3 ms·

> It demands the companies help fund recovery efforts related to California's extreme weather events, from rising sea levels to drought and wildfires, that have

> It demands the companies help fund recovery efforts related to California's extreme weather events, from rising sea levels to drought and wildfires, that have been supercharged by human-caused climate change. This is a money grab pure and simple. It’s been evident for years that California knows they need to clear brush to prevent wildfires but environmentalist won’t let it happen https://californiapolicycenter.org/environmentalists-destroyed-californias-forests/ https://californiapolicycenter.org/environmentalists-destroy...

goku12 3y ago
> This is a money grab pure and simple. This reads like a sick joke. It's like the BigOil telling California "It's unfair to demand compensation from us, because you didn't prepare for a catastrophe that we caused knowingly". California and several regions across planet wouldn't have had to think about clearing the brush or anything else if the oil companies hadn't intentionally and maliciously misled people everywhere about the consequences of burning fossil fuel like this. It's strange to frame a call for compensation as money grab when that money is blood money - how many lives were lost due to climate change? I'm disconcerted by efforts to help big companies skirt their responsibility in causing extreme and irreversible harm to the environment and economy.
- bensecure 3y ago
  > California and several regions across planet wouldn't have had to think about clearing the brush or anything else if the oil companies hadn't intentionally and maliciously misled people everywhere about the consequences of burning fossil fuel like this. Very little of substance would have changed if they had acted differently. The main issue with solving climate change is coordinating people. The deliberate misinformation just adds fuel to the fire...
- iancmceachern 3y ago
  Hasn't the oil and gas industry also been a money grab for the last 100 years? It's called the richest industry on earth for a reason
bamboozled 3y ago
California knows they need to clear brush to prevent wildfires but environmentalist won’t let it happen What seems to have changed is the need to clear brush. Before the climate crisis, droughts were less severe and the need for intensive forest management wasn't there., now when people say we need to clear brush to prevent fires, what does that mean? It would be environmentally destructive to just go and start clearing out important forest ecosystems, the brush is surely part of the ecosystem ? In Australia, they're trying to reinstate ceremonial burning by Aboriginal tribes people, but I have it on good authority these efforts aren't always going smoothly because it turns out there are good times and destructive times to set fire to the forest. These skills need to be relearned. For example: In Australia, many native shrubs seeds need fire to open, but the seeds need to be present before the burn. So knowing the right time to do this is a lost art in many many areas in Australia due to destruction of their culture. I know people are working on restoring this practice which is a beautiful and hopeful thing to hear. California isn't a place which has been traditionally exposed to intentionally burning as far as I'm aware of? So it's probably more complicated than just blaming environmentalists for it? I mean, maybe they have a point? Sounds like the best thing to do is get to net zero carbon emissions by 2030.
- Clubber 3y ago
  >What seems to have changed is the need to clear brush. Controlled burns were definitely a thing when I was growing up. https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/controlled-burning/ https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/controlled... Even the natives did it before the Europeans even got here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_burn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_burn
goku12 3y ago
California Policy Center, whose article you linked, is a pro-oil conservative propaganda/lobby group that generates puff pieces like [1] and [2]. Hardly an unbiased or acceptable source to judge bigoil by. From the article: > "Oil and gas companies have privately known the truth for decades — that the burning of fossil fuels leads to climate change — but have fed us lies and mistruths to further their record-breaking profits at the expense of our environment. Enough is enough," said Rob Bonta, California's attorney general. You may have linked an example of what the attorney general is talking about. [1] https://californiapolicycenter.org/the-benefits-and-costs-of-oil-and-gas-development-in-california/ https://californiapolicycenter.org/the-benefits-and-costs-of... [2] https://californiapolicycenter.org/how-much-fossil-fuel-is-left/ https://californiapolicycenter.org/how-much-fossil-fuel-is-l...
wildrhythms 3y ago
This link took me to a 404.

goku12 3y ago

> This is a money grab pure and simple. This reads like a sick joke. It's like the BigOil telling California "It's unfair to demand compensation from us, because you didn't prepare for a catastrophe that we caused knowingly". California and several regions across planet wouldn't have had to think about clearing the brush or anything else if the oil companies hadn't intentionally and maliciously misled people everywhere about the consequences of burning fossil fuel like this. It's strange to frame a call for compensation as money grab when that money is blood money - how many lives were lost due to climate change? I'm disconcerted by efforts to help big companies skirt their responsibility in causing extreme and irreversible harm to the environment and economy.

bensecure 3y ago
> California and several regions across planet wouldn't have had to think about clearing the brush or anything else if the oil companies hadn't intentionally and maliciously misled people everywhere about the consequences of burning fossil fuel like this. Very little of substance would have changed if they had acted differently. The main issue with solving climate change is coordinating people. The deliberate misinformation just adds fuel to the fire...
iancmceachern 3y ago
Hasn't the oil and gas industry also been a money grab for the last 100 years? It's called the richest industry on earth for a reason

bamboozled 3y ago

California knows they need to clear brush to prevent wildfires but environmentalist won’t let it happen What seems to have changed is the need to clear brush. Before the climate crisis, droughts were less severe and the need for intensive forest management wasn't there., now when people say we need to clear brush to prevent fires, what does that mean? It would be environmentally destructive to just go and start clearing out important forest ecosystems, the brush is surely part of the ecosystem ? In Australia, they're trying to reinstate ceremonial burning by Aboriginal tribes people, but I have it on good authority these efforts aren't always going smoothly because it turns out there are good times and destructive times to set fire to the forest. These skills need to be relearned. For example: In Australia, many native shrubs seeds need fire to open, but the seeds need to be present before the burn. So knowing the right time to do this is a lost art in many many areas in Australia due to destruction of their culture. I know people are working on restoring this practice which is a beautiful and hopeful thing to hear. California isn't a place which has been traditionally exposed to intentionally burning as far as I'm aware of? So it's probably more complicated than just blaming environmentalists for it? I mean, maybe they have a point? Sounds like the best thing to do is get to net zero carbon emissions by 2030.

Clubber 3y ago
>What seems to have changed is the need to clear brush. Controlled burns were definitely a thing when I was growing up. https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/controlled-burning/ https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/controlled... Even the natives did it before the Europeans even got here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_burn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_burn

goku12 3y ago

California Policy Center, whose article you linked, is a pro-oil conservative propaganda/lobby group that generates puff pieces like [1] and [2]. Hardly an unbiased or acceptable source to judge bigoil by. From the article: > "Oil and gas companies have privately known the truth for decades — that the burning of fossil fuels leads to climate change — but have fed us lies and mistruths to further their record-breaking profits at the expense of our environment. Enough is enough," said Rob Bonta, California's attorney general. You may have linked an example of what the attorney general is talking about. [1] https://californiapolicycenter.org/the-benefits-and-costs-of-oil-and-gas-development-in-california/ https://californiapolicycenter.org/the-benefits-and-costs-of... [2] https://californiapolicycenter.org/how-much-fossil-fuel-is-left/ https://californiapolicycenter.org/how-much-fossil-fuel-is-l...

wildrhythms 3y ago

This link took me to a 404.