CIA closes dedicated climate change unit

Nov 20, 2012
The CIA headquarters lobby is pictured in Langley, Virginia, in 2008.

The CIA has shuttered its unit dedicated to studying the impact of climate change on national security, shifting its activities elsewhere, an official said Tuesday.

"As part of a broader realignment of analytic resources, this work continues to be performed by a dedicated team in a new office that looks at economic and energy matters affecting America's ," said CIA spokesman Todd Ebitz.

"The mission and the resources devoted to it remain essentially unchanged."

The Center on Climate Change and National Security was founded in 2009 under the leadership of then CIA director Leon Panetta, who now heads the Pentagon.

It was aimed at studying the security ramifications of climate-related issues such as desertification, , migration and competition for natural resources.

Republican members of the , many of whom doubt the scientifically accepted evidence that climate change is underway, have opposed the unit since its establishment and unsuccessfully sought to block funding for it.

Panetta was replaced in September 2011 by David Petraeus, who has since resigned over an extramarital affair, and the unit no longer enjoys as much internal support, according to Greenwire, a specialized publication.

Under former president George W. Bush, the United States, one of the world's biggest , opposed international measures such as the Kyoto Treaty designed to slow global warming.

President has now vowed a new push for action on the matter in his second term, saying the United States had a duty to come together to curb emissions in the wake of last month's devastating Superstorm Sandy.

played little role in the election campaign until days before the vote, when Sandy tore through the East Coast and the Caribbean, killing more than 110 people in the United States alone.

Some US lawmakers take issue with the view of most scientists that industrial emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are causing the planet to warm.

Word of the center's closure comes just days before the opening of an international conference in Doha on global warming.

Explore further: Trees are more efficient than shrubs in controlling aeolian erosion

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Obama hints at new drive on climate change

Nov 08, 2012

US President Barack Obama has hinted he will make another push to fight climate change after cruising to a new term, but his room for maneuver will be limited even with a new focus after megastorm Sandy.

US greenhouse gases back up after decline

Apr 16, 2012

US emissions of greenhouse gases blamed for climate change rose in 2010, ending a brief downward turn as the world's largest economy gradually recovers from recession, official data showed Monday.

US carbon emissions in surprise drop

Aug 17, 2012

US emissions of carbon dioxide blamed for climate change fell in 2011 and have slipped to a 20-year low this year as the the world's largest economy uses more natural gas and less coal, data shows.

US spring warming off the charts

Jun 07, 2012

The continental United States experienced the warmest spring on record this year, with temperatures far above the average over the past century, government scientists said Thursday.

Climate skeptics exploiting scandal: US envoy

Feb 16, 2010

The US pointman on climate change on Tuesday accused vested interests of exploiting recent scientific scandals, saying there was an overwhelming case for the world to take action.

Recommended for you

User comments : 15

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

antialias_physorg
4.4 / 5 (7) Nov 20, 2012
The mission and the resources devoted to it remain essentially unchanged


So how exactly is this then 'closing down' the unit? It's just relocation/relabeling.

Some US lawmakers take issue with the view of most scientists that industrial emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are causing the planet to warm.

Then let them outlaw physics.
Oops. they already tried.
http://membercent...e-change

It's really sort of sad to see when non-scientists want to decide what science can and cannot say. You don't see scientists telling lawmakers what they can or cannot put into law, do you?
VendicarD
4 / 5 (4) Nov 20, 2012
Don't forget when the Competitive Enterprise Institute and the other Libertaran propaganda groups tried to claim that the earth isn't warming because their Austrian school economists concluded there is no such thing as temperature.

"Then let them outlaw physics." - Antialias
ScooterG
1 / 5 (13) Nov 20, 2012
Maybe the CIA came to the realization that climate change research is being conducted by people who are paid employees of the climate change industry and therefore the integrity of the data they present is highly suspect.

Doesn't take a genius to figure out that if these researchers discovered there was no such thing as global warming, they (the researchers) would be unemployed.
Howhot
4.5 / 5 (15) Nov 20, 2012
Doesn't take a genius to figure out who is the dumbest. I think ScooterG qualifies for that. Any other takers? Global warming is a fact that every country is having to deal with. In the case of the USA, we are kind lagging behind the rest of world in our intelligence. Don't you agree ScooterG?
dav_daddy
1 / 5 (5) Nov 21, 2012
I don't think Scooter is saying the planet isn't getting warmer. He takes issue with the assertion that we are primarily responsible.
kochevnik
4.3 / 5 (11) Nov 21, 2012
He takes issue with the assertion that we are primarily responsible.
I think he takes issue with responsibility in general. Yet another three year old screaming as philistine families do in public.
ayesdi_fdesay
4.7 / 5 (15) Nov 21, 2012
Doesn't take a genius to figure out that if these researchers discovered there was no such thing as global warming, they (the researchers) would be unemployed.


