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
The problem with that statement is the question of whether or not these officials were actually lawfuly elected or not. A personal example is the occasion when I went to vote at my local precinct polling location in California, was denied the right to vote despite my valid voter’s registration card, and was threatened with arrest before even having an opportunity to speak one word to even question the reason why. While I was leaving the polling location, I stopped outside long enough to read the posted list of voters registered to vote at this polling location. My name had been removed from my correct street address and the names, plural, substituted for mine were those of illegal aliens who certainly did not have a legal residence at my house address. In fact, the names were the same names appearing in the mail from the California Department of Motor Vehicles, and you could see through the envelope window that they were California driver’s licenses issued to people who certainly did not and never did reside in my home of many years.
All efforts to report the false driver’s licenses and the vote fraud of the polling officials to the California Department of Motor Vehicles, the county sheriff, the California State Highway Patrol, the county recorder, and the final recommended authority, the state attorney general’s office were met with strong hostility, accusations of racial bias, and intimidating threats to have me arrested for opening someone else’s mail, which was never opened to this day. My experience is far far from unique. Court cases pursuing massive voter fraud in California have made it all the way through the U.S. District Courts, only to be overturned on some controversial technical grounds by justices of the appelate court with backgrounds from the same political party benefiting from the vote fraud.
In another state and time a candidate challenged an incumbent who conventional wisdom indicated was certainly in a supposedly safe voting district. Angry voters, however, gave the challenger a strong lead in all but two counties, where there were some very suspicious lopsided voting statistics. In at least one of those two counties, the vote results were delayed when the county recorder claimed the vote counting machine had failed, and the ballots and votes would have to be recounted manually. An anonymous source later confirmed being a witness to the workers in the county recorder’s office going through the ballots and destroying the ballots with votes for the challenger.
Science is under asssault by some of the same individuals who are corrupting the integrity of our democratic institutions. As a consequence, citizens cannot take it for granted that elected officials actually have a true mandate from the citizens to exercise the authority delegated by the sovereign citizens.
Wow : (
I read over the comments and was very surprised by the response.
In the US, each county seat in conjunction with the support of town councils is required to implement State mandates like Executive Order S-3-05. In this case it was the State that opted for the action related to GHGs. Usually, the loons in Washington mandate regulation and compliance using the threat of withholding federal funding for non-compliance.
The County seat typically contracts for feasibility, environmental, etc. studies because they aren’t experts or don’t want to take the rap for bad conclusions. This is the real problem.
Sustainability is a worthy cause — CO2 isn’t the problem — wasting tax dollars is the issue.
In my opinion, the real problem is Executive Order S-3-05. A mandate without providing adequate tools to the counties.
Chico should not have had to do several studies, should have been given a State plan, and should have simply had the local high school students plug the numbers into a State website for analysis.
This isn’t about Professor Mark (who btw seems like a reasonable guy) — its about the inefficiency of government that wastes resources and our tax dollars.
The People’s Republic of Chico is missing a golden opportunity. Why not slap a carbon tax on the sale of beans, lentils, and cabbages? Make no mistake about it; I’m talking about Killer Anthropogenic Methane Emissions, or KAME. However I may not be the first to broach this delicate subject. Apparently great minds think alike.
Blame it on lentil lovers, not sheep
01 April 2010
http://jennifermarohasy.com/articles182.html
(Jennifer Marohasy is a biologist and author from Australia.)
I ran across some of the Orange County approach and it largely relates to water, land use, and public transportation projects as the basis for emissions reductions. Its actually pretty cleaver.
I wonder if the counties are coordinating and if they require the use of products manufactured in California to achieve the various projects?
Its probably asking a lot but it would be great if they are being smart about the solutions.
