Earth Day 2008 Fact Sheet: Quotes About the Environment


• “With one-fifth of all U.S. CO2 emissions coming from light trucks and cars, any serious effort to significantly reduce U.S. emissions would have to encourage fuel conservation in personal automobiles.  But almost half of all Americans oppose spending more for gasoline, despite polls indicating wide public concern over global warming. These results suggest Americans’ concern [about global warming] may not be as deep as we’ve been led to believe.”

-David A. Ridenour, National Center for Public Policy Research, following release of a nationwide survey showing that 48% of Americans are unwilling to spend even a penny more in gasoline taxes to help reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, quoted in a press release dated March 20, 2008, available at

• “The Nobel Peace Prize, Oscar and an Emmy Mr. Gore has been awarded for his environmental activism will only aid the people of Africa is if he melts them down and donates the gold to a relief organization. For him and his colleagues to try to restrict people of the world from obtaining the energy they need in the means that are cost-effective and readily available for them to get it is not humanitarian in any sense of the word.”

-Thompson Ayodele, director of the Initiative for Public Policy Analysis in Lagos, Nigeria, “Project 21 Helps Expose Hypocrisy of Environmental Elite in the Third World,” Project 21, National Center for Public Policy Research, March 10, 2008,


• “Total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions dropped by 1.5 percent in 2006. The total reduction in U.S. carbon dioxide emissions was 1.8 percent.  By comparison, carbon dioxide emissions by participants in the European Union’s Emissions Trading Scheme (Europe’s version of “cap and trade,” an emissions-regulation system now under consideration by the U.S. Congress) increased by 0.3 percent in 2006.”

– Amy Ridenour, “For Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Cap and Trade, Anyone?,” National Center for Public Policy Research, December 2007,

• “There’s no truth to the claim that global warming is putting cyclones on steroids, unless we’re talking about one of the side-effects of long-term steroid use – impotency.”

– David A. Ridenour, “NOAA Inflating Storm Numbers and Aiding Political Campaign for Carbon Restrictions, Group Says,” National Center for Public Policy Research, November 2007,

• “Right now, the continental United States is in the midst of its fifteenth longest sustained period without a hurricane strike.”

– David A. Ridenour, “Four of the Continental U.S.’s 15 Longest Hurricane-Free Periods Occurred Since 1983, Despite Global Warming Alarms,” National Center for Public Policy Research, September 12, 2007,

“Critics of the global warming agenda are motivated… by a love of freedom and civil liberties. They want a discussion based on logic and facts that will address any problems without depriving us of liberty and personal choice. They do not want to sacrifice our way of life based on fears of an unproven theory.  After all, the loss of liberty is a greater cause of alarm than global warming.”

– Deneen Borelli, “Global Warming Statists Threaten Our Liberty,” Project 21, The National Center for Public Policy Research, September 2007,

• “With the Europeans and carbon reduction, it’s always the planning; never the doing.  The European governments have adopted an even more stringent global warming agreement than the Kyoto Treaty, even as the EU fails to meet its Kyoto targets.  It’s like a plot in the BBC’s old ‘Yes Minister’ series; one in which super-bureaucrat Sir Humphrey Appleby counsels his government department’s minister to cover up a failing plan by announcing a new one that will be even harder to fulfill.  Possibly this new climate pact should be dubbed the ‘Appleby Agreement.'”

– Amy Ridenour, “Sir Humphrey Appleby’s Climate Change Pact,” National Center for Public Policy Research, March 2007,

Endangered Species:

• “In the 32 years the ESA has been on the books, just 34 of the nearly 1,300 U.S. species given special protection have made their way off the ‘endangered’ or ‘threatened’ lists. Of this number, nine species are now extinct, 14 appear to have been improperly listed in the first place, and just nine… have recovered sufficiently to be de-listed. Two species – a plant with white to pale-blue flowers called the Hoover’s Woolly-Star and the yellow perennial, Eggert’s Sunflower – appear to have made their way off the threatened list in part through ‘recovery’ and in part because they were not as threatened as originally believed.  A less than 1% recovery rate isn’t good.”

– David A. Ridenour, “‘TESRA’ Endangered Species Act Reform Proposal Would Do More Harm Than Good,” National Center for Public Policy Research, August 2005,

• “Listing the polar bear under the Endangered Species Act could harm bear conservation efforts by eliminating revenues from the carefully-regulated sport hunting of polar bears by Americans and the importation of polar bear meat and trophies into the U.S. As hunting by non-Americans would replace hunting by Americans, nothing would be accomplished in terms of reducing the number of polar bears killed, but the revenue currently generated by American sport hunters for conservation and research efforts would be eliminated.”

