Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change

Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change (CO2Science)


The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change (CSCDGC) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization based in Arizona run by a family of climate change skeptics including Craig D. Idso (Chairman and former President), his father Sherwood B. Idso (President), and his brother Keith E. Idso (Vice President).

Craig Idso founded the Center in January of 1998 with the purpose of “discovering and disseminating scientific information pertaining to the effects of atmospheric CO2 enrichment on climate and the biosphere.” Their website publishes a weekly issue of “CO2Science,” containing a “new editorial and reviews of five different peer-reviewed scientific journal articles relating to various aspects of the global change debate.” [1]

The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change (CSCDGC) “was created to disseminate factual reports and sound commentary on new developments in the world-wide scientific quest to determine the climatic and biological consequences of the ongoing rise in the air’s CO2 content.” [2]

One of the Center‘s primary arguments is that more CO2 in the atmosphere is a “Powerful aerial fertilizer, directly enhancing the growth of almost all terrestrial plants and many aquatic plants as its atmospheric concentration rises.” The Center argues that while the earth has warmed “slightly,” there “is no compelling reason to believe that the rise in temperature was caused by the rise in CO2 [from man-made emissions].” [3]

Oil Industry Ties

The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change (AKA the Idso family) ranked Number eight on a list of the “Dirty Dozen of Climate Change Denial” compiled by Mother Jones in 2009. [4]

In addition to receiving at least $100,000 from Exxon Mobil (See funding below), Mother Jones reports the Idso family has further ties to the energy industry. In the early 2000s, Craig Idso was the director of environmental science at Peabody Energy, the world’s largest privately owned coal company. Craig and Keith Idso are both tied to the Western Fuels Association. In October, 1999, they assisted in publishing a report for the Greening Earth Society (a group funded and controlled by Western Fuels) titled “Forecasting World Food Supplies: The Impact of the Rising Atmospheric CO2 Concentration,” as Idso announced in a separate CO2 Science article[4], [5]

In 2006, Craig Idso also incorporated Inc., a company serving the oilfield industry. According to the Arizona Corporation Commission, the company was dissolved in August, 2008. A similarly-named “Cenospheres LLC” was also incorporated in May of 2008 and run by Lance and Julene Idso until that corporation was dissolved in February of 2013. [6], [7]

CO2 Science

In addition to publishing a weekly newsletter titled CO2Science, which attempts to “separate reality from rhetoric in the emotionally-charged debate that swirls around the subject of carbon dioxide and global change,” CO2 science is also a separate charity entity, with EIN 20-2778308, and a physical address of Gilbert, AZ 85297. The group was registered in 2006. [2][8]

Their Mission statement reads as follows:


In the tax year ending 2010, CO2 Science reported $10,184 in revenue, with $24,000 in expenses going directly to employee compensation. The only listed employee is Craig Idso, President, who is listed as having received $22,500 in compensation. View publicly-available 990 documents for more information.

NIPCC Reports

Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) reports are sponsored by three organizations: Heartland Institute, the Science and Environmental Policy Project, and the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change. Five iterations have been published so far, each running counter to the official reports released by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC):

Both Craig Idso and his father, Sherwood Idso, have been lead authors of the NIPCC report and NIPCC Scientists”. [18][51][52]

According to leaked documents from the Heartland Institute (See DeSmogBlog entry on Heartland), the Institute planned to pay Craig Idso $11,600 per month for his work on the NIPCC Project in 2012.  

Skeptical Science has also done an in-depth analysis of the science behind the NIPCC report, and reports how the NIPCC report exclusively looks at the literature published by climate change skeptics, whereas the IPCC report looks at both “skeptics” and mainstream climate scientists. They also note that scientists contributing to the IPCC report were not paid for their efforts, whereas the Heartland Institute alone sent $460,000 to the lead authors and contributors to NIPCC reports from 2010 to 2013, with an overall budget of nearly $1.6 million. [19]

The NIPCC report makes a number of claims contrary to the IPCC report, including the following: [20]

  • There is little or no risk of increasing food insecurity due to global warming or rising atmospheric CO2 levels. Farmers and others who depend on rural livelihoods for income are benefitting from rising agricultural productivity throughout the world, including in parts of Asia and Africa where the need for increased food supplies is most critical. Rising temperatures and atmospheric CO2 levels play a key role in the realization of such benefits.
  • “No changes in precipitation patterns, snow, monsoons, or river flows that might be considered harmful to human well-being or plants or wildlife have been observed that could be attributed to rising CO2 levels. What changes have been observed tend to be beneficial.”
  • Higher atmospheric CO2 concentrations benefit plant growth-promoting microorganisms that help land plants overcome drought conditions, a potentially negative aspect of future climate change. Continued atmospheric CO2 enrichment should prove to be a huge benefit to plants by directly enhancing their growth rates and water use efficiencies.”
  • There is no support for the model-based projection that precipitation in a warming world becomes more variable and intense. In fact, some observational data suggest just the opposite, and provide support for the proposition that precipitation responds more to cyclical variations in solar activity.”

