Quote:
Originally Posted by chris08876
I look at it more towards a state approach (one that may cascade to the other states). Overtime, yes, we need to reduce our carbon footprint in general, but in time. How it is implemented in different areas will require different considerations, especially if it becomes a state wide implementation.
But I don't see natural gas as a "soon-to-be-obsolete" fuel. Maybe 50-100 years from now (maybe...), but not soon to be.
But hey... barely any new homes due to costs are being built in Berkeley (a paltry number of units), so really won't be an effective solution. Rich people will benefit from this, the common folk won't.
And its all being powered by the electrical grid anyways, so utility rates are bound to go up.
At the end of the day, this will do nada to reduce the impact on climate change. Even if half of the U.S. went green, we still have a whole other world to worry about. When it comes to climate change, its a global issue, not really a local issue. And at this point in time, there are priorities that demand more focus before trivial impacts such as this are tackled, at least on the local level.
|
I have to disagree with pretty much everything here, other than natural gas not being obsolete soon (no way it will since we've built/retrofitted tons of gas-fired powered plants).
What does "overtime" or "in time" mean when we're talking about reducing carbon? When does it start? This specifically is one municipality taking a concrete step to do that. They had a timeframe for reduction levels that they did not meet. It has been happening over time. This is the next step because other measures in the past havent gotten them to their goals.
Why will rich people benefit but common folk won't?
Being powered by the electrical grid does not mean that rates will go up. That simply does not follow. I'm not even sure what you can possibly mean by this.
This is global, national, state, and local issue. It's such a tired argument that puts forth a false narrative when people say that it won't help anything because all the other countries aren't doing it. Well, guess what, other countries are doing it... and they have been doing it... and I'd like to think that the USA should lead in engineering and technological innovation. BUt you know, hey, I'm no "patriot". Things have to happen at the local level in order for change to occur. That's why cities all over the country and world are taking the lead. If some UN or US federal decree came down about this, people would be going nuts calling it socialism and One World Government and some Chinese conspiracy BS.