The town I live in, Chico, CA is sometimes known as “Berkeley North” due to the liberal influence of Chico State University (CSUC). In this case, CSUC’s sustainability cabal, led by Professor Mark Stemen and Mayor Ann Schwab, has snookered our town into passing a “Climate Action Plan”.
Last Tuesday, our city council (who’s been deep in the red financially) approved by a 6 to 1 vote, the “Climate Action Plan” (CAP) from the “Sustainability Task Force”. It’s quite the hoot, because as I point out, they could buy “carbon indulgences”, for less than the cost of the “studies” money, and be done with it rather than continue to waste everybody’s time and effort. But in my opinion, the CAP really isn’t about results, it is about a continued agenda and public funds being used to support that agenda.
Here’s the story on it:
Full story here
Here’s what went down in discussion:
But Councilor Larry Wahl contested whether a Climate Action Plan, or its subsequent directives, would produce any “tangible benefit” to Chico.
“I do not literally see what this will accomplish … Will the sky be bluer? Will anything be prettier?” Wahl asked.
Holcombe said he didn’t want the city to take the chance that it wouldn’t.
“Nature is not waiting and certainly I don’t want the city of Chico to wait,” Holcombe said.
The rest of the council supported Holcombe.
By a 6-1 vote with Wahl dissenting, the council directed the creation of a Climate Action Plan, simultaneously approving a number of actions to be implemented in the first phase of the plan.
Here’s the Climate Action Plan (PDF) as it was approved that night. You’ll find it starting on page 80 of the meeting agenda. The Enterprise Record wrote a scathing editorial on it:
Full editorial here.
I had identified the same issues, but took it a step further with my letter to the editor I sent, citing what I recently discovered about the Chicago Climate Exchange:
============================================
Dear Editor:
Regarding the recently passed city “Climate Action Plan,” one good idea is the installation of LED street lighting. While it won’t do much to offset carbon dioxide (since power plants program for lower idle loads at night) it will save money due to increased power efficiency. Anything minimizing expense and waste is a good thing for our spend-happy city government.
Besides this misguided but fiscally sensible idea, I note this in the Climate Action Plan: “Carbon Offsets Goal 1: Purchase Carbon Offsets Where Cost Effective.”
Since Team Schwab seems determined to waste money on this, I’ll point out three things:
1. Carbon offset trading in the USA is essentially dead. Even Sen. Harry Reid admits this. The Senate failed to pass cap and trade.
2. If they must waste money, don’t wait, do it now, because carbon offsets at the Chicago Climate Exchange are going for the bargain price of 5 cents per ton, down from the heyday highs of $7.50 per ton. See www.chicagoclimatex.com.
A bag of charcoal briquettes is worth more right now.
3. The plan said Chico emits 516,000 tons of carbon. At that price, we can offset the whole town for $25,800, far less than the cost of the actual city “Climate Plan.”
Maybe the council should buy boatloads of carbon credits at 5 cents per ton then resell it to the clueless Europeans trading carbon at nearly $20 per ton (see www.ecx.eu).
Yeah, that’s the ticket out of our city financial crisis.
Anthony Watts,
Chico CA
===========================================
Here’s the price today:
Waste money now, or later? That is the question.
For the record, I like LED lighting, and I put my money where my mouth is.
My view of carbon offsets? The City of Chico could buy them here, save our public funds, and they’d be just as effective. In fact, if they print them on this paper, the 69 cents a sheet paper would actually be worth more than the 5 cents per ton of carbon they “offset”.
Such a deal, sounds just like a job for our city government.
=========================================
UPDATE: I’ve added the PowerPoint presentation given at the City Council Meeting which you can download here: CityCouncil9-7
Installing LED street lights is part of a “carbon offset” plan? In what stretch of the imagination? Or does Chico generate their own electricity? You’d probably emit more CO2 with the linemen trucks moving around replacing them one by one more than you’d save, unless you replace them by attrition. I feel sorry for the lone councilman who seemed preoccupied for tangible results for the citizenry of the city. Silly guy. But as I’m sure we’re all used to by now, it is style over substance these days.
Surreal
This is all quite funny in a sad sort of way. I’m sure all these people have nearly wet themselves with excitement at how smart and virtuous they imagine themselves to be totally unaware as to the howls of mirth they induce in the sane world. And thanks to Mark for offering himself up for our amusement like a pompous chew toy. Ah, me….
Mark writes:
“It is fine for you own blog, but it is a disservice to our community.”
So what Mark is saying then is that my free speech, my right to publish my opinion in a local newspaper, on a local issue, should be revoked because he sees a dissenting opinion as a “disservice to our community.”
Thanks for allowing me to continue publishing in my blog, I’m forever grateful.
Anthony- you say
“In fact, if they print them on this paper, the 69 cents a sheet paper would actually be worth more than the 5 cents per ton of carbon they “offset”.”
This is one of the funniest comments you have posted this year! Bravo!
P Gosselin says:
September 13, 2010 at 1:19 pm
Anyone still interested in the “free” economy?
“Live free and die?” 😉
The university could probably save some CO2 emissions by firing Professor Mark. Would anyone notice his absence?
Anthony,
You have a right to say whatever you want, wherever you want.
I don’t care if you play fast on loose with the facts on your blog.
I will call you on your BS, however, when you drag our town into it.