View the attached spreadsheet for a full list of NIPCC Report Contributors (.xls). NIPCC Contributors have included some of the highest-profile climate change skeptics from across the country, many lacking credentials directly related to the area of climate change on which they are commenting (see linked profiles below):

Stance on Climate Change


”[…] even if the climate changes that are typically predicted to result from anticipated increases in the air’s CO2 content were to materialize (which we very strongly doubt will happen), the concurrent rise in the air’s CO2 concentration should more than compensate for any deleterious effects those changes in climate might otherwise have had […] CO2 is not a pollutant; it is a pollution fighter that reduces the negative effects of true pollutants, such as ozone, and replaces them with positive effects that are of great worth to man and nature alike.” [49]


“Suffice it to say for now, there is no compelling reason to believe there will necessarily be any global warming as a result of the activities of man, especially those activities that result in CO2 emissions to the atmosphere.” [9]


“[T]here is no compelling reason to believe that the rise in temperature [since the Industrial Revolution] was caused by the rise in CO2.  Furthermore, it is highly unlikely that future increases in the air’s CO2 content will produce any global warming […] “Atmospheric CO2 enrichment brings growth and prosperity to man and nature alike.” [3]


According to the Center’s President, Sherwood Idso, “we never discuss our funding. Why? Because we believe that ideas about the way the world of nature operates should stand or fall on their own merits, irrespective of the source of support for the person or organization that produces them.” [10]

In 2009, Mother Jones quoted Sherwood Idso saying that fundraising is “so poor that I’m not earning anything. Everything has to go to my son [Craig] to help him maintain himself and the five kids that he has now, and so we’re just scraping by.” The Center’s 2008 tax return showed that it entered 2009 with $445,000 in cash on-hand, and in the previous year had paid Sherwood Idso $50,000, Craig Idso $79,000, and Craig Idso’s wife, M. Anne Idso, $52,000. It also made a $58,000 “scientific research” grant to CO2 Science. [4]

Murray Energy Funding

Murray Energy bankruptcy filings in 2019 revealed the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change received $60,000 from the energy company owned by climate change denier Robert Murray. The filings revealed a wide range of creditors with deep ties to climate change denial including the Heartland Institute, International Climate Science Coalition, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, and Government Accountability & Oversight. Robert Murray was known for being a major Trump donor, and giving officials a wish list of proposed actions to help the coal industry. See related reporting from The InterceptEnergy and Environment News, and The New York Times. [64], [65], [66]

Other groups funded by Murray Energy include FreedomWorks, the Cato Institute, the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, and Judicial Watch. As The New York Times noted, Murray continued to fund climate change denial even as his company was going bankrupt. 

CSCDGC Funding Overview

The following is based on data archived at the Conservative Transparency Project combined with original research of public 990 tax forms by DeSmog. Note that not all funding values have been verified by DeSmog for accuracy. [50]

View the attached spreadsheet for additional information on Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change (CO2 Science) funding by year (.xlsx).

Donors Capital Fund$283,800
Mercer Family Foundation$125,000
The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation$110,000
Sarah Scaife Foundation$100,000
Claude R Lambe Charitable Foundation$85,000
Exxon Mobil$85,000
Deramus Foundation$1,000
Grand Total$789,800

CO2 Science Funding

According to Conservative Transparency data, the CSCDGC has also funneled money into CO2 Science[50]

Grand Total$129,016

Exxon Funding1

According to Greenpeace’s ExxonSecrets, the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change has received $100,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998. [11]

Donors Capital Fund (DCF)/DonorsTrust Funding2

Donor’s Capital Fund (DCF) donated at least $283,800 between 2007 and 2009. DeSmogBlog reports that Donors Capital Fund and DonorsTrust have together handled over $479 million of “dark money” connected to skeptical of climate change. The group was called the “dark money ATM of the conservative movement” by Mother Jones magazine. [12], [13]

Koch Funding

Greenpeace USA reports that the CSCDGC has received at least $85,000 from Koch foundations between 2004 and 2007. [60]

CSCDGC 990 Forms

CO2 Science 990 Forms

Key People

The following compensation values are compiled from the the CSCDGC‘s publicly-available 990 tax forms:

Craig D. Idso$130,000$125,000$130,000$115,651$113,333$111,667$79,000$87,000$72,000$88,167$28,333$135,156
Keith Idso$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0
M Anne Idso$120,000$120,000$130,000$80,000$90,000$95,000$52,000$60,000$42,000$37,167$16,667$0
Robert E Ferguson$170,274$15,000$275,335$248,780$312,500$247,500Not on StaffNot on StaffNot on StaffNot on StaffNot on StaffNot on Staff
Sherwood B. Idso$3,000$17,349$0$0$30,833$87,000$50,000$68,580$0$43,750$30,000$50,000

Notably, four out of five employees listed on the >CSCDGC’s 2013 990 tax form are Idso family members:

In his 2012 report, “Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax 2” (PDF), John Mashey highlights the IRS‘s notes on “Governance Practices” and how it may apply to the CSCDGC:

“Irrespective of size, a governing board should include independent members and should not be dominated by employees or others who are not, by their very nature, independent individuals because of family or business relationships.”

