Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

California signs pact with Britain to fight global warming
Central Valley Business Times ^ | July 31, 2006

Posted on 07/31/2006 2:59:47 PM PDT by calcowgirl

• ‘Will not wait’ for federal government to act • To share research, information

The state of California and the government of Great Britain have signed an agreement to collaborate on clean energy and ways to fight climate change.

"California will not wait for our federal government to take strong action on global warming," says Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in a written statement following a meeting with British Prime Minister Tony Blair and the chief executive officers of more than a dozen California-based companies Monday.

"Today, we are taking an unprecedented step by signing an agreement between California and the United Kingdom,” the governor says. “International partnerships are needed in the fight against global warming and California has a responsibility and a profound role to play to protect not only our environment, but to be a world leader on this issue as well."

Specifically, the agreement commits both California and the United Kingdom to:

• Evaluate and implement market-based mechanisms that spur innovation.

The United Kingdom has agreed to share “best practices” on emissions trading and lessons learned in Europe. California and the UK will also explore the potential for linkages between market-based mechanisms that are supposed to better enable the carbon market to accelerate the transition to a low carbon economy.

• Both California and the United Kingdom will share research and information on climate change and how economies will be impacted.

• The two governments have agreed to coordinate energy sector efforts to switch to clean energy technologies, promote green buildings and increase the use of efficiency and renewable energy technologies.

“We will share information regarding our efforts to reduce emissions from the transportation sector, including California's emission standards and hydrogen highway and the United Kingdom's experience with a renewable fuels standard and clean coal technologies,” the governor’s office says.

• Enhanced coordination on climate change, especially the United Kingdom's Hadley Centre and the Virtual Climate Center in California.

Because of California's massive economy, the state is ranked as the 12th largest emitter of carbon in the world.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; News/Current Events; US: California; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: blairinca; climatechange; globalwarming; lastterm; pact; rinold; schwarzenegger; tonyblair
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

1 posted on 07/31/2006 2:59:50 PM PDT by calcowgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl

Let's see, 12th largest emitter of CO2. However, with the amount agriculture we have here in CA, we might just remove more CO2 than we produce.

It's hard to believe that Gray Davis was worse than Arnold. Just goes to show you how far left CA is.


2 posted on 07/31/2006 3:03:39 PM PDT by stylin_geek (Liberalism: comparable to a chicken with its head cut off, but with more spastic motions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl
Isn't it a violation of federal law for a state to sign a treaty with a foreign nation? I realize California thinks it is part of Mexico, but.......
3 posted on 07/31/2006 3:04:27 PM PDT by Ben Mugged
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl
"California will not wait for our federal government to take strong action on global warming," says Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in a written statement following a meeting with British Prime Minister Tony Blair and the chief executive officers of more than a dozen California-based companies Monday.

He won't secure the borders because its a Federal issue, but he'll combat 'global warming'. Arnold Schriver-Schwarzenegger is a piece of work.

4 posted on 07/31/2006 3:05:46 PM PDT by USMC Veteran ("Life is tough. Life is tougher if you're stupid." - John Wayne)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl

November can't come quick enough to get rid of that scumbag and his old lady that wears the pants in that family.


5 posted on 07/31/2006 3:06:12 PM PDT by dalereed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl

Our Constitution forbids states from entering international agreements. Its the feds job.

Funny arnold says the borders are the fed's job so he will do nothing but now he is violating the Constitution entering a international agreement that, is the fed's job.


6 posted on 07/31/2006 3:08:38 PM PDT by edcoil (Reality doesn't say much - doesn't need too)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl; Congressman Billybob
In an earlier era, such a pact wouldn't just be unconstitutional (which it is) but also a casus belli.


Article I.
Section 10
No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

7 posted on 07/31/2006 3:09:40 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: edcoil

US Constitution
Section. 10.

No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.


8 posted on 07/31/2006 3:11:01 PM PDT by MeanWestTexan (God Protect Israel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MeanWestTexan

Assume you are just making my point?


