3 ms·

I feel like that is only natural after a prolonged inaction by the elected official upper in the hierarchy. Climate change is only a world ending type of emerge

I feel like that is only natural after a prolonged inaction by the elected official upper in the hierarchy. Climate change is only a world ending type of emergency, we are already at 1.2 degrees and are heading towards 3-4, a lot of people are already dying and the death count will grow exponentially every decade as inaction continues. Perhaps your elected officials are simply desperate. And given the severity of the situation, I wish more elected officials were many times more desperate than Berkeley’s.

hnav 4y ago
Maybe they're arrogant, they're so convinced that they're at the center of the universe that they forget that they preside over a town of 100k in a world where billions of people are coming out of poverty and wanting increased standards of life. Above everything they're so arrogant that they failed as politicians: they misjudged how much clout they have in their own town of 100k.
- runarberg 4y ago
  Perhaps so, but again, both elected officials that preside over the state of California, and elected official that preside over the country of USA have repeatedly failed to act. And the climate emergency keeps getting more and more desperate. This is the only power they have, and apparently the court has ruled they don’t even hold that power. You call it arrogance. I call a weak attempt while the system at large fails everybody, in other words, desperate is still my leading theory.
- cyberax 4y ago
  Heck, Berkeley has passed laws that outlaw anything "nuclear" within the city limits: https://berkeley.municipal.codes/BMC/12.90 https://berkeley.municipal.codes/BMC/12.90 This includes irradiated food (e.g. many spices).
  - TheSpiceIsLife 4y ago
    Does that include smoke detectors?
    - WillPostForFood 4y ago
      You found one of the two good nukes! Smoke detectors and radioluminescent watches. Exclusions. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the following: 4. Uses of radioactive material for smoke detectors, light emitting watches and clocks, and other applications not related to the development of nuclear weapons. (Ord. 5784-NS § 4, 1986)
  - rainbowzootsuit 4y ago
    I always feel sad for the stars that gave their lives as supernovae in order to power our clean energy future, only to be ignored for the "hot new thing" (Sun) in the galactic neighborhood.
ars 4y ago
Except that banning natural gas makes things worse, not better. At least for now, while natural gas is still being burned to make electricity. If they actually cared about climate change they would focus on production. For example nuclear power.
- Paul-Craft 4y ago
  In theory, centralizing the combustion of natural gas in power plants makes sense. In a power plant, the infrastructure to reduce pollution out of the stacks is actually feasible, as opposed to home systems, where it would be anywhere from impractical to impractically expensive. In other words, I'd rather have one big source that can be more easily mitigated, than millions of smaller ones that effectively cannot be mitigated.
- Karrot_Kream 4y ago
  Berkeley's energy mix is solar dominant during the day and natural gas dependent at night. If you're cooking with light out (especially as our days are getting longer as we approach spring and summer) you're coming out ahead. Generally, consolidated natural gas burning at a plant is more efficient than the cheap natgas stoves that most people have in their apartments and homes. This is aside from leaks in the infrastructure of course. IMO the much bigger issue with gas stoves is the hit in air quality. I have a CO2 and AQI meter I keep for measuring things and when we need to use the gas stove (we generally cook on induction) the difference in air quality is obvious both to our noses and to the meter and the air becomes appalling if we don't run the range hood. My partner and I have spent a lot of time in developing countries and just took the smell for granted until we started measuring the air quality. California also tends to be very anti-nuclear which is also quite silly. Berkeley even moreso.
- runarberg 4y ago
  I don’t think the Berkeley city government has the funding to build a nuclear power plant. But you are absolutely right to focus on the production side of things. Berkeley is not a small power producer. There are two power plants in the city, which ranks it kind of high on the list of California cities, particularly given the small size and population of Berkeley. Both power plants are natural gas. I was a fool defending these people, they obviously want to push the responsibility of ruining our climate onto consumers and away from governments. https://www.countyoffice.org/berkeley-ca-power-plant/ https://www.countyoffice.org/berkeley-ca-power-plant/
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
realworldperson 4y ago
[dead]
specialist 4y ago
Correct. Further, any place that jumps on the Green New Deal (or equiv) bandwagon will out complete the brave defenders of the status quo. As Ben Shapiro likes to say: Mother Nature doesn't care about your feelings.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

hnav 4y ago

Maybe they're arrogant, they're so convinced that they're at the center of the universe that they forget that they preside over a town of 100k in a world where billions of people are coming out of poverty and wanting increased standards of life. Above everything they're so arrogant that they failed as politicians: they misjudged how much clout they have in their own town of 100k.

