E Online on yahoo photos
We already have Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, well, by George, why not President Clooney?
Posted on 09/26/2006 5:07:37 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
California's landmark effort to set a cap on greenhouse gas emissions is just one step in a long-term strategy by the nation's most populous state to combat global climate change, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said Tuesday in an interview.
The governor said the global warming strategy for California, the world's 12th largest producer of greenhouse gases, will include further industrial reductions and initiatives such as placing greater emphasis on renewable energy and hydrogen-fueled cars.
Schwarzenegger said he hopes California's efforts on global warming will inspire other states and the federal government, which has done little to curb the emissions scientists blame for warming the Earth.
"We are trying to bring other people in and inspire them and work with them," Schwarzenegger said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press. "We want to be in the forefront. California has always been known for that."
On Wednesday in San Francisco, the governor is scheduled to sign a bill imposing a first-in-the-nation emissions cap on utilities, refineries and manufacturing plants. Two years ago, the state imposed tight regulations on automobile tailpipe emissions, an initiative that is being challenged in federal court by automakers.
Schwarzenegger's endorsement of the global warming issue has helped burnish the governor's environmental credentials during a year in which he faces re-election. His plans for additional state action rest on whether he wins in November against state treasurer Phil Angelides, the Democratic nominee who also has embraced the state cap.
California's efforts on global warming have been in the spotlight since Schwarzenegger and the state's legislative Democrats reached the deal to cut greenhouse gas emission last month. The governor and British Prime Minister Tony Blair also have agreed to work together to develop new technologies to combat global warming.
California's efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions are part of a goal to cut the state's emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, an estimated 25 percent reduction. Schwarzenegger issued an executive order in 2005 calling for an even more ambitious reduction - cutting the levels of greenhouse gases to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.
"In fitness, the field I come from, it's all part of goals. You step on the scales and say, 'I weigh 220 pounds; I want to get my body weight down to 200. Here's the plan and how to do it, and I'm going to check every day if I get there,'" Schwarzenegger said. "That's what we're trying to do here with the emissions (of) greenhouse gases."
The industrial emissions cap has been praised by environmentalists as a step toward fighting global climate change, but business leaders have warned that it will increase their costs and force them to scale back their California operations.
Schwarzenegger dismissed the criticism, citing a study by the University of California, Berkeley that estimates 89,000 jobs will be created as the state weans itself from fossil fuels.
"When you set goals, it makes other industries be innovative. They end up being innovative and creating new ways of solving problems, and that's what this is all about," Schwarzenegger said. "We feel very strongly we can do that and add jobs and make industries boom."
Many scientists believe greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide are trapping heat in the atmosphere, leading to a warming of the Earth. In turn, that threatens to alter weather patterns, shrink wildlife habitat and raise sea levels around the globe.
State reports have predicted that California could suffer dire consequences as temperatures rise. Warming could lead to earlier melting of the Sierra snowpack, flooding in the Central Valley and the San Francisco Bay area, and changes in growing seasons for the country's largest agricultural producer. Climate change also could threaten the state's water supply.
If re-elected, Schwarzenegger said he would seek legislation to protect the state's coastline in the face of rising ocean levels. He also wants to shore up the state's vulnerable drinking water supplies by building more reservoirs.
You go for it California, that way more companies will be forced to flee and move to Texas. When Bush retires back on the ranch we will still have a viable economy while all you liberal idiots are walking to welfare lines looking for jobs.
The way California industries will solve this problem of a lunkhead governor is to leave California.
Yeah. Mexico is not a long way to move.
And Florida. :)
Go back to movies, RINOLD...Sacramento is out of your league.
CA nuts show their stripes.
God forbid they have a natural disaster or a terrorist attack, the US will have to pull them off their butts.
Can't imagine why any normal person would want to live there.
As opposed to say, the flood of illegals or the security of the ports. ARRRRRRRRRGGGGGH!
The Gulf Coast states are the new center of power.
Of course, the MSM are decades behind reality on that score.
The center of power was in the NE, then briefly flirted with California then moved east again but at a more southerly latitude.
Idiotic. Pandering. Unenforceable. Unachievable. Echoes of California's mandated '10% electric cars by 2000' law. Damaging to the economy. More fodder for bureaucrats and lawyers.
It's a steroid residual thing.
I remember the first time I saw the movie "Predator" back in the 80's. For some reason, and I'm not sure exactly why, I mused to myself, "You know, I'll bet that not one but TWO state governors emerge from the cast of this movie..."
Because it's a beautiful state with a nice climate. Desert, ocean, mountains, all in one package.
However, problems (like housing prices and illegal immigration) seem to have started getting much worse much faster over the last ten years.
E Online on yahoo photos
We already have Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, well, by George, why not President Clooney?
I've lost all faith in Arnold. He may as well convert to democrat.
I can't keep up! Now I see in the sidebar that Clooney won't run. Will they go back to Beatty and Reiner now?
It's past time to stop looking for candidates from Hollywood casting agents.
LOL. Now he is having to rely on the bogus study by the lefties at Berkeley to try to justify this stuff? Anything for the Cause, I suppose.
This is one thread that shows the idiocy of the study:
Analysis: Environmental Activists Just Don't Get ItHere's more comments about the study.
The Heartland Institute ^ | October 1, 2006 | Joel Schwartz
Posted on 09/26/2006 5:31:27 PM PDT by calcowgirl
August 17, 2006
New hooey on emissions: The crusade continuesUC Berkeley researchers say capping greenhouse-gas emissions not only won't hurt the economy, it will be a tremendous boon, according to published reports based on their press release:
State laws requiring California companies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020 would actually create as many as 17,000 new jobs, says a new University of California, Berkeley, report.It would boost the annual Gross State Product (GSP) by $60 billion, the report says.But look at the arguments in the report [PDF file]... and they're laughable:
The positive economic results are derived from two primary sources: savings from improvements in energy efficiency and reduced energy bills that offset the cost of achieving emission reductions and, in related policy scenarios, the benefits of investing in technologies for innovation.Got that? The theory that a hard cap on emissions will help the economy depends entirely on this development: Not only will technology readily yield new energy sources, but they will cost less than current sources.
Huh? We've been pursuing breakthroughs in energy since the first oil price shock in October 1973 with very mixed success. Now all of a sudden it gets easy?
What also stinks here is that one of the lead UC Berkeley academics involved in this study is Michael Hanemann. But he's no specialist in energy engineering or technology. He's just masquerading as one in service of his longstanding crusade to cap emissions by any means necessary.
But that won't matter to the governor or the greens or the Assembly speaker or all the journalists who have signed up for the crusade. Facts, schmacts. Not only will an emissions cap not hurt the economy, it will yield nirvana. Indeed, if we banned all emissions, no one would ever have to work again! It's that simple.
Give me a break. This study is a joke. Here's hoping someone in the media bothers to read the whole thing, not just the press release, and reaches the obvious conclusion about its (de)merits.
Or China. Why pay carbon credits if you can receive them?
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.