9 posted on 07/31/2006 3:12:27 PM PDT by edcoil (Reality doesn't say much - doesn't need too)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MeanWestTexan

Ok. So now what can we do? If he can make deals on the environment what is to stop other states from making deals with their country of choice?


10 posted on 07/31/2006 3:15:46 PM PDT by CindyDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MeanWestTexan
Our Constitution forbids states from entering international agreements. Its the feds job.

The second amendment is also part of our constitution, but, when the democrats don't like a law they'll either try to work around it or repeal the law. Watch out Article 10!
11 posted on 07/31/2006 3:17:38 PM PDT by adorno
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl

So California can fight "global warming" (sic) when the Federal government (thank G-d) will not, but California will not fight illegal immigration when the Feds will not?


12 posted on 07/31/2006 3:22:22 PM PDT by Yaakov The Orator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yaakov The Orator

"So California can fight "global warming" (sic) when the Federal government (thank G-d) will not, but California will not fight illegal immigration when the Feds will not?"

What do you expect when his marching orders come direct from Ted Kennedy?


13 posted on 07/31/2006 3:28:22 PM PDT by dalereed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

"in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."

Yes, but you see, the dangers posed by global warming will not "admit of delay." (sarc off)

Just another sign that California thinks that it is more important than the Fed.


14 posted on 07/31/2006 3:30:24 PM PDT by clueless123 (Colt Revolvers - The Worlds Right Arm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl

California companies can reduce CO2 production (in California) by moving more production to China.


15 posted on 07/31/2006 4:00:08 PM PDT by Voltage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl
When the rest of the jobs are all dried up in Khaliforniastan, don't come to Texas.

It is too hot here, people carry guns and shoot up the place constantly. Rattle snakes, scorpions, killer horned toads, you name it.

So Khaliforniastanis, Texas is definitely not the "place you outa be".

16 posted on 07/31/2006 4:05:45 PM PDT by lormand (Kill every Islam-0-facist and supporter in the world, only then will we have peace.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: edcoil

Yep.


17 posted on 07/31/2006 4:36:05 PM PDT by MeanWestTexan (God Protect Israel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl


Grope this
18 posted on 07/31/2006 4:38:11 PM PDT by John Lenin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl
First democrat governor Richardson of NM goes to North Korea, then the democrat governor Baldacci of Maine goes to Cuba, now RINO governor Schwarzenegger signs a agreement with a foreign nation?

I realize the states were here before the fed and I am a big states rights advocate, but, there are some things reserved for the feds. Negotiating and signing agreememts with foreign countries are one of those things.
19 posted on 07/31/2006 4:46:50 PM PDT by thiscouldbemoreconfusing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl
The Soviet Union finally collapsed when the individual republics became convinced that their prosperity would be greatly enhanced by independence and when it became obvious that the central government could not or would not use force to maintain the union.

It was hard for me not to wonder at the time if the US does not face the same future. Liberals are so convinced that they have the right solutions that they now ignore the law when it suits them.

We saw that in San Francisco when the mayor was selling marriage licenses for gays. Now we see Arnold making agreements with foreign countries without the consent of Congress.

If the other forty-nine states simply shrug it off, then the behavior will increase. It will accelerate the divergence of the interests of each of the states.

Who would take up arms to hold Kalifornia in the Union? I wouldn't. They deserve to make their own way in the world unconstrained by the Constitution created by men of much greater virtue.

One can't help but wonder what lengths that Kalifornia will go to hold on to its wealth, though. Like the Soviet states, Kalifornia would have to build walls and fences to keep the freedom-loving people in. Otherwise, they will leave.

Baby Boomers by definition were born after World War II. In the US their lives have been relatively free from serious sacrifice. They have had it so good without realizing that many of their advantages were bought at great price by former generations. Their ignorance has doomed them to an uncertain future.

20 posted on 07/31/2006 4:51:50 PM PDT by William Tell (RKBA for California (rkba.members.sonic.net) - Volunteer by contacting Dave at rkba@sonic.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson