California's meaningless 'game-changer'

Monday, June 19, 2017
 | 
Chris Woodward (OneNewsNow.com)

solar, geothermal power plantThe U.S. may have exited from the Paris climate agreement, but that's not stopping California from pursuing what critics call a symbolic, feel-good effort with renewable energy.

Governor Jerry Brown (D-CA) and others want California to get 50 percent of its electricity from renewable sources by the year 2030.

"What has been the source of our prosperity now becomes the source of our ultimate destruction, if we don't get off it," Brown said at a 2015 signing ceremony in Los Angeles.

Environmental groups applaud California's goal. That includes the National Resources Defense Council, which has called this a game-changer.

Norman Rogers of ClimateViews.com is not in that camp. He thinks California is setting the nation's worst example for a renewable energy marketplace.

"First of all, they're raising the price of electricity for all the people in California," Rogers tells OneNewsNow. "Second of all, it's really not practical to get 50 percent of your energy where a lot of wind power and solar power is involved, because it's too erratic."

Faced with this shortfall, Rogers says California is buying power from other states and using electricity from natural gas.

"Renewable power providers in California sell renewable power certificates (RPCs) to the state so California can pretend that they are providing renewable energy to all, even though wind turbines in Palm Springs are not powering office buildings in San Diego," he explains.

Hypothetically, if California were to achieve its goal, or even get close to 50 percent, does that mean it is that more environmentally friendly? Solar panels and wind turbines contain things that have to be mined, manufactured, transported, etc., and all those methods have an impact on the environment.

"It's not so much that, but it's just a total waste of money," answers Rogers. "If you even believe the theory there is going to be a global warming disaster from putting carbon dioxide in the air, that's on very shaky ground as far as science goes, because the earth hasn't really warmed in the last two decades."

Meanwhile, Rogers says China is still burning a lot more coal than the U.S. 

"So this whole action by California is purely a feel good, symbolic thing. It has no meaning whatsoever in the real world," he concludes.

We moderate all reader comments, usually within 24 hours of posting (longer on weekends). Please limit your comment to 300 words or less and ensure it addresses the article - NOT another reader's comments. Comments that contain a link (URL), an inordinate number of words in ALL CAPS, rude remarks directed at other readers, or profanity/vulgarity will not be approved. More details

SIGN UP FOR OUR DAILY NEWSBRIEF

SUBSCRIBE

VOTE IN OUR POLL

What's the biggest factor behind Democrats' 0-4 record in special elections since November?

CAST YOUR VOTE

GET PUSH NOTIFICATIONS

SUBSCRIBE

LATEST AP HEADLINES

  FBI: No 'wider plot' suspected in Michigan airport stabbing
Census: US growing older and more racially diverse
Angry Dems turn against leaders after House election losses
AP sources: Senate GOP health bill would reshape Obama law
Biden to LGBT gala: 'Hold President Trump accountable'

LATEST FROM THE WEB

Why no one shouts 'Jesus is great' when they kill
Brown University teaching high school kids to be 'social justice warriors'
The unwritten law that helps bad cops go free
Citing no evidence, student editor claims: ‘If you’re white, you’re probably racist’
Professor calls white people "inhuman"

CARTOON OF THE DAY

Cartoon of the Day

REASON & COMPANY

NEXT STORY
Wildlife conservation putting humans at greater risk

sharkIt's understood in science that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. That applies to government efforts at protecting wildlife, which in turn seems to be putting human life in greater danger from wild animals.