Scientific and Policy Advisors

According to the CSCDGC‘s 2005 Brochure (PDF), “Scientific and Policy Advisors” have included: [16]


January 13, 2020

Heartland Institute senior fellow Fred Palmer published an article at the coal mining industry publication CoalZoom describing a plan to form a new group called “Saving US Coal.” The Saving US Coal Campaign is a partnership between CoalZoom and the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change with donations being funneled through CSCDGC. [67], [68], [69]

“’Saving US Coal’ has been created to be the vehicle for turning the tide for the full acceptance of coal in the US energy market by undertaking a campaign to repeal CO2 Endangerment at EPA. That requires a compelling EPA filing, of course, one that proves the benign and beneficial nature of more CO2 in the air based on the incredible work that Craig Idso has carried on for his Dad, Sherwood Idso and mentor, Sylvan Wittwer. However, it also requires creation of a coal coalition, like the Climate council quoted above, and the make-up of that coalition can be learned from coal’s past,” Palmer wrote. [67]

He envisions the group to be a modern equivalent to CEED (the Center for Energy and Economic Development), a coal industry group created to fight against CO2 emissions standards. As Palmer described it: [67]

“In 1992, CEED was formed to meet the challenge to coal plants due to coal combustion and its CO2 profile and engage at the state level.”

… .

CEED was successful in the 90s and the approach used then can inform for today. Coal’s challenge today at the state level is much more serious than it was in 1992, for the simple reason that the great investor owned utilities in CEED have switched sides and they own the regulated coal plants. But the CEED model never depended on the nature of CEED‘s members, it depended and depends on defending CO2 in defense of Coal. ‘Saving US Coal’ is the only entity that can do this today and its leaders were engaged directly in the 90s with CEED and succeeding years. ‘Saving US Coal’ can perform the same function today as CEED did then in a virtual way.” [67]

Palmer envisions CO2 proponent Craig Idso taking a key role in the new group by promoting benefits of CO2[67]

“Once filed at EPA, ‘Saving US Coal’ will engage virtually at the state level with regulators directly and through NARUC to educate on the benefits of CO2 to the biosphere and the human environment. At the same time Craig will develop additional, original research showing the truth of CO2 which will be distributed as generated to the regulators. By doing so, coal suppliers can then engage directly with the regulators with challenges to the announced closures; rep-opening previous announcements where the plants are still operating is not out of the question.” [67]

He also makes recommendations on coal industry groups that could be encouraged to join the pro-coal coalition: [67]

“Today, there are groups sitting right in front of us and ready to go in coalition, I believe. These include: [67]

Count on Coal through NMA

Friends of Coal in West Virginia, Kentucky, Illinois, Indiana and Pennsylvania

RMCMI in Colorado

The American Coal Council

The state coal associations, a very powerful and overlooked resource

Trade press”

Palmer first joined CoalZoom along with Craig Idso, in coordination with Bill Reid, in December 2019 to focus on the initiative with “the ultimate deliverable: repealing the EPA CO2 Endangerment Finding highlighting coal use as the vehicle and Champion that it is and will be.” [70]

May 8, 2017

The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, represented by Craig D. Idso, is listed on an open letter to President Donald J. Trump urging him “to withdraw fully from the Paris Climate Treaty and to stop all taxpayer funding of UN global warming programs.” [61]

DeSmog reported that the 40 groups represented in the letter, including the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), The Heartland Institute, and the Heritage Foundation, have received a combined total of millions of dollars from the Koch Brothers, ExxonMobil, and other industry groups. [62]

Analysis also showed that the groups accepted about $80 million through Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust, two groups that have been confirmed is a key financial source for key U.S-based climate change denial groups. [63]

June 13, 2016

The Center for Media and Democracy (CMD/PRWatch) reports the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change (CSCDGC) was listed as a creditor in Peabody Energy’s bankruptcy filings. [55]

While the available bankruptcy documents do not list the scale or dates of funding, they outline Peabody Energy’s financial ties to a large network of groups promoting climate change denial. [56]

Prominent individuals appearing in the documents include climate deniers Willie SoonRichard LindzenRoy Spencer and Richard Berman. The long list of organizations also includes groups such as Americans for ProsperityAmerican Legislative Exchange CouncilCFACTInstitute for Energy ResearchState Policy Network, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and dozens more. [57]

The Guardian also analysed and reported on the Peabody bankruptcy findings: [58]

These groups collectively are the heart and soul of climate denial,” said Kert Davies, founder of the Climate Investigation Center, who has spent 20 years tracking funding for climate denial. “It’s the broadest list I have seen of one company funding so many nodes in the denial machine.”

The company’s filings reveal funding for a range of organisations which have fought Barack Obama’s plans to cut greenhouse gas emissions, and denied the very existence of climate change. […]

Among Peabody’s beneficiaries, the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change has insisted – wrongly – that carbon emissions are not a threat but “the elixir of life” while the American Legislative Exchange Council is trying to overturn Environmental Protection Agency rules cutting emissions from power plants. Meanwhile, Americans for Prosperity campaigns against carbon pricing. The Oklahoma chapter was on the list. […]

The breadth of the groups with financial ties to Peabody is extraordinary. Thinktanks, litigation groups, climate scientists, political organisations, dozens of organisations blocking action on climate all receiving funding from the coal industry,” said Nick Surgey, director of research for the Center for Media and Democracy.

We expected to see some denial money, but it looks like Peabody is the treasury for a very substantial part of the climate denial movement.”