runarberg 4y ago
Perhaps so, but again, both elected officials that preside over the state of California, and elected official that preside over the country of USA have repeatedly failed to act. And the climate emergency keeps getting more and more desperate. This is the only power they have, and apparently the court has ruled they don’t even hold that power. You call it arrogance. I call a weak attempt while the system at large fails everybody, in other words, desperate is still my leading theory.
cyberax 4y ago
Heck, Berkeley has passed laws that outlaw anything "nuclear" within the city limits: https://berkeley.municipal.codes/BMC/12.90 https://berkeley.municipal.codes/BMC/12.90 This includes irradiated food (e.g. many spices).
- TheSpiceIsLife 4y ago
  Does that include smoke detectors?
  - WillPostForFood 4y ago
    You found one of the two good nukes! Smoke detectors and radioluminescent watches. Exclusions. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the following: 4. Uses of radioactive material for smoke detectors, light emitting watches and clocks, and other applications not related to the development of nuclear weapons. (Ord. 5784-NS § 4, 1986)
- rainbowzootsuit 4y ago
  I always feel sad for the stars that gave their lives as supernovae in order to power our clean energy future, only to be ignored for the "hot new thing" (Sun) in the galactic neighborhood.

ars 4y ago

Except that banning natural gas makes things worse, not better. At least for now, while natural gas is still being burned to make electricity. If they actually cared about climate change they would focus on production. For example nuclear power.

Paul-Craft 4y ago
In theory, centralizing the combustion of natural gas in power plants makes sense. In a power plant, the infrastructure to reduce pollution out of the stacks is actually feasible, as opposed to home systems, where it would be anywhere from impractical to impractically expensive. In other words, I'd rather have one big source that can be more easily mitigated, than millions of smaller ones that effectively cannot be mitigated.
Karrot_Kream 4y ago
Berkeley's energy mix is solar dominant during the day and natural gas dependent at night. If you're cooking with light out (especially as our days are getting longer as we approach spring and summer) you're coming out ahead. Generally, consolidated natural gas burning at a plant is more efficient than the cheap natgas stoves that most people have in their apartments and homes. This is aside from leaks in the infrastructure of course. IMO the much bigger issue with gas stoves is the hit in air quality. I have a CO2 and AQI meter I keep for measuring things and when we need to use the gas stove (we generally cook on induction) the difference in air quality is obvious both to our noses and to the meter and the air becomes appalling if we don't run the range hood. My partner and I have spent a lot of time in developing countries and just took the smell for granted until we started measuring the air quality. California also tends to be very anti-nuclear which is also quite silly. Berkeley even moreso.
runarberg 4y ago
I don’t think the Berkeley city government has the funding to build a nuclear power plant. But you are absolutely right to focus on the production side of things. Berkeley is not a small power producer. There are two power plants in the city, which ranks it kind of high on the list of California cities, particularly given the small size and population of Berkeley. Both power plants are natural gas. I was a fool defending these people, they obviously want to push the responsibility of ruining our climate onto consumers and away from governments. https://www.countyoffice.org/berkeley-ca-power-plant/ https://www.countyoffice.org/berkeley-ca-power-plant/

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

realworldperson 4y ago

[dead]

specialist 4y ago

Correct. Further, any place that jumps on the Green New Deal (or equiv) bandwagon will out complete the brave defenders of the status quo. As Ben Shapiro likes to say: Mother Nature doesn't care about your feelings.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]