Say, If California Is Against Fuels, Why Isn’t It Cutting Its Production?

Despite all the greeny weenies yammering on about anthropogenic climate change, how fossil fuels are evil, and the government of the People’s Republik Of California (PRC) passing all sorts of Hotcoldwetdry laws, the people still use tons on fossil fuels. And

To Meet Climate Goals, California Should Cut Oil Production, Report Says

California built a reputation launching some of the most ambitious climate policies in the world, but it’s also a significant oil producer, with the third largest oil production of any state.

If it were to eliminate even half of that production, it could cut global carbon dioxide emissions by 8 million to 24 million tons per year, the Stockholm Environment Institute says in a new report. That’s equalivalent to as much as 5 percent of the state’s overall emissions.

It’s a supply-side approach to cutting emissions, rather than targeting demand the way the state’s cap-and-trade or auto-efficiency rules do.

I think this is a fantastic idea. They need to walk the talk. Who cares if citizens are already complaining that the current carbon trading rules are increasing the cost of fuel, and that the above idea would drastically increase the cost: we have a planet to save from hundreds of a degree temperature rise! PRC has the second highest average gas price in the nation, right behind Hawaii.

The authors argue that attacking fossil fuel production at the wellhead is necessary if California—often called the world’s sixth-largest economy—is to help meet the goals of the Paris climate agreement. Studies have found that avoiding the worst risks of climate change means keeping most of the world’s fossil fuel reserves—including a third of the oil—in the ground.

“You could in theory do that by reducing demand for fossil fuels,” said Peter Erickson, a senior scientist at the Stockholm Environment Institute and co-author of the report. “But it’s not happening fast enough, so that creates a need to limit the supply of fossil fuels.”

Why not go whole hog and ban the production of fossil fuels in the state completely? This includes drilling and refinement. Heck, the PRC should ban the importation of all fossil fuels to the state. Oh, and certainly the state and local governments should stop using them. We have a world to save!

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

One Response to “Say, If California Is Against Fuels, Why Isn’t It Cutting Its Production?”

  1. Dana says:

    Nothing quite like taking jobs from American citizens, and forcing us to once more become dependent upon foreign oil imports, huh?

    Decreasing the supply of petroueum does not decrease the demand for it; it simply leads to higher prices.

Pirate's Cove