SB 375
Impact Analysis Report
http://www.uli.org/~/media/Documents/ResearchAndPublications/Reports/Sustainable%20Development/SB375ImpactAnalysisReport.ashx
Urban Land Institute/Orange County
http://orangecounty.uli.org/sitecore/content/ULI2Home/ResearchAndPublications/PolicyPracticePriorityAreas/Sustainability.aspx
John from CA says:
September 14, 2010 at 4:22 pm
“Sustainability is a worthy cause — CO2 isn’t the problem — wasting tax dollars is the issue.”
It would appear that the “sustainability” sought by the ruling class in Chico is the sustainability of their positions and salaries…they make sure to get theirs before spending your money…
Glenn says
“If the “researchers” were Mark’s students, would they be considered consultants?
And what overhead do you refer? Riding bikes and cruising the Internet? And why would $10 an hour be considered cheap for a student that is involved by a teacher to do research?”
I was only making a comparison – while it is true that they were students, they were acting as consultants. Even my administrator and support people get more than $10 a hour. If the studnets get any benefits, it’s overhead.
That was the nominal Gorian PR hoped-for minimum, AFAIK. The EUX is currently about $15/MTE; official Warmist estimates are that it should be pushed up to about $45 to have any effect.
Actually, “Sustainability” is code for the whole panoply of loon-beloved and grotesque inefficiencies and imaginary Gaian benefits.
The basic trick is that some arbitrary and assumptive base is taken as the ideal, whether it’s the present state of affairs, or some imaginary 18th C Elysium, and anything purporting to force inputs and outputs to match is “sustainable”, and deviations are fair game for any manner of financial or penal penalties.
It is a core catch-word of the UN’s Agenda 21, and of the programme of every other watermelon pressure group on the planet.
Beware!
Mark says:
September 13, 2010 at 6:48 pm
For the rest of you, Anthony twisted the truth to make the task force look silly. It is his pattern. My pattern is to sink to his level in my replies to WUWT, and get even worse in the cesspool of Topix.
No, Anthony twisted nothing, but your ego required you to try to bluster your way onto a “community” forum and beard the lion in his den. (I say bluster because you have yet to substantiate any of the slanderous statements made about Anthony or his writings.). I guess in the college world, the word of a tenured “professor” is akin to an acclamation from God. However in the real world, where facts and figures are needed, your word and a buck will get you a cup of coffee – and they want the buck before they give you the coffee.
I have waited for Anthony’s reply, but I understand that he is busy with other (more important) things, and there is not much for him to say.
My beef is clear. Anthony wanted to make fun of the task force, which is all good and well, but he reached too far. He also provided the necessary proof, the powerpoint. Check for yourselves, carbon offsets are nowhere to be found. The list he found in the staff report was being sent to the task force for discussion. He overreached before when I submitted the GHG Inventory, which had a similar list of possible actions for discussion. The first time was an honest mistake. The second time . . . Well maybe it was a careless mistake, or maybe it was deliberate? Since Anthony and I have history, my perspective is jaded, and suspect.
It is a common refrain from those on “your side” (to generalize) that researchers are in it for the money, and the publications. You seem unable to believe that I did this simply as a service to my community. I live here. I volunteer here. I participate in local government by attending City Council meetings, and meetings like the Sustainability Task Force. To set a reduction target, they needed a baseline. The report identified percentages for each sector, but the important piece of information was 515, 910 MTE. The City’s normal consultants wanted $100,000 for the report, and the task force balked, and this was before the economic meltdown. The report was more time consuming that technical, so I figured I could help.
I put together a proposal to hire students and former students to collect the data and plug it into the software the city had purchased. The City has a historic relationship with the University Research Foundation that made the contract portion easy, since the Foundation could handle the payroll, liability, and auditing requirements. The Foundation hired three of my former students (2MA, 1BA) and one current student who say the ad. They were paid $15-$20. The Foundation also took their cut of the $30,000 as “indirect.” I wish the money had gone to the students doing the work, but that is the arrangement between the City and the University.
I was paid nothing. I received no release time. I carried the standard 4/4 teaching load. I wrote the report on my own time, and on my own computer. Sorry to disappoint, but in this case, you are wrong.
