Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Article from CALSEIA

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Article from CALSEIA

    Special Update:
    Governor Brown’s Executive Order Setting a 2030 Greenhouse Gas Reduction Target for California
    Bernadette Del Chiaro, Executive Director, CALSEIA
    April 29, 2015

    The California Solar Energy Industries Association (CALSEIA) applauds Governor Brown’s Executive Order setting a 2030 greenhouse gas emission reduction target (B-30-15).

    Quadrupling the state’s greenhouse gas emission reductions from 1990 levels by 2020 to 40% below those levels by 2030 puts California, once again, in the driver’s seat toward a clean energy future and a stronger economy.

    The transition to clean energy is not only the right thing to do for the state’s natural resources and public health, it is also good for the state’s economy. Renewable energy technologies, such as solar power, are massive job creators in California.

    Today, 54,000 people work in the solar industry and more than 2,000 companies are doing business here and we expect a 20% increase in jobs this year alone. Already, California’s solar industry employs more people than the state’s five largest utilities combined.

    This growth in solar jobs is not solely because of California’s most abundant natural resource: the sun. It is also because of California’s ongoing commitment to pro-solar policies that give a broad base of consumers, from farmers to homeowners, access to the sun.

    The California solar industry stands ready to help the State of California reach this new 2030 goal. We are confident that with the right pro-solar policies in place, including preserving California’s most powerful solar driver: Net Energy Metering (NEM), along with continued market and technological innovation, California can meet its 2030 goals and continue to lead the country, and world, toward a clean energy future.

  • #2
    Good old governor moonbeam! Fourty years back the old boy was loony and he gets more so every year that passes.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    Comment


    • #3
      http://www.latimes.com/local/politic...429-story.html
      says
      "In an executive order, Brown said the state must cut the pollutants to 40% below 1990 levels by the year 2030, more than a decade after he leaves office.
      That is an interim target, intended to help California lower emissions to 80% below 1990 levels by the year 2050, a goal set by Brown's predecessor, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger."

      So nothing really new about it, he's just following through with the existing goal.

      Of course, since:
      - CO2 is not increasing
      - increased CO2 doesn't cause climate change
      - climate change is not a problem
      - humans are not to blame for the increased CO2
      - the oceans are not becoming more acidic
      - ocean acidification is not a problem
      - government should be small and not try to prevent climate change
      - insurance companies that endorse government action on climate change are run by liberals
      this is just another dangerous, wasteful, job-killing step on the way to disaster.
      If only he would realize that fossil fuels are cheaper, safer, and cleaner than solar energy!

      Comment


      • #4
        We do realize Dan is spewing BS like normal.
        [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

        Comment


        • #5
          Which of the statements in my post do you disagree with?

          Comment


          • #6
            [FONT=Comic Sans MS]My guess is that goal to reduce CO2 80% will be mute by 2050 since by then the "big one" will happen and the western half of the state will be gone along with all those polluting cars and industries.[/FONT]

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by SunEagle View Post
              [FONT=Comic Sans MS]My guess is that goal to reduce CO2 80% will be mute by 2050 since by then the "big one" will happen and the western half of the state will be gone along with all those polluting cars and industries.[/FONT]
              [FONT=Comic Sans MS]I suspect you won't even notice the "big one" in cali: you'll be too busy sandbagging your Florida real estate or just be 6' under like I expect to be. [/FONT]

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by DanKegel View Post
                http://www.latimes.com/local/politic...429-story.html
                says
                "In an executive order, Brown said the state must cut the pollutants to 40% below 1990 levels by the year 2030, more than a decade after he leaves office.
                That is an interim target, intended to help California lower emissions to 80% below 1990 levels by the year 2050, a goal set by Brown's predecessor, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger."

                So nothing really new about it, he's just following through with the existing goal.

                Of course, since:
                - CO2 is not increasing
                - increased CO2 doesn't cause climate change
                - climate change is not a problem
                - humans are not to blame for the increased CO2
                - the oceans are not becoming more acidic
                - ocean acidification is not a problem
                - government should be small and not try to prevent climate change
                - insurance companies that endorse government action on climate change are run by liberals
                this is just another dangerous, wasteful, job-killing step on the way to disaster.
                If only he would realize that fossil fuels are cheaper, safer, and cleaner than solar energy!
                You forgot:

                - the Koch brothers will save us if there's ever a problem.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Ian S View Post
                  You forgot:

                  - the Koch brothers will save us if there's ever a problem.
                  Russ would not agree with that statement. He considers the "Koch brothers" a boogeyman of the left.
                  I was trying to stick with statements that a Russ or a Sunking might actually agree with.

                  My purpose was not to mock, but to stimulate discussion by trying to summarize their position, and letting them tell me which parts were wrong.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by DanKegel View Post
                    Russ would not agree with that statement. He considers the "Koch brothers" a boogeyman of the left.
                    I was trying to stick with statements that a Russ or a Sunking might actually agree with.

                    My purpose was not to mock, but to stimulate discussion by trying to summarize their position, and letting them tell me which parts were wrong.
                    Got it. Here's one I suspect they'd agree with and it's only a minor modification of my original:

                    -- the Free Market will save us if there's ever a problem.

                    It's the libertarian mantra and it's sounds good - heck it sounded good to me 35 years ago when I supported Ed Clark for President! Unfortunately, when you get government small enough to drown in a bathtub, big business interests and the 0.1% puppet-masters will take control. I really don't think that's in the best interests of the average citizen. YMMV especially if you're in the 0.1%.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Ian S View Post
                      [FONT=Comic Sans MS]I suspect you won't even notice the "big one" in cali: you'll be too busy sandbagging your Florida real estate or just be 6' under like I expect to be. [/FONT]
                      [FONT=Comic Sans MS]I can swim pretty good. How long can you tred water?[/FONT]

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by SunEagle View Post
                        [FONT=Comic Sans MS]I can swim pretty good. How long can you tred water?[/FONT]
                        [FONT=Comic Sans MS]By 2050, I don't expect to care much one way or the other but who knows maybe walkers will have pontoons.
                        [/FONT]

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Ian S View Post
                          [FONT=Comic Sans MS]By 2050, I don't expect to care much one way or the other but who knows maybe walkers will have pontoons.
                          [/FONT]
                          [FONT=Comic Sans MS]Maybe but steering a boat may be too complicated for them to do much more then go in circles.[/FONT]

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I am tired of politics - Don't bother stimulating anything Dan.
                            [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X