Notable organizations listed in the initial documents include:

Notable individuals named in the initial documents include the following:

March 29, 2016

Craig Idso, Founder, Former President, and Current Chairman of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, was a featured speaker at a conference titled “The Climate Surprise: Why CO2 Is Good for the Earth” hosted by the CO2 Coalition and The New Criterion in New York City. [53]

According to the event description, “Members of the CO2 Coalition and  many other experts argue that carbon dioxide enrichment of the atmosphere provides manifold benefits for humanity. And observed surface warmings are much smaller than predicted by climate models.   Economic models that fail to include the benefits  of CO2 and the serious exaggerations of climate models  and are being used to advocate “cures” that are much worse than the non-existent disease.” [53]

Videos of the conference are available at The New Criterion’s YouTube pageFeatured speakers included the following: [53]

September 16, 2015

The Heartland Institute interviewed Sherwood B. Idso, President of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, about the impacts of rising CO2 emissions. According to Idso, increased emissions from using fossil fuels is greatly beneficial: [21]

“I have found if fossil fuel usage is not foolishly restricted in a misguided attempt to prevent climate change—previously referred to as global warming—the expected increase in anthropogenic CO2 emissions will significantly enhance the yields and water-use efficiencies of essentially all of the world’s food crops, allowing us to continue to feed the world’s growing population up to and far beyond the year 2050, when it is expected to peak out at approximately nine billion people, compared to today’s 7.2 billion.”  [21]

September 15, 2015

In a response to Pope Francis’s push for UN climate change goals and recent encyclical on the environment, The Federalist published an essay by Craig D. Idso, the founder of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, where he supposedly “challenged the Pope’s claim that there is a ‘solid scientific consensus’ that human activities are causing a ‘disturbing warming’ of the climate,” the Breitbart reports. [22]

In his article, titled ”Pope Francis, Fossil Fuels Won’t Cause Armageddon,” Idso argues that there is no scientific consensus on climate change, and that “global warming could be good,” while “Taxing or regulating CO2 emissions is an unnecessary and detrimental policy option that should be shunned.” [23]

August 3, 2015

The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, which claims to be unbiased in its examination of the scientific literature, published an article titled “The President’s Clean Power Plan is Built Upon a Pack of Lies.” [24]

Idso argues that, as hinted in the title, “President Obama’s Clean Power Plan is built upon a pack of lies.” Idso bases this accusation on research compiled solely by the CO2 Science website, and “literally thousands of peer-reviewed scientific papers” that Idso claims to have either read or published, as well as the reports of the NIPCC (which has been debunked by Skeptical Science). Idso reiterates that CO2 is an “arial fertilizer” that will have “direct monetary benefits of atmospheric CO2 enrichment on global crop production.” [24]

July 7 – 9, 2015

CO2 Science was listed as an official co-sponsor of the Heartland Institute’s 10th International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC10) in Washington, DC. [25]

The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change’s President Craig Idso was also listed as a Panelist/Speaker at the conference. [26]

As a panelist, Idso argued that carbon emissions have a net benefit that should have been analyzed by the Federal Interagency Working Group (FIWG): [27]

[They] in no way … reflect the economic reality of a properly conducted climate change [benefit-costs analysis].”

 “When certain errors and omissions in the [FIWG’s] methodology and calculations are rectified, the projected benefits of ‘carbon’ are found to far outweigh their projected costs,” said Idso.

No attempt was made by [FIWG] to calculate or even acknowledge the existence of multiple, well-established ‘carbon’ benefits,” said Idso. “In order to be valid, a benefit-cost analysis must examine and include not only the costs but any benefits as well. Such negligence and prejudicial imbalance is stunning. It is inexcusable. It is scientifically fraudulent. And it is borderline criminal.” [27]

June 26, 2015

The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change published an article on CO2 Science titled “Atmospheric CO2 Enrichment: Boon or Bane of the Biosphere?[28]

The article concludes:

“[T]he real-world effects of atmospheric CO2 enrichment are absolutely essential to enable us to adequately feed and sustain the human population of the planet that is expected to inhabit the earth a mere 35 years from now, while at the same time being able to enjoy better health and resultant longevity. Is not this the moral course we all should be pursuing?” [28]

March 25, 2015

CO2 Science promoted an Open Letter to Museums of Science and Natural History. The letter claims that abandoning fossil fuels “would not help the environment but would likely harm it.” [29]

Interestingly, the letter appears to have originated from a new organization titled the CO2 Coalition, which shares many of the views of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change. The new CO2 Coalition also included Craig Idso in its Board of Directors. 

Patrick Moore, also a member of the CO2 Coalition’s Board of Directors, posted to twitter that the Letter was created by the CO2 Coalition.

December, 2014

Craig Idso, Founder of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, spoke at the December conference of the American Legislative Exchance Council (ALEC)InsideClimate News reports. [30]

“Instead of being shunned like the plague, the ongoing rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide should be welcomed with opened arms,” Idso said, according to the ALEC member who spoke to InsideClimate News. “Far from being a pollutant, [CO2] is better than being the best fertilizer ever invented because it is actually…food that sustains essentially all plants on a daily basis.”

Carbon-reduction policies and actions “are unnecessary, unwise, and unwarranted,” Idso continued.

The Center for Media and Democracy’s SourceWatch has created to document the group’s actions. They offer the following description:

ALEC is not a lobby; it is not a front group. It is much more powerful than that. Through the secretive meetings of the American Legislative Exchange Council, corporate lobbyists and state legislators vote as equals on ‘model bills’ to change our rights that often benefit the corporations’ bottom line at public expense. ALEC is a pay-to-play operation where corporations buy a seat and a vote on ‘task forces’ to advance their legislative wish lists and can get a tax break for donations, effectively passing these lobbying costs on to taxpayers.”