This sort of logic is just baffling. If it were true, then there would be no research that is trustworthy. Yes, according to this logic, all humans are just corrupt, lying, purely self-serving actors that will say anything to get their paycheck.

But let me guess: you trust research from industries whose profit (or existence) is threatened by the outcome of that research? And research from groups formed to promote an ideology that is challenged by the very notions that (1) a free market could lead to such a problem (the potential extinction of humans) and (2) the *only* solution to it would require the intervention of the boogeyman (government)?

Your arguments are no longer arguments driven by evidence or logic (actually, evidence was never on your side--just specious logic). This is just stubborness and propaganda.
mntmn3
2.1 / 5 (7) Nov 21, 2012
Left-wing propaganda: "Republican members of the US Congress, many of whom doubt the scientifically accepted evidence that climate change is underway." Wrong. They don't doubt it. They doubt that it is entirely man-made. Stick to science, not politics.
ScooterG
1.5 / 5 (10) Nov 21, 2012
I don't think Scooter is saying the planet isn't getting warmer. He takes issue with the assertion that we are primarily responsible.


No. I take issue with placing faith in data gathered/presented/interpreted by hired guns of the climate change industry.

Enviro-nazis have a long history of using phony science to shake-down industry. There is no reason to believe they have changed their ideals.
ScooterG
1.5 / 5 (10) Nov 21, 2012
This sort of logic is just baffling. If it were true, then there would be no research that is trustworthy. Yes, according to this logic, all humans are just corrupt, lying, purely self-serving actors that will say anything to get their paycheck.


Why is this so baffling? Why does "follow the money" logic apply to everything *except* climate change?

Proposed climate change "solutions" will cost the consumer an enormous amount of money, much of that money going to known hucksters.

As I've said before, such climate change solutions will take money from people who can least afford it and give it to a few climate change industry leaders. Isn't this the same fiscal scenario that liberals such as Occupy Wall Street detest?

Hypocrisy defined.
Howhot
4.3 / 5 (6) Nov 21, 2012
Enviro-nazis have a long history of using phony science to shake-down industry


LOL! Hay everyone. Let watch a flailing wing bat try to make a point!
ScooterG
1.5 / 5 (8) Nov 22, 2012
First there was Big Coal. Then there was Big Oil. Now we have Big Climate Change.

LOL...Ya' gotta' love capitalism!
Eric_B
4.5 / 5 (8) Nov 24, 2012
I don't think Scooter is saying the planet isn't getting warmer. He takes issue with the assertion that we are primarily responsible.


No. I take issue with placing faith in data gathered/presented/interpreted by hired guns of the climate change industry.

Enviro-nazis have a long history of using phony science to shake-down industry. There is no reason to believe they have changed their ideals.


sorry kid...you and yours were wrong about banning CFC's. the world economy didn't collapse.

you whorish little corporate slaves won't quit chiming in for your masters, though....loyal pets, at least!
VendicarD
3.7 / 5 (3) Nov 25, 2012
At the time of the Montreal Protocol was being negotiated, American Conservatives were telling me n mass that banning CFC's was going to kill over a billion people as a result of lack of refrigeration and air conditioning.

That bit of propaganda was produced by the Heritage Foundation and promoted by the Competitive Enterprise Institute among other dishonest Libertarian organizations.

"sorry kid...you and yours were wrong about banning CFC's. the world economy didn't collapse." - EricB

Conservatives were uneducated fools then, and they remain uneducated fools today.

Conservatism is a mental disease.
Shinobiwan Kenobi
1 / 5 (2) Dec 03, 2012
Maybe the CIA came to the realization that climate change research is being conducted by people who are paid employees of the climate change industry and therefore the integrity of the data they present is highly suspect.

Doesn't take a genius to figure out that if these researchers discovered there was no such thing as global warming, they (the researchers) would be unemployed.


I must confess: I am the chief archetect behind the Climate Change Industry. I am a multi-trillionaire and have paid off all government institutions and have all the scientists on the planet in my shirt pocket. Yes friends, I pay every single scientist under the table to keep their lips buttoned on all the blatantly false data that just seems like common sense. I cannot go on letting you all disparage ScooterG, I admire that he has the mental accuity to see through the veils I have cast and correctly identify the existence of a shadow perpetrator advancing the AGW agenda.

Now you know...