No matter where you live or what your job may be, climate change legislation has the power to affect you in profound ways. In recent years, various theories on climate change have emerged. Some believe our planet is in peril because of man-made greenhouse gases and that we must do everything possible to keep the earth from overheating. Others agree that warming is occurring, but they question whether it is anthropogenic – that is, caused by human activity – or whether it is simply part of the earth’s natural cycle. Still others point to the past 10 years or so of data that indicate we have emerged from a warming cycle and are now entering a cooling cycle. There are many ways to measure the earth’s temperature, but what we do know is that climate change is nothing new. And while many questions remain about the theory of climate change, perhaps the more pertinent questions to ask are these: Koch companies believe in the efficient use of all resources and are absolutely committed to maintaining a clean and healthy environment. But we also believe there should be open and honest debate about climate change and the likely effects of proposed climate policies on the energy that drives the productivity of our society. The skeptical environmentalist, Bjorn Lomborg, offers an interesting perspective on global warming. The author of “Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist’s Guide to Global Warming,” Lomborg is the director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center, a think tank that explores optimal ways to combat the world’s most serious problems. While Lomborg believes global warming is occurring, his Copenhagen Consensus Expert Panel of five world-class economists, including Nobel Laureate Vernon L. Smith, has created a prioritized list of what they think are the most, and the least, effective responses to global warming. According to a news release from the Center, “The Expert Panel found that high carbon taxes would be an expensive, ineffective way to reduce the suffering from global warming.” Here is the list of the Expert Panel’s promising responses to global warming and a link to the Copenhagen Consensus site. What do Americans think about global warming? Findings from the annual Gallup Social Series Environment poll conducted March 2010 show a general reversal in the trends of Americans' attitudes about global warming. According to the poll, "The average American is now less convinced than at any time since 1997 that global warming's effects have already begun or will begin shortly." In addition, 48 percent of Americans believe that reports of global warming are generally exaggerated, up from 41 percent in 2009 and 31 percent in 1997 when Gallup first asked the question. And when it comes to the causes of global warming, Gallup says, "Americans are now almost evenly split in their views of the cause of increases in the Earth's temperature over the last century," with 50 percent saying global warming is caused by human activity and 46 percent attributing it to natural causes. On December 7, 2009, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency finalized its “endangerment finding,” which concludes that six greenhouse gases (GHGs) threaten human health and welfare, and that GHG emissions from motor vehicles contribute to this threat. The endangerment finding is the first step toward an EPA GHG regulatory program under the Federal Clean Air Act. In the absence of legislation, the endangerment finding would allow the EPA to regulate GHG emissions from power plants, refineries, and other industries. Last year, the U.S. House of Representatives narrowly passed the 638-page Waxman-Markey climate change bill that would mandate cap and trade and have the potential to cost U.S. households as much as $3,100 per year. The Heritage Foundation has compiled a paper that compares various cost estimates of Waxman-Markey, including studies by The Brookings Institution, The National Black Chamber of Commerce, Congressional Budget Office, and the Environmental Protection Agency. While the estimates vary, all conclude that Waxman-Markey would have a negative effect on the U.S. economy. Brookings offers several perspectives on climate policy on their website, along with this fact sheet titled, "Consequences of Cap and Trade." 
Climate controversies and energy needs
Climate Questions
Challenging Conventional Thinking
Measuring Public Opinion
A January 2010 poll by the Pew Research Center finds global warming at the bottom of the public's list of 21 domestic priorities, with 28 percent saying it is a top priority, down from 38 percent in 2007. And an October 2009 Pew survey found a sharp decline in the number of Americans who believe there is solid evidence the globe is warming. The poll found that 57 percent think there is solid evidence compared to 71 percent in April 2008.
Why the declines and lagging interest? Some possible reasons are the increasing number of reputable scientists who are challenging the science behind global warming, and a much-heralded Copenhagen summit that mustered only a non-binding agreement among attending nations. Also spurring doubts is the controversy surrounding the November 2009 leak of internal emails and documents of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia. This Weekly Standard article offers an in-depth look at the controversy and cover-up surrounding what has been dubbed "Climategate," as does this New York Times story. EPA Endangerment Finding
EPA has received many comments from a variety of industries arguing that EPA should either not proceed with the finding or delay it in order to review new science challenging the basis for a finding. Industry also voiced concerns that the Clean Air Act was ill-suited to regulation of GHGs. In addition to concerns voiced by industry, lawsuits have been filed by numerous states including Virginia, Texas and Florida, seeking to stop the EPA from issuing rules controlling GHG emissions until it re-examines whether GHGs harm human health.
EPA continues to stand by its position, saying the scientific basis for the endangerment finding is so compelling that it must take immediate action. Legislative Update
Following action by the House, Senators Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and John Kerry (D-MA) introduced the Senate’s version of a climate bill, and a version of that bill was approved by the Senate Environment Committee in early November. Senate meetings on planned climate and energy legislation continue, but the bill's architects Sens. John Kerry (D-MA), Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Joe Lieberman (I-CT) are not far along enough to release a long-awaited draft before the Spring recess that begins Monday.
