. ↑ ExxonSecrets Fact sheet Craif Idso Greenpeace. Accessed 29th January 2009
  41. ↑ Frew, W. (2007) Minchin denies climate change man-made The Sydney Morning Herald 15th March 2007. Accessed 22nd January 2009
  42. ↑ Frew, W. (2007) Minchin denies climate change man-made The Sydney Morning Herald 15th March 2007. Accessed 22nd January 2009
  43. ↑ SourceWatch Science and Public Policy Institute Accessed 15th January 2009
  44. ↑ Kininmonth, W. (2007) Unmasking “An Inconvenient Truth” Centre for Science and Public Policy. February 2007. Accessed 22nd January 2009
  45. ↑ Science and Public Policy Institute Contact Accessed 22nd January 2009
  46. ↑ Center for Science and Public Policy New Study Released on the Safety of the Fish We Eat 22nd September 2004. Accessed 22nd January 2009
  47. ↑ American Council on Science and Health More on Eating More Fish Centre for Science and Public Policy. 2005. Accessed 22nd January 2009
  48. ↑ Monckton, C. (2007) 'IPCC Fourth Assessment Report 2007: Analysis and Summary' Center for Science and Public Policy. February 2007. Accessed 22nd January 2009
  49. ↑ The Heartland Institute Unmasking “An Inconvenient Truth Accessed 22nd January 2009
  50. ↑ Centre for Science and Public Policy Home Page Accessed 15th January 2009
  51. ↑ GreenPeace Investigations ExxonMobil Public Information and Policy Research 2001 5th October 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009
  52. ↑ GreenPeace Investigations ExxonMobil Public Info and Policy Research 2002 5th October 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009
  53. ↑ GreenPeace Investigations ExxonMobil Public Information and Policy Research 2003 5th October 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009
  54. ↑ GreenPeace Investigation ExxonMobil '04 Worldwide contributions and community investments 5th October 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009
  55. ↑ GreenPeace Investigations ExxonMobil Public Info and Policy Research 2005 5th October 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009
  56. ↑ GreenPeace Investigations ExxonMobil '06 Contribustions and Community Investments 5th October 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009
  57. ↑ Nesmith. J, (2003) Foes of global warming theory have energy ties Seatle Post Intelligencer. 2nd June 2003. Accessed 16th January 2009
  58. ↑ Science and Public Policy Institute Personnel Accessed 15th January 2009
  59. ↑ ExxonSecrets.org Factsheet Robert (Bob) Ferguson Greenpeace. Accessed 29th January 2009
  60. ↑ Nesmith, J. (2001) Foes of global warming theory have energy ties Seattle Post Intelligencer. 2nd June 2003. Accessed 29th January 2009
  61. ↑ Soon, W., Baliunas, S. L., Robinson, A. B. & Robinson, Z. W. (2001) [http://www.fraserinstitute.org/commerce.web/product_files/GlobalWarmingGuide.pdf 'Global Warming A Guide to the Science']. The Fraser Institute. 2001. Accessed 29th January 2009
  62. ↑ Heartland Institute Article - 'Consensus Can Be Bad for Climate Science' reproduced from Environment & Climate News. Published by the Hearland Institute. January 2005. Accessed 29th January 2009
  63. ↑ Melissa Fyfe (2004) ‘The global warming sceptics’ ‘’The Age’’. 27th November 2004 . Accessed 22nd January 2009
  64. ↑ Kininmonth, W. (2007) Unmasking “An Inconvenient Truth” Centre for Science and Public Policy. February 2007. Accessed 22nd January 2009
  65. ↑ Australian Government Current details for 81 287 283 607 business.gov.au. Accessed 22nd January 2009
  66. ↑ Fraser Institute Independent Summary for Policymakers:IPCC Fourth Assessment Report March 2007. Accessed 29th January 2009
  67. ↑ Frew, W. (2007) Minchin denies climate change man-made The Sydney Morning Herald. 15th March 2007. Accessed 5th February 2009
  68. ↑ Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change About/Chairman Accessed 16th January 2009
  69. ↑ The George C Marshall Institute James J O'Brien Accessed 29th January 2009
  70. ↑ Fraser Institute Independent Summary for Policymakers:IPCC Fourth Assessment Report March 2007. Accessed 29th January 2009
  71. ↑ Fraser Institute Independent Summary for Policymakers:IPCC Fourth Assessment Report March 2007. Accessed 29th January 2009
  72. ↑ The Heartland Institute International conference on climate change - Global Warming:Truth or Swindle? Accessed 16th January 2009
  73. ↑ Heartland Institute Article - 'Consensus Can Be Bad for Climate Science' reproduced from Environment & Climate News. Published by the Hearland Institute. January 2005. Accessed 29th January 2009
  74. ↑ Science and Public Policy Institute Home Page Accessed 5th February
  75. ↑ Science and Public Policy Institute Home Page Accessed 5th February
  76. ↑ Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change About/Chairman Accessed 16th January 2009
Retrieved from "https://powerbase.info/index.php?title=Science_and_Public_Policy_Institute&oldid=124390"