{"id":254,"date":"2010-07-10T16:42:53","date_gmt":"2010-07-10T16:42:53","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/lawreaves.com\/?p=254"},"modified":"2011-05-18T18:07:56","modified_gmt":"2011-05-18T18:07:56","slug":"reasons-for-no-on-prop-23-7-10-10","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mediation.lawreaves.com\/wp\/2010\/07\/10\/reasons-for-no-on-prop-23-7-10-10\/","title":{"rendered":"Reasons for No on Prop. 23 (7-10-10)"},"content":{"rendered":"

July 14, 2010<\/em><\/p>\n

NO ON “DIRTY OIL” INITIATIVE TO SUSPEND THE CLEAN ENERGY LAW (AB 32).<\/em><\/p>\n

Texas has a saying, “Don’t mess with Texas,” that started as an anti-litter campaign. <\/em>So why are Texas oil companies Valero and Tesoro messing with California’s goal to cut <\/em>pollution? As key funders of the Dirty Oil Initiative set for the ballot in November <\/em>(misleadingly called the “Jobs Initiative”), their goal is to suspend AB 32, the California <\/em>Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, just when it is about to be more broadly implemented, <\/em>until the state’s jobless rate lowers to 5.5% for a straight year. They want to kill the bill and <\/em>stop the spread of clean energy legislation \u2014 not surprising given that these carbon belching <\/em>companies are clinging frantically to their dirty business model of pollution past. AB 32 is a <\/em>trendsetting law that deserves strong support for many reasons.<\/em><\/p>\n

1. THE IMPORTANCE OF THE MARKET SIGNAL AND INVESTMENT CAPITAL.<\/em><\/p>\n

* AB 32 has sent a strong signal to the market to invest in energy efficiencies and clean <\/em>energy which is already driving a new and cleaner economy in California – even during this <\/em>recession. We must continue to invest in this direction and reap the long-term benefits. San <\/em>Diego is particularly well poised to benefit with its cluster of universities, research, and high <\/em>tech companies.<\/em><\/p>\n

* AB 32’s environmental requirements are prompting the market to comply and innovate. <\/em>Huge amounts of venture capital have poured into the emerging green market ($9B between <\/em>2005 and 2009). High tech companies have grown rapidly in San Diego and California during <\/em>the recession. As the economy slowed between 2007 and 2008, our state lost 1% of the jobs, <\/em>but green sector jobs rose more than any at 5%. In San Diego, there was 57% growth in green <\/em>jobs. According to CleanTech San Diego, there are 700 clean tech businesses in San Diego <\/em>that have invested more than $1 billion! As we develop our own expertise in energy <\/em>efficiencies and clean energy, we will be in a position to sell and export our expertise and <\/em>products.<\/em><\/p>\n

* While momentum is building, it can fall. Opponents use the worn cliche that AB 32 <\/em>will be a job-killer because of costs. Virtually all studies, including one by the California Air <\/em>Resources Board, predict an affordable cost of compliance, minimal cost increases, <\/em>savings, decreased vulnerability to foreign oil and price increases, and a strengthened <\/em>economy. By contrast, the only negative study (Varshney and Tootelian (2009)) was fatally <\/em>flawed by using assumptions that are incorrect (e.g., that every house in the state would incur <\/em>$50,000 costs to become a “Zero Net Energy” home, such as by installing solar panels) and <\/em>failing to take into account the offsetting benefits that will accrue from any investment.<\/em><\/p>\n

* The state Employment Development Department released a study in April, 2010, which <\/em>indicates nearly 500,000 people are involved in green jobs in this state (the highest number in <\/em>the country). Manufacturing is the top employer of green jobs within our state, hiring about <\/em>93,000 workers.<\/em><\/p>\n

* Another study by Next 10 and Collaborative Economics in December, 2009, shows <\/em>there has been a 45% boost in green businesses and 36% jump in the number of green <\/em>employees from 1995 to 2008, whereas the total jobs in California only expanded 13%.<\/em><\/p>\n

* The Union of Concerned Scientists recently concluded AB 32 would add a mere 0.3% <\/em>to the energy costs of small businesses by 2020. Their calculation is likely high because it did <\/em>not factor in the cost savings that can be achieved by implementing energy efficiencies.<\/em><\/p>\n

* We should be alarmed that China invested $34.5 billion in 2009 in its country’s <\/em>renewable energy future (nearly twice that of the U.S.). We actually need more, not less, than <\/em>AB 32 to ensure our state and country do not lose their competitive edge. Suspend AB 32, <\/em>however, and you will see a massive retrenchment in the very investment we need in our state.<\/em><\/p>\n

2. THE HUGE COST OF INACTION.<\/em><\/p>\n

* U.C. Berkeley prepared a study for Next 10 in October, 2009, which estimated the cost <\/em>of remaining primarily dependent on fossil fuels could rise as much as 33% by 2020, with a <\/em>resulting loss of $80B and 500M jobs. It appears that may be exactly where the oil companies <\/em>behind Property 23 see their future profit.<\/em><\/p>\n

* There are other staggering costs that come with inaction compared to moving forward. <\/em>Consider that costs of securing energy independence and adapting to climate change increase <\/em>the longer we fail to take action. Consider remaining hostage to the rising costs of oil and <\/em>dependent on other countries to supply us. Consider taking a back seat to a new energy future <\/em>while countries such as China leave us in the dust with new, clean technologies.<\/em><\/p>\n