May 21–23, 2012

CO2Science was an official Co-sponsor of the Heartland Institute’s Seventh International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC7). [31]

DeSmogBlog researched sponsors behind the conference and found they had collectively received a combined total of $67 Million in funding from ExxonMobil, Koch, and Scaife Family foundations. [32]

June 30–July 1, 2011

The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change was an official Co-Sponsor (PDF) of the Heartland Institute’s Sixth International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC6) in Washington, DC. Craig Idso was also a speaker at the event. [33]

DeSmogBlog found that 17 of the 43 sponsors of the Heartland Institute’s Sixth International Conference on Climate Change, including the Heartland Institute itself, had collectively received over $46 million from either Scaife Foundations, Koch Foundations, or ExxonMobil. [34]

February 2011

The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change worked with Tom Harris and the International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC) to produce a petition attempting to rebut an earlier letter written by 18 climate scientists to Members of Congress. [35]

The original, 18-scientist letter, urged “our elected leaders to work together to focus the nation on what the science is telling us, particularly with respect to impacts now occurring around the country.” [36]

The rebuttal letter organized by Harris and Idso refers to the 18 climate scientists as “climate alarmists” who “appear to be unaware of ‘what is happening to our planet’s climate,’ as well as the vast amount of research that has produced that knowledge.” [37]

SkepticalScience debunks the arguments used in the skeptic’s petition. [38]

May 16–18, 2010

The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change was an official Co-Sponsor (PDF) of the Heartland Institute’s Fourth International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC4). Craig D. Idso was also a speaker (PDF) at the conference. [39]

June 2, 2009

The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change was an official Co-Sponsor of the Heartland Institute’s Third International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC3). [40]

Crag Idso was also a registered speaker at the conference. [41]

March 8-10, 2009

The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change was an official Co-Sponsor of the Heartland Institute’s Second International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC2) in New York. [42]

DeSmogBlog researched the funding behind Heartland’s Second International Conference on Climate Change and found that sponsor organizations had received over $47 million in funding from energy companies and right-wing foundations, with 78% of that total coming from Scaife Family foundations. [43]

November 3, 2003

The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change issued a report,  “Enhanced or Impaired? Human Health in a CO2-Enriched Warmer World,” written by the “father-and-sons team of Sherwood, Craig and Keith Idso.”

According to the Center’s Press Release (PDF), “[…] People would likely be healthier and live considerably longer in a world of higher temperatures and atmospheric CO2 concentration.” [44]

The report “also describes a number of non-climatic effects of atmospheric CO2 enrichment that positively impact human health, including the concentration enhancement of various health-promoting constituents of food and medicinal plants.”

July 29, 2003

The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change issued a report (PDF) that they claim “Debunks Claims of Warming-Induced Extinctions,” arguing that more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would be beneficial because “Plants in a CO2-enriched atmosphere generally prefer warmer temperatures than they do when exposed to normal air.” [45]

The idea that doubling the CO2 in the atmosphere would be beneficial because of its impact on plant growth is a common argument by climate change skeptics, reports Skeptical Science. [46]


Joint CSCDGC/SPPI Papers

CSCDGC regularly co-publishes “original papers” with the Science Public Policy Institute (SPPI). These joint reports do not appear to be peer-reviewed, often do not list author information, and only seem to be available on the SPPI and C02 Science websites. [48]

SPPI and CSCDGC have historically published multiple papers per month on topics like the supposed benefits of CO2 on crop growth, the supposed exaggeration of sea level rise, and that species are more adaptive to climate change than mainstream science has suggested. [48]

Many of the arguments presented in the SPPI papers appear at SkepticalScience’s review of common “global warming and climate change myths.” Sample SPPI/CSCDGC papers are listed below. [48]

