Guest essay by Eric Worrall
h/t Breitbart; California has committed to moving forward with its job destroying climate policies, regardless of vocal complaints from business leaders.
California, at Forefront of Climate Fight, Won’t Back Down to Trump
…
“California can make a significant contribution to advancing the cause of dealing with climate change, irrespective of what goes on in Washington,” Mr. Brown said in an interview. “I wouldn’t underestimate California’s resolve if everything moves in this extreme climate denial direction. Yes, we will take action.”
…
When California enacted its climate reduction standards last year, it drew fierce criticism from state business leaders.
The bills “impose very severe caps on the emission of greenhouse gases in California, without requiring the regulatory agencies to give any consideration to the impacts on our economy, disruptions in everyone’s daily lives or the fact that California’s population will grow almost 50 percent between 1990 and 2030,” the California Chamber of Commerce said.
…
“California more than ever is strongly committed to moving forward on our climate leadership,” said Kevin de Leon, the leader of the State Senate. “We will not deviate from our leadership because of one election.”
…
“If the president-elect and his administration work to undermine our climate leadership, they will hurt our economy, “ Mr. de Leon said. “They will kill jobs. And ultimately, they will hurt the economy of the United States. We are 13 percent of the overall G.D.P.”
Still, California officials and environmentalists said climate measures in place here will undoubtedly be undercut if the Trump administration rolls back environmental policies put in place by President Obama.
“Our system works better — our cap-and-trade system and other ways of addressing climate change — if we have more company,” said Anthony Rendon, the speaker of the Assembly. “The more company we have, the better.”
…
Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/26/us/california-climate-change-jerry-brown-donald-trump.html
Who do you think knows more about running a business and creating jobs, politicians or business leaders? Business leaders are sometimes happy to indulge in populist green washing, but Californian political plans go far beyond a little window dressing.
The desire for “more company” to join California’s job destroying climate plan is telling – if Californian political leaders really thought their plan made economic sense, they wouldn’t have to beg for company, other people would flock to join their climate crusade – probably all riding their eco-friendly flying pigs.
Update (EW): Fixed the link to the New York Times article
All for nothing, to accomplish nothing.
That’s the thing about pre-determined opinion – it doesn’t change.
“BB, I assume you do not live in California. You have always struck me as a sensible type, so why would you?”
Mark,why the sweeping generalization that anyone living in California is not “sensible”, and likes what’s going on? Many of us are here for completely understandable reasons, it doesn’t mean we like what’s going on, or have any power to change it.
Sorta like living anywhere in Oregon besides Portland, Salem, or Eugene.
Ahem.
A new sheriff is in town.
CA will need to do it without federal taxpayers money.
commieBob on December 27, 2016 at 5:11 pm
If business can create a profit without creating jobs, so much the better.
___________________________________________
Sure you have examples, inhuman profits.
Name some.
commieBob says
Germany was one of the most civilized countries on the face of the planet and yet it democratically voted Hitler to be dictator.
Following Kaiser Wilhelm and Bismarck in the ‘Ständestaat’ with ‘Fememorde’.
Voted Hitler? commieBob Neonazi?
My comment is awaiting moderation!
‘Wie Du in den Wald rufst so schallt es zurück.’
was’nt it commieBob calling Authority ‘Hitler’.
https://www.google.at/search?client=ms-android-samsung&ei=la5kWIXODJvwwALewIqoDw&q=the+St%C3%A4ndestaat+&oq=the+St%C3%A4ndestaat+&gs_l=mobile-gws-serp
And don’t forget the founding fathers fled the ‘Ständestaat ‘:
https://www.google.at/search?client=ms-android-samsung&ei=q65kWMS1EpXywQLJ_LW4AQ&q=us+founding+fathers+&oq=us+founding+fathers+&gs_l=mobile-gws-serp.
tell me, commieBob, about profits without working.
commieBob, you know what a Hüttler is:
a small cabin in the woods for Hüttlers, aka
https://www.google.at/search?q=H%C3%BCttler&oq=H%C3%BCttler&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l3.15867j0j4&client=ms-android-samsung&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charcoal
that’s where the Name Hitler stems from:
Black dirty charcoal from the Wienerwald.
commieBob, sure I’m with You:
‘Henry Ford discovered that he could save a lot of money by paying his employees twice the going rate.’
Where are nowadays Henry Fords? In China with Kuka?
A good 2017! Cheers – Hans
In China with Kuka and Putzmeister?
Maybe I’m just wrong, but aren’t we naturally transatlantic partners. Me thinks Trump and Putin are on a realistic way – and I’m sure I’m not alone.
Cheers
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Polish_history
Poland will back to the Jagiellonan Dynasty, helping europe on the siege of Vienna, defending Christianity.
Hungarian Victor Orban will restore the reign of Attila, King of the Huns, threatning North Italy and the triumph of Vatican over secular state.
Turkey Makhthaber Erdogan will restore the Osman Empire, ruling the black Sea and the Mediterranean Sea, the Dardanelle seaway + from Egypt through the red sea to near and far east.