As a reminder to all your readers, this blog is also posted in our local paper, and the original lie was sent in as a letter to the editor
REPLY: Wow, now you care calling my constitutionally protected free speech opinion a “lie”? Mark, you’ve gone off the deep end. Serenity now buddy. Hey, newsflash professor! The town IS in it- through no action of mine. You should quit while you are ahead, you’ve now left factual discourse and descended into spinning silliness. – Anthony
I like the idea of buying a few hundred carbon offsets (if the certificates were printed on individual pieces of paper). Imagine what a unique collectors item these will be in 50-100 years. Better than Confederate currency.
Darrin – Ain’t that the truth . Sadly , far too many college towns have gotten that way .
You have to admit, its probably a nice head trip for those selected to be on the “Sustainability Task Force” where they can be self important, self-righteous bores.
JT
Two years ago we re-did our kitchen and used 12 volt lighting under the cabinets. Recently, one quit on us and I went to a lighting store and had the transformer replaced. While there, I looked at the LED under-cabinet lights and was impressed with their low usage and their coolness. Until I asked their price. The lights we have cost about 40 bucks for an 18 inch fixture. The same LED fxture costs $180. I wonder what it is going to cost your city to replace all its street lights and how long will it take to re-coup the expense through lower electric bills.
Mark says:
September 13, 2010 at 2:23 pm
“I have not received a single cent for my work, nor has my department. ”
And pigs fly.
LED lighting has come of age. Granted the stuff you buy will be made in China, but so are Apple computers. If you go with LEDs go for the SMD type and not the bazillion small leds mounted on wafers and enclosed in a capsule. They will not last. While LEDs do not emit a lot of heat, they emit some. When it is trapped in the capsule (no convective cooling) the solder joints thermally stress. Eventually you will have a wafer at a time drop out because their connection to the power bus running through the bulb fatigued to death. Some of the open air ones are ok, but if you stick with the SMD flavor, you will win. As to the difference in price between high pressure sodium and LEDs I will not comment. As has been pointed out, you have to take man-hours into account when you swap them out.
Even less expensive than the CCX, although less official:
http://www.freecarbonoffsets.com/home.do
I hope the city of Chico has good insurances for the unintended consequences to go for LED streetlights. Remember this story?
http://www.newser.com/story/76251/led-traffic-lights-efficient-but-cant-melt-away-snow.html
REPLY: not really a problem here, 1 snow event in 5 years is typical, and we already have LED traffic lights. – Anthony
$70,000. I hope the council got some free sustainable organic cotton T-shirts with that 🙂
Hey Anthony,
There are a series of debates scheduled on AB 32/ Prop 23.
Do you want to crawl out and play?
Or is it too scary in public?
REPLY: Oh Mark, please. You know with my hearing loss as bad as it is now, I can’t participate in a live debate. I can’t hear well enough to keep up. I can give presentations, but I can’t do live interaction well. I’m at a huge disadvantage. Have you noticed that my radio broadcasts on KPAY are no longer “live in the studio” interactive? I record them because I can’t keep up with the one-on-one fast paced dialog. Oh sorry, you never listen to my station.
I can do presentations, just like I did on TV, but Q&A with audience is really rough. During my Australian tour I had to have an “interpreter” who would listen to questions from the audience and then repeat them to me on-stage. Even then I didn’t get them all because he had an accent.
But if you want to add “abusing the handicapped” to your resume already soiled with the free speech issue you made here, please be my guest.
Until you live with hearing loss, please don’t pretend to lecture to me about being “scared” or “crawling out”. You should be ashamed.
– Anthony
Odd, Mark thinks he called someone else on the BS….
Are these the same people teaching our kids?
Is this what they are teaching them?
Do they ever get out in the real world?
Do they really melt in sun light?
…..stay tuned for another installment of The Day of the Triffids………
Mark, if you co-authored the paper and the researchers were paid for their work, were they paid directly by the city council or through the University, and did you co-author as a private citizen or as a member of the University? I ask this because, putting out is quite the big deal at Universities. Publish or perish. You keep your job because you publish, and because you publish you reap money awards in the future. You may not have had the audit money put in your department’s account, but having a publishing record related to CO2 garners more grants of any kind in the future. And you know that.
I’ve been in the Ivory tower and sad to say, the childish attitude shown by whoever this Mark guy is, is what I experienced. It’s as if churlishness in some research circles is a resume requirement.
Let’s get back to the cost of this thing Chico is doing. Does seem a bit over the top to me, and focused on bandwagon appearances rather than impactful decisions. Plus buying carbon credits seems like the way to go as a first step. Meanwhile, focusing on what lowers city service expenses seems very reasonable, politically smart, and party-blind in the long term.
When I was a kid, rumor was, some other kids (not I, I hasten to add) would shoot out streetlights with powerful slingshots. What is the replacement cost of LED’s vs. incandescents, and has that been factored into the economics of the use of LED’s as streetlights?
Mark says:
September 13, 2010 at 3:02 pm
You guys never have the balls to debate. Look what a waste of time Cameron was when he reneged in public.
When one has no facts on one’s side, it is mighty hard to debate and win, as wimpy Cameron found out.
REPLY: Actually, in defense of Mark, he does. And has. I sat in on a debate several years ago (when I still had some hearing left) with him. – Anthony
Sodium vapor lamps are more efficient than LED’s so why use LED’s for street lights?
http://cypress.csuchico.edu/APO/Course_net1/GreenCourses.aspx
Is this environmentalism taught in the religion department?