-Amy Ridenour, “Parody Ad Takes Up Cause of Ringed Seals, Says Polar Bear Populations are Prosperous and Growing,” Press Release, National Center for Public Policy Research, March 28, 2008,

• “Listing the bear [under the Endangered Species Act] could spawn lawsuits and impose economy-crippling restrictions on carbon dioxide emissions. Because the ESA makes it a crime to ‘harm’ a listed animal or its habitat, environmentalists could sue any public or private entity that emits CO2, which, they claim, causes global warming and harms the bear. NRDC and others already have successfully sued under the ESA to stop everything from military training to cattle ranching.  Listing the polar bear would benefit environmental activists, but would raise energy costs for consumers and harm our economy, while providing few if any benefits to the bears.”

-Peyton Knight, “Listing the Polar Bear Under the ESA Could Spell Disaster,” National Center for Public Policy Research, February 26, 2008,

• “The global polar bear population is healthy, and the estimated total number of bears is more than double the amount thought to exist four decades ago…  Listing the polar bear as threatened due to projected global warming… could be enormously costly to the U.S. economy and could create a precedent for massively expanded federal regulatory powers under the ESA. It is very likely to harm indigenous cultures in the arctic while increasing the number of lawsuits filed for the purpose of blocking economic activity in the U.S.  One thing it is unlikely to do is help the polar bear.”

-Peyton Knight and Amy Ridenour, “Listing the Polar Bear Under the Endangered Species Act Because of Projected Global Warming Could Harm Bears and Humans Alike,” National Center for Public Policy Research, March 2008,

Invasive Species:

• “What do mute swans, kudzu, red clover, pigs, and starlings have in common? Not much, except that they are all non-indigenous species – that is, the species does not originate from within the United States.  And that is essentially all they have in common. Yet many government agencies, lawmakers and environmental special-interest groups would like to clump together the thousands of these species introduced within our borders and stamp out their existence.”

– Dana Joel Gattuso, “Invasive Species: Animal, Vegetable or Political?,” National Center for Public Policy Research, August 2006,

Clean Water:

“The Clean Water Restoration Act seeks ostensibly to restore protections under the Clean Water Act lost due to Supreme Court decisions in 2001 and 2006 and to clarify which waters would be subject to regulation under the act.  We’re concerned, however, that the Clean Water Restoration Act would achieve the opposite: It would expand the scope of the Clean Water Act far beyond its original intent while increasing confusion over what is and isn’t to be protected. In addition, we believe the bill runs counter to the principle of accountable government as it seeks to transfer legislative power from elected officials to those appointed for life.”

-Coalition Letter on the Clean Water Restoration Act, signed by 100 organizations and individuals to Congress, October 9, 2007,  A similar letter signed by approximately 50 additional organizations was sent to Congress April 9, 2008 and is available at

“Congress is currently considering legislation that would substantially broaden the federal government’s authority under the Clean Water Act. However, like many misnamed bills before it, the Clean Water Restoration Act is a lesson in false advertising. The Act would do more to threaten the cherished pastimes of hunters, fishermen and other outdoor enthusiasts than it would to ensure the cleanliness of our nation’s water.”

-Peyton Knight, “Sportsmen: Beware the Clean Water Restoration Act,” National Center for Public Policy Research, April 2008,

• “In the midst of another hurricane season, Rep. [James] Oberstar and 169 of his colleagues are pushing the Clean Water Restoration Act, a bill that legal scholars say would encourage more wetlands lawsuits – lawsuits with the potential to thwart even more vital public works projects like those designed to protect people from hurricanes… As we remember the victims of Hurricane Katrina, we should also remember the preventative measures that were prescribed over 40 years ago and the reasons those measures never came to fruition. If only Congressman Oberstar and his colleagues would remember this as well.”

– Peyton Knight, “Congressmen Supporting Clean Water Bill Should Remember Katrina,” Natinal Center for Public Policy Research, September 2007,


• “Move over, ‘Bridge to Nowhere’ — there’s a new poster child of congressional waste and avarice — ethanol, the ‘Fuel to Nowhere.’ Ethanol leads only to higher food prices and greater greenhouse gas emissions… Taxpayers are shelling out billions of dollars while getting nothing in return, making ethanol truly a fuel to nowhere.”

-David A. Ridenour, “Dead-End Fuel Drives Up Prices, Greenhouse Gases,” Atlanta Journal-Constitution, April 18, 2008,

• “Two independent studies in the journal Science report that the clearing of forests, grasslands, and other ecosystems throughout the world to grow corn, soybean, and other food-for-fuels will double greenhouse emissions over the next 30 years. Because plants and soil hold enormous quantities of carbon, destroying existing plants and tilling the soil releases the stored carbon.”

