There were a couple of stories yesterday about cities having small carbon footprints… The San Diego Union Tribune carried one and so did The San Jose Mercury News – both good stories, but how do these cities fair when we keep hearing that the state will not achieve it’s 20% renewables target by 2010 (as is mandated under current law)?
Let’s assume that we could not only meet that target, but better yet, we exceeded that target… How would these cities then be impacted (on a global scale) by events such as the eruption of the Chaiten volcano in Chile last month that spewed lava and blasted ash more than 12 miles (20 kilometers) into the sky or the devastating earthquake that rocked China this month?
Seems to me, that we will really need to step up efforts around the globe if we really hope to impact global warming… But back to my question, and closer to home (at least as far as generation is concerned), how will we accomplish this without the infrastructure to allow us to deliver the low emission generation?
California really needs to re-evaluate our views on this matter and allow for creative thinking. Do we really want to have a lasting impact on global warming? I mean in the positive sense… Since the answer is a resounding "yes," I would submit that we had better allow for the infrastructure to be developed, including transmission, solar, wind, hydro, natural gas (we need the gas generation to run when the wind is not blowing) and yes, even rethink nuclear generation. Admittedly, nuclear is not in the cards anytime soon, but we need to begin that dialogue today. How can it be that
Last month I wrote about the comments that Governor Schwarzenegger made at the Yale Climate Change Conference . He’s right – we all need to take a deep breath and get out of the way and allow the infrastructure that is needed to be built to actually be built. Otherwise we should be honest and admit that we really don’t want anything to change. The more we stand in the way of the infrastructure development that is needed, the harder it will be to turn global warming around.
How can it be that France and Japan are doing so well with nuclear and we can barely even say the word?
Posted by: ClubPenguinCheats | June 01, 2010 at 08:16 PM