Benefits of Atmospheric CO2 Enrichment on Maize2015-12-29Not Listed“In summary, it seems fairly clear that as the air’s CO2 content continues to rise, and even if the climate of the world changes in the ways suggested by GCM calculations, maize plants will likely display greater rates of photosynthesis and biomass production, as well as reduced transpirational water losses and increased water-use efficiencies; and to top it all off, more areas of the world will likely become suitable for growing this important crop.”
Benefits of Atmospheric CO2 Enrichment on Tomato2015-12-22Not Listed“Clearly, the evidence reveals that as the CO2 content of the air increases, tomato plants will likely display greater rates of photosynthesis and biomass production, which should consequently lead to greater fruit yields, even under stressful conditions of fungal infection and high soil salinity.”
2015-11-17Not Listed“As demonstrated here, for many species, ocean acidification will be a non-problem … and maybe even a blessing!”
Benefits of Atmospheric CO2 Enrichment on Sunflower2015-11-04Not Listed“Thus, commercial growers of sunflower crops will likely experience enhanced yields as the atmospheric CO2 content continues to rise. “
2015-10-21Not Listed”[…] wheat growers can anticipate greater yields in the future, due to this beneficial effect of the rising atmospheric CO2 concentration.”
2015-10-14Not Listed”[…] marine life affairs pretty much deflates the catastrophic prognostications put forth by the IPCC with regard to the future of the planet’s corals”
Deserts: Are They Expanding or Shrinking?2015-10-07Not Listed“As with most of the rest of the world, therefore, as global temperatures go, so also goes the greening of the Earth … driven directly by the ongoing rise in the air’s CO2 content, and possibly indirectly by warming-induced alterations in global precipitation patterns.”
The Response of Echinoderms to Ocean Acidification2015-09-09Not Listed”[…] the impacts of ocean acidification on echinoderms may not be as bad as many initially thought. Indeed, for many echinoderm species, the impacts will likely be minimal, if not altogether positive.”
2015-09-02Not Listed”[…] even if the climate changes that are typically predicted to result from anticipated increases in the air’s CO2 content were to materialize (which we very strongly doubt will happen), the concurrent rise in the air’s CO2 concentration should more than compensate for any deleterious effects those changes in climate might otherwise have had on the growth and yield of peanuts. […] CO2 is not a pollutant; it is a pollution fighter that reduces the negative effects of true pollutants, such as ozone, and replaces them with positive effects that are of great worth to man and nature alike.”
2015-08-26Not Listed
”[…] Earth’s coccolithophores are well equipped to deal with whatever
degree of ocean acidification may yet be experienced by the world’s great water bodies.”
Alpine Ecosystem Responses to Rising Temperature and Atmospheric CO22015-08-19Not Listed”[…] alpine species in many locations are responding in a positive manner to increasing temperature and atmospheric CO2 concentrations.”
Historic Trends in Global Sea Level2015-07-29Not Listed
”[…] it would appear that real-world sea level rise has been far less
dramatic over the course of the Industrial Revolution than what has typically been claimed to be the case by the world’s climate alarmists.”
Antarctic Sea Ice Trends2015-07-22Not Listed ”[…] for some still-unproven reason, and despite the supposedly unprecedented ncreases in mean global air temperature and atmospheric CO2 concentration that the planet has experienced since the late 1970s, Antarctic sea ice extent has stubbornly refused to do what climate models say it should be doing, as it just keeps on growing.”
Effects of Ocean Acidification and Warming on Corals (Laboratory Studies)2015-07-11Not Listed”[…] it is clear that many corals will not succumb to the presumed negative impacts of rising temperatures and ocean acidification. […]  In fact, many coral species could well benefit from the warmer ocean temperatures and higher atmospheric CO2 concentrations predicted for the years and decades ahead.”
Interactive Effects of C02 and Salinity on Plant Growth2015-07-15Not Listed”[…] barley – and many other crop plants as well –should continue to respond positively to continued increases in the air’s CO2 content, even in situations where significant stresses may be present due to high soil salinity levels.”
Atmospheric C02 Enrichment: Boon or Bane of the Biosphere?2015-06-26Not ListedCriticizes Pope Francis’s position on climate change.  The paper cites work by Craig Idso and the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, and describes how “many people” believe carbon dioxide as providing “aerial fertilization” and being a boon that would “avert the otherwise near certain food and water crises looming on the horizon.”
Climate Model Inadequacies (Sea Ice)2015-06-15Not ListedQuestions models suggesting  dramatic reductions in Arctic Sea ice due to global warming.  
Mammals in a CO2-Enriched and Warmer World2015-04-27Not ListedSuggests global warming will result in increased biodiversity.
Effects of Ocean Acidification on Marine Crustaceans2015-03-31Not ListedPuts forward a “much more optimistic viewpoint” on ocean acidification caused by global warming.
Health Effects of Hot vs. Cold Temperatures in Asia2014-12-30Not ListedSuggests that global cooling is more dangerous than global warming. 
Coral Reef Responses to Temperature and Stress: Thermal Adaptation2014-12-23Not ListedSuggests that corals can adapt to increased global temperatures.
Response of Fish to Ocean Warming2014-10-31Not ListedPresents supposed evidence”in opposition to the IPCC‘s point of view” and claims that global warming will not have net harm to marine species. 
The Global Medieval Warm Period2014-10-30Not ListedSuggests that the climate has been warmer in the past, and that this warming was “known to have had a largely beneficial impact on earth’s plant and animal life.”

Other Studies

StudyStudy DateAuthor(s)Sample Media Mentions & CitationsStudy Conclusion
Physiological and ecological factors influencing recent trends in United States forest health responses to climate change,” Forest Ecology and Management2016-03-01Craig Loehle, Craig Idso, T. Bently Wigley
  • “We found that trees are tolerant of rising temperatures and have responded to rising carbon dioxide.
  • No long-term trends in US drought have been found in the literature.
  • CO2 tends to inhibit forest pests and pathogens.
  • Projections of forest response to climate change are highly variable.”
Craig D. Idso. “Stewardship and Sustainable Development in a World of Rising Atmospheric CO2: A Biblical Perspective on Humanity’s Relationship to the Biosphere” Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change2015-07-10Craig D. Idso
“Indeed, even now, we may already be unknowing participants in the great plan, as our burning of
fossil fuels releases long-sequestered carbon to the atmosphere, awakening earth’s plant life from
the lethargy of the low CO2 concentrations under which it has basically slumbered throughout
the entire history of man. Let us deeply consider these matters—even prayerfully—before we
put forth our arm to steady the ark of God. He is clearly capable of doing His own work.”
Urban CO2 Dome (Phoenix, Arizona, USA),” Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change1998Craig D. Idso “With respect to its influence on vegetation, the urban CO2 dome likely enhances the robustness of urban vegetation, given the well-documented fact that atmospheric CO2 enrichment tends to enhance plant growth rates and increase the efficiencies with which plants utilize water to produce organic matter. “

Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change Contact & Location

The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change listed the following contact information in its website as of May, 2016: [54]

Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change
P.O. Box 25697
Tempe, AZ 85285-5697
[email protected]
480-966-3719 (USA)

Social Media


  1. Media Information,” Co2 Science. Archived October 2, 2015. WebCite URL
  2. Mission Statement,” CO2Science. Archived October 3, 2015. WebCite URL 
  3. C. D. Idso and K. E. Idso. “Carbon Dioxide and Global Warming: Where We Stand on the Issue,” Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, 1998. Archived October 2, 2015. WebCite URL
  4. Josh Harkinson. “No. 8: Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change (A.K.A. The Idso Family),” Mother Jones, December 4, 2009. Archived October 2, 2015. WebCite URL
  5. Give Peace a Chance by Giving Plants a Chance,” CO2Science, Volume 2, Number 19 (October 1, 1999). Archived October 2, 2015. WebCite URL
  6. CENOSPHERES.NET,INC.,” Arizona Corporate Commission, Archived Oct 2, 2011. File Number -1278591-0.
  7. Cenospheres LLC,” Arizona Corporate Commission, Archived October 3, 2015. File Number L14490462.
  8. CO2SCIENCE,” GuideStar Charity Report. Accessed October 3, 2015.
  9. Assessing the Potential for Serious Global Warming,” CO2Science, Volume 4, Number 30 (July 25, 2001). Archived October 4, 2015. WebCite URL
  10. What Motivates the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change?”, CO2Science. Archived October 3, 2015. WebCite URL
  11. ExxonSecrets Factsheet: Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, Center for the Study of CO2 and Climate Change. Accessed October 2, 2015.
  12. Graham Readfearn. “Exclusive: Major Climate Denial Funders Donors Trust and Donors Capital Fund Handled $479 Million Of Dark Money,” DeSmogBlog, May 12, 2015.
  13. Any Kroll. “Exposed: The Dark-Money ATM of the Conservative Movement,” Mother Jones, February 5, 2013. WebCite URL
  14. Chairman,” CO2Science. Archived October 3, 2015. WebCite URL
  15. Vice President,” CO2Science. Archived October 3, 2015. WebCite URL
  16. Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change,” Center Brochure (PDF), November, 2005. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.
  17. Scientific and Policy Advisor Board Member: Donald Paul Hodel,” Co2 Science. Archived October 11, 2008.
  18. About NIPCC,” Archived October 3, 2015. WebCite URL
  19. DenialGate Highlights Heartland’s Selective NIPCC Science,” Skeptical Science, February 18, 2012. Archived October 3, 2015.
  20. Joseph Bast. “The IPCC‘s Latest Report Deliberately Excludes And Misrepresents Important Climate Science,” Forbes (Op-Ed), March 31, 2014. WebCite URL
  21. Interview: Carbon Dioxide Feeds the World,” The Heartland Institute, September 16, 2015. Archived October 3, 2015. WebCite URL
  22. Thomas D. Williams. “Pope Francis Encourages EU to Adopt Climate Goals,” Breitbart, September 17, 2015. Archived October 3, 2015. WebCite URL
  23. Craig Idso. Pope Francis, Fossil Fuels Won’t Cause Armageddon,” The Federalist, September 15, 2015. Archived October 3, 2015. WebCite URL
  24. Craig Idso. “The President’s Clean Power Plan is Built Upon a Pack of Lies,” CO2 Science, August 3, 2015. Archived October 3, 2015. WebCite URL
  25. Sponsors,” ICCC10. Archived July 15, 2015.
  26. Speakers,” ICCC-10. Archived July 26, 2015.
  27. Global Warming Policies Reflect False Assumptions, Panelists Say,” The Heartlander, July 14, 2015. Archived October 3, 2015. WebCite URL
  28. Atmospheric CO2 Enrichment: Boon or Bane of the Biosphere?CO2 Science, June 26, 2015. Archived October 4, 2015. WebCite URL
  29. TO THE MUSEUMS OF SCIENCE AND NATURAL HISTORYAN OPEN RESPONSE,”CO2 Science, April 16, 2015. Archived September 9, 2015.
  30. Neela Banerjee. “What’s Behind ALEC‘s Denial That It Denies Climate Change?“ InsideClimate News, April 14, 2015. Archived October 4, 2015. WebCite URL
  31. Cosponsors,” 7th International Conference on Climate Change. Archived May 10, 2012.
  32. Michael Fisher. “A Closer Look at Heartland’s ICCC7 Denial-a-Palooza Speakers and Sponsors,” DeSmogBlog, May 23, 2012.
  33. Sixth International Conference on Climate Change Conference Program (PDF), the Heartland Institute. Archived July 25, 2015. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog. 
  34. Brendan DeMelle. “Denial-a-Palooza 6: Heartland’s Sixth International Conference on Climate Change, Courtesy of Koch, Scaife & Exxon,” DeSmogBlog, June 30, 2011.
  35. Richard Littlemore. “Oily Strategists Mint Another Silly Climate Petition,” DeSmogBlog, February 8, 2011.
  36. The Importance of Science in Addressing Climate Change,” January 28, 2011. Republished by Climate Science Watch, February 1, 2011. Archived October 3, 2015. WebCite URL
  37. In reply to ‘The Importance of Science in Addressing Climate Change,’” February 8, 2011. Republished by WattsUpWithThat. Archived October 3, 2015. WebCite URL