I do not need to say these things to people in Chico. They know. They know me. They know I am a fellow member of the Chico community and not a snake oil salesman. I do not want to demean WUWT, but your discussions are not attached to any ‘place.’ Thus, when you comment on actual actions in actual places, you overlook the important but obvious details, like the fact it does not snow in Chico.
And lastly, what does my profession “have” to do with anything? Few of you even use your own name, let alone have the moderator out your employer. This is a blog, and I am a blogger. Period. Why do I have to argue any differently than the rest of you?
And for people who fault IPPC data, RatemyProfessor.com? Really?
REPLY: Well Mark, once again you’ve put your foot in your mouth. Yes I’ve been busy, for example yesterday I had to prepare and present a powerpoint to a group of Chico citizens, so yes there were more important things to do. My reply is forthcoming. – Anthony
Please fix my post, had to have in last paragraph. I will live with the other typos. Thanks
And lastly, what does my profession had to do with anything
And lastly, what does my profession “have” to do with anything
REPLY: Fixed, Anthony
Mark,
As part of my research for my response, I’ve heard that you came up to councilman Larry Wahl (the lone dissenting vote) and said to him:
“You are going down in flames Wahl”.
Care to comment?
The comment was from the crowd. I relayed to Larry that I corrected them and point out, if anything, Larry was moving up in flames since he is moving from Council to Board of Supervisor. It was loud in the lobby after the meeting, and late. I am sorry Larry misheard what I said. I will be sure to chat with him again next meeting
I await your response.
And, who was the group, if I might ask.
REPLY: It might have been me that misheard, I’m the one with the hearing problem. He did mention the “up in flames” comment too, but I thought it was his quip.
And you wonder why why people don’t like to attend city council meetings? The last time I was there, presenting what was my right, I was shouted at, humiliated, name called, and generally run through the ringer, all for what is my right as a citizen. Your liberal friends there are just plain rude and childish, sort of like the name calling behavior you’ve demonstrated over this episode.
And I’ve sat there as an elected official and taken it too, thought I did take one person to task for calling the whole school board (including me at the time) a “bunch of Nazi’s” in the hall of democracy, aka the City Council chambers.
Most sensible people avoid city council meetings these days, I sure do, as I’m not welcome there thanks to the group of people you hang out with. Maybe, though just maybe, if I ever do go again, I’ll take my hearing aids out, and let them squeal in feedback at the podium while I talk. That way I can’t hear the insults being hurled from the “friends of …” (choose your topic).
Yes been busy, caught NOAA in a major blunder yesterday/today, have orders to get out, have more meetings this week with Chamber of Commerce, plus visitors from China to entertain…so probably won’t be until the weekend until you see my fully researched response. You’ll know it when you see it.
– Anthony
@Mark
Glad to see your explanations. It seems to me that the back and forth ‘twixt you and Anthony is on more narrow issues than the issues the commenters here have discussed. I’ve just been hanging out and waiting to read what you and Anthony have to say.
Meanwhile, since broader issues have been raised, and if you have the time…
Is it true you don’t give tests? Do your students grade themselves?
I do not give exams in my classes. The students take quizzes, and turn in around forty pages of written work. They write two page “journals” each week, plus three longer essays on various topics.
Students in one class (GEOG 440) grade themselves on one assignment, participation in the class service learning project.
Thanks for asking
“It is a common refrain from those on your side (to generalize) that researchers are in it for the money, and the publications.”
That is because…they are! And the status. Climate researchers don’t work for free…
Climate Ca$h is as abundant these days as excessive CO2, especially in the University community. I can’t blame them, though. It’s fun to work on dubious projects with other people’s money…
Meanwhile, our economy is going to pot, unemployment is at 10%, and we’re racking up massive debt.
Mark says:
September 15, 2010 at 8:45 am
(In response to H.R.’s queries)
“I do not give exams in my classes. The students take quizzes, and turn in around forty pages of written work. They write two page “journals” each week, plus three longer essays on various topics.
Students in one class (GEOG 440) grade themselves on one assignment, participation in the class service learning project.
Thanks for asking”
Quizzes are short tests. Now I’m LMAO at those online reviews because there are going to be a bunch of very surprised students if they’ve signed up on the basis of “no tests & grade yourself.”
It’s an amusing sidebar. Thanks for your time.
Frank K. said at 10:11 am
That is because…they are! And the status. Climate researchers don’t work for free… Climate Ca$h is as abundant these days as excessive CO2, especially in the University community.
And that IS the “status” through out the higher education system. It’s “Go Green” or get left behind. For example, here is part (some deadlines removed to save space) of the syllabus of a GEOGRAPHY course taught at Chico U. –
GEOG 440: Environmental Thought and Action (No, it’s not a Political Science class, it’s a Geography)
This seminar will integrate the various interdisciplinary curricular elements of the Environmental Studies minor and provide students with an appreciation for the interplay between the many interrelated dimensions—the scientific, the social, the historical, and the humanistic—of the study of the environment.
Readings
Any environmental title purchased this semester from Galaria books
Mark Stemen ed., Environmental Studies Reader
Objectives
Increase knowledge of important writings in environmental studies
Synthesize and reflect on the ideas and theories presented in other environmental studies classes
Translate abstract thought into concrete action
Learn direct democracy skills
Produce a resume and job application
Practice buying and reading books without instructions from a teacher.
Weekly reading assignments and course work deadlines
January 27 — The 411
Wendell Berry, “Higher Education and Home Defense”
January 29 — Top Ten Issues
List of Issues due
February 3 — Campus Ballot Issues
Narrow top ten issues to two or three
February 5 — The Century of Declines
Heinberg, Peak Everything
February 10 — How to Write an Initiative
Draft Initiative
BOD meeting Wednesday, 12pm, BMU 205
February 12— Getting Real About the Future
Kunstler, Making Other Arrangements
February 17 — Negotiating the Process
Finalize initiative wording – Initiative Due by 5pm
February 19 — Change Agents
Meadows, “Tools for the Transition to Sustainability”
McKenzie-Mohr, “Creating Effective Messages”
February 24 — The Art of Tabling
Form campaign committees
February 26 — Eugene Conference – No Class
March 3 — Excuse me, would you like to sign . . .
Gather signatures
March 5 — For the Love of the Earth
Rassmussen, Green Rage
March 10 — Signature Update
Bring signatures sheets to class
March 12 — Mother Culture and the Great Forgetting
Quinn, “The Public Lectures of B”
Signature Deadline – March 15, 5pm in BMU 205
March 24 — Planning a Campaign
March 26 — Intentions and Design
McDonough, “This Book is Not a Tree”
March 31 — Campaign Update
April 2 — What is Food?
Pollan, “An Eater’s Manifesto”
April 7 — Campaign Update
April 9 — Living Simply
Sanders, The Common Life
April 14 — GOTV: Get Out The Vote
Group campaign effort around campus
April 16 — Sustainable Transportation
Mark Svenvold, Send in the Clowns
April 21 — Campaign Reflection
April 23 — Another Turn of the Crank
Berry, Think Little
April 28 — Look what I found!
Book of Choice presentations
May 5 — What do you want to be when you grow up?
May 7 — What is Environmental Studies?
May 12 — Rachel Carson and Silent Spring
Video: Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring
May 14 — “that which we tame”
??? GEOGRAPHY??? AND Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring?? Pleaaaaase!