Putin will consolidation from Minsk to Wladiwostok. His sole icefree Haven in Latakia, Syria
http://maps.google.com/?q=Latakia%2C+Syrien&ftid=0x1526ac2d61d4607d:0x8e325bf8a14195de&hl=de&gl=at
Why the hell he should retain from the Krimea!
Don’t you think that a realistic approach?
And Mongolia seeking for the burial of Genghis Khan – to restore a proud nation.
China’s seeking for
https://www.google.at/search?q=china+the+buried+army+of+the+first+emperor+qin%27s+buried+battalions&oq=china+the+buried+Army+of+the+first+emperor&aqs=chrome
Obama : https://www.google.at/search?q=obama+indigenous+holy+lands&oq=obama+indigenous+holy+lands&aqs=chrome
That’s just a politically approach to prevent archeology from shining a light on prehistoric settlement of the amaricas : was it done along the coasts, was it done over the frozen Bering Sea, – was it done twice time?
_____________________________________________
1st. we have to learn ‘coexistence’
– than
2nd. we’re able to find ‘coalitions’.
Any sane company will try to reduce the cost of inputs including labour. If you can reduce a cost to zero, that’s the best. Sometimes things aren’t obvious though. Henry Ford discovered that he could save a lot of money by paying his employees twice the going rate.
Things are often different than they look at first glance. Anyway, I never talked about profit without work. If you know how to do that, let me know.
“A majority of Californians don’t want nuclear generation ….”
Really Beta, I think your are lying. Please provide a link to the ballot measure.
I worked at a nuke plant in California. The money for the political campaign to close that nuke plant came from Jane Fonda and PG&E.
First off most people do not care how their electricity is produced but they do care about the cost of power. There are a few vocal groups but the are against everything. I would say the ‘majority’ does not care and does not have an opinion until a pollster asks.
Second. power plants are not based on popular vote. I am not against it, it is just not how it’s done. That is really good for California since 1/3rd of the power comes from out of state.
A while back a LA city councilman did not like something said in Arizona and proposed a boycott of Arizona products. An Arizona commissioner said great, we will start by letting California boycott water and power from Arizona.
Since people in California use power, this implies that they both have a say in how it’s produced and accept choices they do not like. If you do not like something, you can challenge it in court. Courts like evidence.
This is no evidence that wind and solar is good for the environment. I have read the environmental impact statements (EIS). Renewable energy is not renewable. Solar panels do not grow in trees.
I am an engineer. Choices have to pass the practical test. Texas has a modest mandate for wind and solar. Over twenty years, the state of Texas will find if wind and solar pass the practical test. The more electricity Texas makes with wind, the more natural gas Texas can sell to California.
Texas also has coal and nuclear. More natural gas Texas can sell to California.
So when nuke plants shut down in California, more natural gas Texas can sell to California.
California has huge natural gas reserves just off shore. Banned long time ago. More natural gas Texas can sell to California.
So it would seem a 50% mandate would be good policy to reduce the more natural gas Texas can sell to California.
For those who live in California and are stuck with stupid, you may want to check how much wind power comes from other states. The jobs and property taxes come out of the pockets of California ratepayers.
So when the CEO of PG&E says no problem what he means is he has no problem tacking on 10% to the mandated costs so the shareholders will give him a nice bonus.
Just for the record and the edification of those outside the US, there many utility CEOs who work hard to keep rates low by making good choices for their customers.
“As advocates of nuclear power, ….”
I am an advocate of what makes sense. For example, the US navy uses nuclear propulsion on certain ships because not needed to be refueled provides a tactical advantage.
Since I had lots of nuclear experience from the navy and we were building lots of new commercial nuke plants when I got out of the navy, I stayed in the nuclear field because I enjoyed it and they paid me too.
There are many places where nuclear power is the best practical choice for base load power. It depends on the cost of transportation of fossil.
I am not an advocate of nuclear power to reduce climate change.
I am an advocate of biomass renewable energy where it can be shown to be a more practical choice. For example in the lumber and paper industries, co-generation of power is a good way to dispose of wood waste.
Wind and solar is never a practical way to provide power to the grid. It is never a good for the environment. Is it less bad than coal. I do not think so based on reading many documents on environmental impact.
The fact that engineers can make some power from the impractical is a evidence of our skill as engineers. Maybe it is evidence of our poor communications skill. Wind and solar is a poor solution to a problem that does not exist.
I am an old retired engineer, such as yourself and find this alternative energy makes no sense at all, both economically and environmentally, totally stupid. I am from OZ and try to keep tabs on what is happening in the world.
This governor Brown person in Calibloodyfornia comes across to most right thinking people in the outside world as a dipstick of the worst kind.
My understanding of that state is that it will be destroyed by earthquakes and volcanoes before climate change, whether it be hot or another ice age becomes a problem, these are the things that the governor should be planning for. Governor Brown is Texas greatest asset.