* The worldwide supply of oil is at a tipping point. Tightening supplies will lead to price <\/em>spikes and jockeying over remaining supplies, adding to global instability. Our country <\/em>imports about 55% of our oil needs today and projects 70% in 20 years. We remain hostage to <\/em>foreign price controls. Our foreign debt burgeons. We borrow to buy. The cost of fossil <\/em>fuels will increase steadily over the coming years. We could instead invest heavily here and <\/em>convert to clean energy independence at a price that very quickly will be better and more stable <\/em>than the prices we would otherwise be forced to accept from oil cartels.<\/em><\/p>\n

3. THE IMPORTANCE OF CLEAN AIR AND IMPROVED HEALTH.<\/em><\/p>\n

* Air pollution continues to be a serious problem. On the best days, San Diego’s air <\/em>pollution is still near the “moderate” level.<\/em><\/p>\n

* The American Lung Association has declared a national asthma epidemic. According <\/em>to State of California report,”<\/em>The Burden of Asthma in California. A Surveillance Report“(June <\/em>2007), over 5 million Californians have been diagnosed with asthma sometime during their <\/em>lives. The report indicates a growing trend in the diagnosis of asthma in adults, from 11% in <\/em>1995 to 13.7% in 2005. An October 2006 UCLA Health Policy Research Brief indicates <\/em>asthma disproportionately affects young children, African-American children, and American <\/em>Indian\/Alaska Native children.<\/em><\/p>\n

* According to the state, the costs of asthma are enormous. For instance, over $3\/4B <\/em>was spent on emergency room visits for asthma in 2005 alone.<\/em><\/p>\n

* We need the market to respond to the type of signal that AB 32 sends – that is, to make <\/em>our use of energy more efficient and cleaner which will help clean our air and create healthier <\/em>lives and communities.<\/em><\/p>\n

3. THE IMPORTANCE OF CLIMATE CHANGE AND NATIONAL SECURITY.<\/em><\/p>\n

* As climate scientists, including those at Scripps, have warned, climate change <\/em>accelerates after years of hidden build up. CO2 persists decades or more in the atmosphere. <\/em>Oceans have buffered much of the impact so far, absorbing more CO2 (becoming more acidic) <\/em>and 80-90% of the increased heat (raising sea level). Science shows we are at a “tipping” <\/em>point (per Dr. James Hansen) or very close to it. We cannot alter trends quickly once they <\/em>become apparent.<\/em><\/p>\n

* Our military sounds the same alarm. Since 2007, the Center for Naval Analyses, with <\/em>a Military Advisory Board of retired Generals and Admirals, has produced reports examining <\/em>the intertwined issues of energy, climate change, national security, and global instability. <\/em>Their May, 2009, report “warns that continuing business as usual is perilous because of the <\/em>converging national security risks of energy demand and climate change.”<\/em><\/p>\n

* The message from Valero and Tesoro is 100% <\/em>opposite that of our military. The dirty <\/em>oil companies want business as usual. Who cares if that is <\/em>perilous if it is <\/em>profitable???<\/em><\/p>\n

4. CONCLUSION.<\/em><\/p>\n

* Are Valero and Tesoro nostalgic for the past, when oil roamed free, forcing others to <\/em>bear the social costs of oil spills, air pollution, and climate change, while keeping us addicted <\/em>to oil?<\/em><\/p>\n

* How do we Californians and San Diegans feel about Texas oil companies trying to pull <\/em>the clean tech rug and clean air out from under us? The Dirty Oil Initiative is reckless and <\/em>would stymie investment in a clean future.<\/em><\/p>\n

* California can take the lead in finding the best ways to implement efficiencies and clean <\/em>energy here and the world. AB 32 has jumpstarted the process. I say we charge ahead. Will <\/em>you join me?<\/em><\/p>\n

John H. Reaves is an environmental attorney and a Director of Citizens Climate Lobby<\/em><\/p>\n

(citizensclimatelobby.com). He is also a member of the California Business Alliance for a <\/em>Green Economy. He can be reached at john@mediation.lawreaves.com<\/em><\/p>\n

Please join the California Business Alliance for a Green Economy and endorse the opposition <\/em>to Prop 23.<\/em><\/p>\n

Go to: www.ca-greenbusinessalliance.com<\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

July 14, 2010 NO ON “DIRTY OIL” INITIATIVE TO SUSPEND THE CLEAN ENERGY LAW (AB 32). Texas has a saying, “Don’t mess with Texas,” that started as an anti-litter campaign. So why are Texas oil companies Valero and Tesoro messing … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[10],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-254","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-reaves-articles"],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mediation.lawreaves.com\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/254","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/mediation.lawreaves.com\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/mediation.lawreaves.com\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mediation.lawreaves.com\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mediation.lawreaves.com\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=254"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/mediation.lawreaves.com\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/254\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":256,"href":"https:\/\/mediation.lawreaves.com\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/254\/revisions\/256"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mediation.lawreaves.com\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=254"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mediation.lawreaves.com\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=254"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mediation.lawreaves.com\/wp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=254"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}