Food for Fuel Is No Laughing Matter
May 5, 2008
European Railroads Not a Model for U.S. April 23
April 23, 2008
Will Greenery Promote Growth, and Save the World (and Money)?
April 12, 2008
Correction To Cali’s Kyoto: Working Off A Bad Model
Upon re-reading AB 1058, I realize that the bill does not require California's Climate Action Registry (CCAR) to establish and design CO2 emission reduction goals and strategies for non-automobile sectors and industries. Rather, it requires CCAR, "upon the request" of participating companies, to recommend providers with expertise in establishing and designing such goals and strategies. Nonetheless, I stand by my conclusion that AB 1058's assault on SUVs is the "first move in a wider assault on all carbon-based energy." The bill requires CCAR to "Encourage organizations from various sectors of the state's economy, and those from various geographic regions of the state, to report emissions, establish baselines and reduction targets, and implement efficiency improvements and renewable energy programs to achieve those targets." Further, it requires CCAR to "Recognize, publicize, and promote participants." In effect, CCAR will be in the business of generating favorable publicity for companies that take its advice and "volunteer" to act in Kyoto-friendly ways. This will facilitate advocacy groups' efforts to identify and mount PR campaigns against companies that don't "volunteer." And, what happens when AB 1058's sponsors "discover" that "voluntary" reductions are not enough to "save the planet"? At that point, surely, they will demand that AB 1058's mandatory provisions for automobiles be extended to other industries and sectors.
