US EPA science advisers question ‘secret science’ rule on data transparency

Jun 1, 2018

By Jeff Tollefson

Science advisers to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) voted on 31 May to review a series of controversial rules that the agency has proposed over the past eight months. They include a plan that would limit the types of scientific research that the EPA could use to justify environmental regulations, and proposals to strike down limits on greenhouse-gas emissions.

EPA administrator Scott Pruitt framed the data rule as part of a push for transparency — and against ‘secret science’ — when he released it on 24 April. The policy would prevent the EPA from relying on studies that include any non-public data.

The decision by the EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) to review the rule comes after earlier criticism by some of its members. In a 12 May memorandum, an SAB working group chastised the EPA for not submitting the proposal to the board for review.

Continue reading by clicking the name of the source below.

7 comments on “US EPA science advisers question ‘secret science’ rule on data transparency

  • @OP – EPA administrator Scott Pruitt framed the data rule
    as part of a push for transparency — and against ‘secret science’
    when he released it on 24 April.
    The policy would prevent the EPA from relying on studies that include any non-public data.

    The science is only “secret” from illiterate muppets who are too incompetent to read it – and so prefer to read propagandist trash built on a few quote-mines of real science and a load of doubt-mongering!

    Nobody makes all their rough notes public!

    The misuse of “transparent” as a buzz-word, is cynically pathetic! – especially when most of the company research data behind the commercial pollutants and polluting products, he is deregulating, is patented, copyright, and commercially defended as secret intellectual property! – Not to mention government monitoring programmes shut-down to hide the evidence!



    Report abuse

  • Meanwhile, it looks as if Koch pseudo-science campaigns, and Trump pseudo-science / pseudo-economics campaigns, are about to clash!

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44366737

    Powerful US billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch are funding a multi-million dollar campaign against President Donald Trump’s trade tariffs.

    Three political groups backed by the brothers say they will use advertising, lobbying and grassroots campaigns to push the benefits of free trade.

    The duo run Koch Industries, one of the world’s largest privately-owned firms.

    [Remainder of article via the link – mods]



    Report abuse

  • MOD MESSAGE

    For copyright reasons, please quote only a small proportion of the text from linked articles. The smallest possible amount required to give a sense of what the article is about. This will generally be no more than a few lines.

    We are aware that there are restrictions on some news sites that make it difficult for people outside specific geographic areas to access them, but this, too, is for legal reasons and we need to respect them.

    There is no problem with providing a brief summary of the main points in your own words, together with a link to the original.

    Thanks.



    Report abuse

  • Moderator #3
    Jun 5, 2018 at 9:01 am

    Sorry.

    I sometimes struggle to include the relevant content and comments on it in few words, but we must respect the legal requirements.

    I will try harder in future.



    Report abuse

  • Under the 1965 copyright guidelines of the Society of Authors an entire article from one issue of a publication is considered fair use or 10% of a short book, or a whole chapter of a long book so “a few lines” is in no way close to a correct interpretation of the legalities here. Alan has never reproduced more than a sample of an article from a publication, he attributes the source and clearly this is not for profit so well within guidelines.



    Report abuse

  • @OP – They include a plan that would limit the types of scientific research that the EPA could use to justify environmental regulations, and proposals to strike down limits on greenhouse-gas emissions.

    So while Pruitt is digging deeper into the cloud-cuckoo land of climate change denial, some big investment funds are taking action!

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44430882

    Legal and General Investment Management (LGIM) has said it will take action against companies that are not addressing the risks of climate change.

    LGIM, one of the biggest investment funds in Europe, said it would exclude offending firms from its Future World index fund.

    Where those firms featured in its other equity funds, it would vote against re-electing the chairs of their boards.

    China Construction Bank and Russia’s Rosneft were among the worst, it said.

    “China Construction Bank remains the world’s largest funder of coal mining and plants,” LGIM said.



    Report abuse

Leave a Reply

View our comment policy.