It's Official: East Anglia Climategate Involved Both Illegal Behavior and a Catch-22

From the Times Online: Scientists in stolen e-mail scandal hid climate data:

The University of East Anglia breached the Freedom of Information Act by refusing to comply with requests for data concerning claims by its scientists that man-made emissions were causing global warming. . .

In a statement, Graham Smith, Deputy Commissioner at the ICO, said: “The e-mails which are now public reveal that Mr Holland’s (who requested the information) requests under the Freedom of Information Act were not dealt with as they should have been under the legislation. Section 77 of the Act makes it an offence for public authorities to act so as to prevent intentionally the disclosure of requested information.”

He added: “The ICO is gathering evidence from this and other time-barred cases to support the case for a change in the law. We will be advising the university about the importance of effective records management and their legal obligations in respect of future requests for information.”

Mr Holland said: “There is an apparent Catch-22 here. The prosecution has to be initiated within six months but you have to exhaust the university’s complaints procedure before the commission will look at your complaint. That process can take longer than six months.”

The above issue has been dubbed "Climategate".

If the case that serious warming of the planet is occurring and can be remedied by restricting putting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere is such a solid one, why are we learning about this sort of behavior and the Himalaya "Glaciergate" scandal?

Increasingly, the cap-and-trade solution to this "crisis" is looking like a scam to benefit favored business interests.

There is a much simpler solution, one proposed by Bill Clinton in 1993. Tax sales of petroleum products.

There is also a supply-side solution. Shrink global production of oil and coal. The resultant price increase will make "green" technology price-advantaged without the need for government to pick winners and losers or spend money on subsidies.

Climate change aside, depleting irreplaceable resources is a bad idea. It's time to ditch cap and trade and create an energy policy that is green, diminishes reliance on imported oil, leads to creation of major new domestic industries, and helps the Federal deficit.

A policy of sunshine and not stonewalling. That would be change in which we could believe.

Copyright (C) Long Lake LLC 2010