Even taking into consideration that it is the Geography AND Planning Dept. wherein it suggests: Geography invites critical and creative thinking about our impact on the earth, the equitable distribution of resources, and sustainable livelihoods across the globe. (Geography does that? Except for the word “earth”, what the H does any of …. never mind.) The Department of Geography and Planning provides students with opportunities to practice critical spatial thinking and research skills using advanced technologies in geographic information sciences, cartography, remote sensing and planning. one must ask- “practice critical spatial thinking and research skills”?? Not in GEOG 440! It’s all about becoming a political enviro-activist. But hey, I can’t blame Mark. Somebody has to teach these kids how to survive in the new Socialist Order. If you can get the Ca$h for it, do it!
and go here – http://cypress.csuchico.edu/APO/Course_net1/GreenCourses.aspx
for an amazing list of “green” courses like: “Religion and America’s Ethnic Minorities” & “Mysticism: East and West”….?? Well, it is California…. and if it only was thus in the lane of fruits & nuts.
Mark,
Your explanation is exactly what I wanted to emphasize with my note about billing rates. I’ve worked for engineering consulting firms for over twenty years, and any study/evaluation/report that required over 1200 hours of labor would be much more expensive with a conventional consulting firm. The $100,000 quoted would have been cheap.
Profesor Stemen,
Assuming you don’t mind answering a question, is there any California effort to coordinate the mass purchase of break through technology with the idea of attracting new business, manufacturing, job creation, and maximizing ROI?
It seems like an obvious opportunity to also promote California institutions like Caltech and Disney? Disney has been a leader in energy efficiency and waste management for decades.
Thanks,
John from Orange County, CA
Caltech GHG Mitigation Summary
http://www.sustainability.caltech.edu/climate/mitigation_projects
“Caltech utilized the Clean Air-Cool Planet (CACP) greenhouse gas emissions calculator to compile its emissions footprint. The CACP model was chosen since it was designed to model university emissions, has been widely used by other universities and is endorsed by the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE).”
They managed to establish a 63,000 MTCO2e for 1990 and a historical trend to 2009. Solar and Biogas Fuel Cells are part of their plan.
http://www.sustainability.caltech.edu/climate
Anthony,
I do believe it was your friends who were acting rude and childish at the last meeting.
http://www.newsreview.com/chico/content?oid=1653469
And that is not to say you were not treated the same.
So how do you think I feel when you hurl rude and childish claims from your computer?
I await your reply to my claim you misled people about the actions of the council that night having anything to do with buying carbon offsets.
Take your time. I’ll check back in a few days.
If they are serious, there are immediate simple steps that can be taken.
#1 Turn off the air conditioning in all city buildings, open the windows. Including the University buildings.
#2 Turn down the heat for winter to 62F. People can wear sweaters. In Chico this should eliminate the need for heating for most days.
vigilantfish says:
September 13, 2010 at 8:45 pm
It’s unfortunate that Mark ..feels the need to belittle us.
Here in the UK our National Head of Taxation (collecting) recently said he didn’t feel he had any need to apologise for the fact that something like 6 million UK taxpayers had been paying the wrong amount of tax for about 4 years and would now have to pay up!
It must be something that affects only people paid out of taxes the rest of us pay.
TomVonk says:
September 14, 2010 at 6:45 am
So, is this really your business?
I think it is .
Because the rather horrifying example of Chico today might be our reality tomorrow .
We have also our opportunistic Marks, our confused Holcombs and our crazy environmentalists who would like us spending money to count tons of carbon and worse .
But we have succeeded to hold them in check sofar .
So yes , I think we are all concerned
California is on the verge, the very edge, of going bankrupt. An economy equal to that of the 7th largest country in the world. Would be a bigger, far bigger, bankruptcy than Greec or Portugal. Wasting small ($70,000 small!) amounts of money on these exercises in small cities throughout the state and larger amounts in bigger cities and undoubtedly other amounts on equally daft projects is one major reason why California will soon be bankrupt!
That link Mark posted:
http://www.newsreview.com/chico/content?oid=1653469
Those council members look about as disinterested in the citizenry… as our federal government did, in all of us, when we were sending e-mails, letters and phone calls to not bail out AIG and their ‘partners in crime’.