4 ms·

Politicians giving themselves a ~ 30-year runway is a farce. Promise you'll reduce it by 10% in 3 years, and I'll take you seriously. This is garbage. Just lik

Politicians giving themselves a ~ 30-year runway is a farce. Promise you'll reduce it by 10% in 3 years, and I'll take you seriously. This is garbage. Just like the return to the Moon promised by Regan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump ... always "15 to 20 years from now" ... and NEVER happens. By the way - 10% in 3 years would be a perfect milestone to 100% in 30 years.

mmanfrin 8y ago
California generally has a good track record of hitting longer-term environmental goals. 2045 is a long way out, but it is a length that will allow for unclean plants to see through to their end-of-life, rather than kneecapping current plants/projects. I suspect the intent was to signal to energy producers that CA won't make their current investments worthless (otherwise it would drive away developers who have put investments in to our grid). In other words, this was a "keep investing, but new plants need to be clean" move.
jorblumesea 8y ago
I agree with the sentiment but this is probably a more realistic goal. Germany, which is far more organized than the US in many respects, is failing to hit its climate goals for 2020. It's just harder than people think. Same with public projects going over budget. The budget was never realistic in the first place.
- truculent 8y ago
  I think "realistic" kind of depends on your goal. If you want to make it under 2C, I don't believe this is particularly realistic (i.e. not soon enough). If you want to avoid controversial actions and major changes to people's loves, sure it maybe too soon.
saas_co_de 8y ago
Always be suspicious when politicians pass legislation that doesn't take effect until after they leave office.
Brakenshire 8y ago
The UK has a law requiring ongoing cuts towards an 80% cut from 1990 to 2050, and we’re about half way through, and about half way there. If the government doesn’t keep to the pathway it can be sued and required to take action by the courts. https://www.carbonbrief.org/ccc-cut-uk-emissions-61-by-2030-for-fifth-carbon-budget https://www.carbonbrief.org/ccc-cut-uk-emissions-61-by-2030-...
kszxgz 8y ago
> By the way - 10% in 3 years would be a perfect milestone to 100% in 30 years. That would be a reduction to about 35% of the original after 30 years.
- function_seven 8y ago
  Keep the basis level constant, and 10% every three years fine :)
tkel 8y ago
From the bill (sb100), 33 percent by December 31, 2020, 44 percent by December 31, 2024, 52 percent by December 31, 2027, and 60 percent by December 31, 2030. The commission shall establish appropriate three-year compliance periods for all subsequent years.
tankerdude 8y ago
The pace is already going to beat that legislation at it’s current rate. This codifies that they don’t drag behind.

mmanfrin 8y ago

California generally has a good track record of hitting longer-term environmental goals. 2045 is a long way out, but it is a length that will allow for unclean plants to see through to their end-of-life, rather than kneecapping current plants/projects. I suspect the intent was to signal to energy producers that CA won't make their current investments worthless (otherwise it would drive away developers who have put investments in to our grid). In other words, this was a "keep investing, but new plants need to be clean" move.

jorblumesea 8y ago

I agree with the sentiment but this is probably a more realistic goal. Germany, which is far more organized than the US in many respects, is failing to hit its climate goals for 2020. It's just harder than people think. Same with public projects going over budget. The budget was never realistic in the first place.

truculent 8y ago
I think "realistic" kind of depends on your goal. If you want to make it under 2C, I don't believe this is particularly realistic (i.e. not soon enough). If you want to avoid controversial actions and major changes to people's loves, sure it maybe too soon.

saas_co_de 8y ago

Always be suspicious when politicians pass legislation that doesn't take effect until after they leave office.

Brakenshire 8y ago

The UK has a law requiring ongoing cuts towards an 80% cut from 1990 to 2050, and we’re about half way through, and about half way there. If the government doesn’t keep to the pathway it can be sued and required to take action by the courts. https://www.carbonbrief.org/ccc-cut-uk-emissions-61-by-2030-for-fifth-carbon-budget https://www.carbonbrief.org/ccc-cut-uk-emissions-61-by-2030-...

kszxgz 8y ago

> By the way - 10% in 3 years would be a perfect milestone to 100% in 30 years. That would be a reduction to about 35% of the original after 30 years.

function_seven 8y ago
Keep the basis level constant, and 10% every three years fine :)

tkel 8y ago

From the bill (sb100), 33 percent by December 31, 2020, 44 percent by December 31, 2024, 52 percent by December 31, 2027, and 60 percent by December 31, 2030. The commission shall establish appropriate three-year compliance periods for all subsequent years.

tankerdude 8y ago

The pace is already going to beat that legislation at it’s current rate. This codifies that they don’t drag behind.