IPCC as a knowledge monopoly | Climate Etc.

However, the IPCC has certainly extended its remit; many have accused the IPCC of haughtiness; innovation is slow; quality may have declined; and the IPCC may have used its power to hinder competitors – all things that monopolies tend to do, and none of which is in the public interest. The IPCC would perform better if it were regulated by an independent body which audits the IPCC procedures and assesses its performance; if outside organizations would be allowed to bid for the production of IPCC reports and the provision of IPCC services; and if would-be competitors to the IPCC would be encouraged.

The New Nostradamus of the North: A new low from His Royal Higness

Climate change/Global warming is most certainly a highly political question both in Australia and elsewhere. That is why the prince is clearly in breach of his duty to "remain separate from party political debate". Neither do his alarmist rants "act as a catalyst for facilitating debate". Maybe it is time for a STOP PRINCE CHARLES movement in the UK?

- Bishop Hill blog - Ideological money laundering

What is surprising is the sheer scale of this shameless enterprise. We all knew that 'grey literature' -- non-scientific and non-peer reviewed 'research' -- found its way into IPCC reports. What surprises is the extent to which 'grey organisations' -- para-govermental institutions with public functions, but little or no democratic accountability or transparency -- are involved in the production of policy and evidence-making, benefitting a narrow industrial sector and serving a particular political agenda.

But what really grates is that to ask questions about this process is to identify oneself as a 'denier', in hock to fossil energy interests and 'well-funded' PR organisations. Pointing out the implications for democracy and the economy when self-interested NGOs and industry-associations enjoy such privilege from government is characterised as 'denying scientific evidence'.

Time for Democrats to do some wheeling and dealing on climate change | Other voices - The News Tribune

Green policies could be a nice fit here. One of the most appealing is a tax on carbon emissions. Those whose activities result in dangerous greenhouse emissions – things such as burning coal in power plants or mixing cement, with results that affect all of us – would have to pay something for them. This would raise lots of money – depending on the details, tens or hundreds of billions over a decade.
...
Stephen Stromberg is The Washington Post’s deputy online opinions editor.