-Dana Joel Gattuso, “Congress Picks a Loser,”, April 15, 2008,

• “For the past four decades, food prices have remained fairly stable, lagging far behind inflation. But as the USDA reports, food prices this year are soaring, rising twice the rate of inflation – the highest annual increase in over a decade. Corn prices, which doubled since last year, are close to $4 a bushel. Eggs are up 44 percent from last year, while milk, up 21 percent, has jumped to $3.83 a gallon – the highest retail price since World War Two. What’s driving record food prices? Federal policies mandating more food for fuel are a big factor.”

– Dana Joel Gattuso, “Thanks to Congress, Ethanol and Biofuel Mandates Cause Food Prices to Soar,” National Center for Public Policy Research, December 2007,

Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards:

• “At the very time that Congress is considering a Bush administration request to equip our troops in Iraq with vehicles that are more resistant to roadside bombs, its leadership is fighting for a proposal that would have the opposite effect on roads here at home: a measure sought by environmentalists that would force automakers to make vehicles sold domestically much lighter and, thus, more vulnerable in collisions.”

– Deneen Borelli, “Legislative Schizophrenia,” National Center for Public Policy Research/Ft. Worth Star-Telegram, August 2007,

• “CAFE standards have little impact on greenhouse gas emissions, and the environmental benefits of increasing CAFE standards are frequently overstated. Their impact on human health is more certain: CAFE standards have resulted in tens of thousands of deaths since their adoption.”

– Amy Ridenour and Peyton Knight, “CAFE Kills, and Then Some: Six Reasons to Be Skeptical of Fuel Economy Standards,” National Center for Public Policy Research, June 19, 2007,

Corporate Social Responsibility:

• “Fear not only sells newspapers and contributes to movie sales but it also affects those in positions of power – especially those who are concerned with public image. Among the most susceptible to these fears are CEOs who don’t want to be held responsible for climatic catastrophe.  This is particularly true for CEOs who are under the corporate social responsibility spell. Because CSR requires companies to take responsibility for their environmental footprint – direct and indirect consequences of its business practices beyond legal requirements – global warming policies are a litmus test for a ‘responsible’ company.  Unfortunately for shareholders and advocates of limited government, frightened CEOs make bad business decisions, many of which also contribute to the growth of government.”

– Tom Borelli, “An Inconvenient Exposure,”, October 20, 2007,

• “Karl Marx once said, ‘The last capitalist we hang shall be the one who sold us the rope.’  Marx was wrong. The last capitalist to be hanged shall be the one who donated the rope, and then lobbied for his own hanging.”

– Amy Ridenour, “Is Caterpillar Going Green or Losing Green?,” National Center for Public Policy Research, June 14, 2008,

National Heritage Areas:

• “The U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Kelo v. City of New London ignited a national outcry against government abuse of property rights. The ‘bridge to nowhere’ and other wasteful programs triggered angry protests against the practice of earmarking.  National heritage areas are the Kelo decision and earmarks rolled into one.”

– Letter to Congress signed by 114 policy groups, grassroots leaders, local government officials, sportsmen groups, civil rights organizations, property rights advocates, farmers, ranchers, and individuals, September 4, 2007,

• “National heritage areas corrupt the principle of representative government by giving unelected, unaccountable special interests the authority to develop land management plans and federal money with which to finance their efforts.”

– Letter to Congress signed by 114 policy groups, grassroots leaders, local government officials, sportsmen groups, civil rights organizations, property rights advocates, farmers, ranchers, and individuals, September 4, 2007,

World Heritage Areas:

• “Continued listing of the Everglades [as a World Heritage Site in Danger] is an embarrassment to the United States because it says that the United States needs international technical and financial assistance to protect the Everglades.”

– David A. Ridenour, “Maybe Bill Nelson Should Resign,” National Center for Public Policy Research, August 2007,


• “The people of Africa cannot afford to worry about their carbon footprint when they are focused on making sure they have enough to eat and can remain healthy.”

-Alice Wanja Hinga, RN, a native Kenyan, “Project 21 Helps Expose Hypocrisy of Environmental Elite in the Third World,” Project 21, National Center for Public Policy Research, March 10, 2008,

Law of the Sea Treaty:

• “In a great ironic twist, the Law of the Sea Treaty – supported by many in the energy sector – may give environmentalists a blunt instrument to use against the energy industry… Backdoor implementation of the Kyoto Protocol might be advanced by arguing that U.S.’s anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions (one-quarter of such emissions world-wide) are warming the planet, causing irreparable harm to coral reefs, home to the world’s most biologically-diverse marine ecosystems.”

– David A. Ridenour, “Ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty: A Not-So-Innocent Passage,” National Center for Public Policy Research, August 2006,

The National Center for Public Policy Research is a communications and research foundation supportive of a strong national defense and dedicated to providing free market solutions to today’s public policy problems. We believe that the principles of a free market, individual liberty and personal responsibility provide the greatest hope for meeting the challenges facing America in the 21st century.