Energy and Commerce Chairman John Dingell (D-Mich.) found an unlikely ally in his spat with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) over a new climate-change panel: former committee chairman Joe Barton (R-Texas).

While Barton and Dingell have butted heads on energy policy, the two were like-minded in their opposition to a select committee on climate change that would operate outside the bounds of their own committee.

Dingell compared the panel, which Pelosi is pushing as a way to draw attention to the issue of global warming, to “feathers on a fish.”

Keeping with the avian theme, Barton’s spokeswoman Lisa Miller called the effort “a publicity machine with wings.”

Pelosi has put global warming and energy independence near the top of her priority list, after having successfully pushed through the Six in ’06 agenda. She has said she wants a climate-change bill on the floor by July.

A select committee on global warming “will give us the opportunity to gather state-of-the-art scientific research, focus public attention on these urgent issues, and support the work of the authorizing committees,” Pelosi said in a letter to colleagues.

After the select committee was announced, Barton quickly gathered about 15 Republican energy lobbyists in a meeting on Capitol Hill where he implored them to ask members they knew to vote against the creation of the committee.

“He said, ‘Let’s support Dingell on this,’” one lobbyist who attended the meeting said.

In an effort to ease opposition from Dingell and others, Pelosi wrote in her memo that the select committee would not have legislative authority and would be disbanded after two years. But the idea still makes members nervous, particularly those close to fossil fuel industries that would be among the hardest-hit under carbon dioxide caps. Dingell is a longtime supporter of the domestic auto industry, which could find it tough to comply with a tough global-warming bill.

“That’s what they always say,” one Democratic aide said of the limits the Speaker has put on the committee.

Lobbyists come into play because the creation of a select committee likely requires a floor vote.

Energy lobbyists largely sat out the debate on the tax subsidies, believing their efforts would be of more use in the Senate, where a closer voting margin improves the chances to alter some aspects of the package.

But the climate-change panel seemed to create a bigger stir on K Street. Democratic energy lobbyists began quietly to do their own whipping, fearing the select committee signaled a shift to the left on climate change.

The issue holds “enormous consequences” for their clients, one of the lobbyists said.

“It’s game-changing for the entire economy,” the lobbyist said.

Increasingly, however, businesses are coming forward seeking clarity on the issue of climate change. General Electric, DuPont, Alcoa and Duke Energy announced the creation of a coalition to press the administration and Congress to address global warming through efforts like a mandatory cap on carbon dioxide.

Democratic lobbyists, meanwhile, concentrated on members from energy-producing states, so-called oil-patch members already a little peeved at the repeal of billions of dollars in tax breaks the industry now receives, and on the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), one of the most powerful subgroups within the Democratic Caucus.

Lobbyists argued, according to a Democratic aide and a lobbyist, that traditional committee structure is more suited to the interests of the Blue Dogs and the CBC, which has several members in charge of congressional panels.

A select committee likely requires a floor vote. Lobbyists said Speaker Pelosi could still create a lesser panel -— a task force, for instance — that wouldn’t require a vote.

Energy and Commerce Democrats met Friday, after which Dingell wrote a memo that summed up his position: “This entity would exist for a fixed period of time and can take the form of a Speaker’s Committee within the Democratic Caucus or a Task Force of the House,” the memo stated.

But a source close to the Speaker said a vote is likely to be held, although given the remaining confusion over what authority the panel would possess, the vote is likely to be delayed until after this week.