  38. Carbon Dioxide and Earth’s Future: Pursuing the Prudent Path,” SkepticalScience. Archived October 3, 2015.
  39. 4th International Conference on Climate Change Conference Program (PDF), The Heartland Institute. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog. 
  40. Co-Sponsors,” Third International Conference on Climate Change. Archived July 14, 2010.
  41. Speakers,” Third International Conference on Climate Change. Archived July 14, 2010.
  42. Co-Sponsors,” The 2009 International Conference on Climate Change. Archived April 28, 2011.
  43. Heartland Institute’s 2009 Climate Conference in New York: funding history of the sponsors,” DeSmogBlog.
  44. (Press Release). “Study Touts Health Benefits of CO2-Enriched Warmer World,” (PDF), Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, November 3, 2003. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.
  45. (Press Release). “Study Debunks Claims of Warming-Induced Extinctions” (PDF). Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, July 29, 2003. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.
  46. CO2 is plant food,” Skeptical Science. Archived October 3, 2015.
  47. John Mashey. “Fred Singer Recalls Silly Attack On Consensus And Naomi Oreskes By Klaus-Martin Schulte, Lord Monckton’s Endocrinologist Front Man,” DeSmogBlog, March 30, 2015.
  48. Category Archives: Science Papers,” Science and Public Policy Institute. Archived May 5, 2016. WebCite URL
  49. “The Response of Peanut Plants to Changes in Climate and Atmospheric CO2” (PDF),Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, September 2, 2015. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.
  50. Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide,” Conservative Transparency. Search performed May 6, 2016. 
  51. “Lead Authors,” NIPCC. Archived May 7, 2016. WebCite URL
  52. NIPCC Scientists,” NIPCC. Archived May 7, 2016. WebCite URL
  53. The Climate Surprise: Why CO2 is Good for the Earth,” CO2 Coalition, April 25, 2016. Archived May 7, 2016. WebCite URL
  54. Contact the Center,” Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change. Archived May 29, 2016. WebCite URL:
  55. Nick Surgey. “Peabody Coal Bankruptcy Reveals Climate Denial Network Funding,” PRWatch, June 13, 2016. Archived June 20, 2016. WebCite URL:
  56. In re: Peabody Energy Corporation, et al. Debtors,” United States Bankruptcy Court Eastern District of Missouri Eastern Division,  Case 16-42529, May 27, 2016. Retrieved from DocumentCloud.
  57. Farron Cousins. “Court Documents Show Coal Giant Peabody Energy Funded Dozens Of Climate Denial Groups,” DeSmogBlog, June 13, 2016. 
  58. Suzanne Goldenberg and Helena Bengtsson. “Biggest US coal company funded dozens of groups questioning climate change,” The Guardian, June 13, 2016. Archived June 20, 2016. WebCite URL
  59. President,” CO2 Science. Archived July 15, 2016. WebCite URL
  60. Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change (CO2 Science): Koch Industries Climate Denial Front Group,” Greenpeace USA. Archived March 14, 2017. URL:
  61. “Dear Mr. President” (PDF), retrieved from Competitive Enterprise Institute. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmog.
  62. Graham Readfearn. “Conservative Groups Pushing Trump To Exit Paris Climate Deal Have Taken Millions From Koch Brothers, Exxon,” DeSmog, May 10, 2017.
  63. Susanne Goldberg. “Conservative groups spend up to $1bn a year to fight action on climate change,” The Guardian, December 20, 2013. Archived May 12, 2017. URL
  65. Scott Waldman. “Murray Energy a major funder of climate denial groups,” E&E News, December 17, 2019. Archived December 20, 2019. URL
  66. Lisa Friedman. “A Coal Baron Funded Climate Denial as His Company Spiraled Into Bankruptcy,” The New York Times, December 17, 2019. Archived December 20, 2019. URL
  67. Fred Palmer. “Saving US Coal – A Path Forward to Preserve the Existing Coal Fleet,”, January 13, 2020. Archived January 14, 2020. URL
  68. Saving US Coal,” CO2 Science. Archived January 14, 2020. URL:
  69. “Saving US Coal” (PDF), Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmog.
  70. Saving US Coal – Watch This PowerPoint,” CoalZoom, December 16, 2019. URL:

Other Resources

Related Profiles

APCO Worldwide Background APCO has been described as “one of the world's most powerful PR firms.” [1], [2] According to its agency profile at O'Dwyers, “APCO Worldwide is a...
Hugh W. Ellsaesser Credentials Ph.D., Meteorology. [1] Background Hugh W. Ellsaesser, born in 1920, is a meteorologist by training and retired “guest scientist” at the Lawren...
Alfred (Al) Pekarek Credentials Ph.D., University of Wyoming (1974). [1]B.A. University of Minnesota-Twin (1965). [1] Background Alfred (Al) Pekarek is a former ass...
Benny Josef Peiser Credentials Ph.D. , University of Frankfurt (1993). Peiser studied political science, English, and sports science. [1], [2] Background Benny Peiser is a sports ...