What Happens in California Most Definitely Doesn’t Stay in California
How does progressive government policy apply the right kind of pressure on a market economy to drive its fuel consumption in the direction of low carbon emissions? I sure wish there were an easy answer to that question, but there isn’t–and even if one existed, it could be completely different 24 months from now.
That’s why, each year, 2GreenEnergy is proud to act as a media partner with the California Carbon and LCFS (Low-Carbon Fuel Standard) Summit. It’s easily the best single venue to learn about North America’s ever-changing carbon, emissions, and fuels markets and the uncertainty that surrounds them. It’s actually the only place to understand how California’s current Cap-and-Trade and LCFS program (as well as federal emission initiatives) affects the future of all market participants’ emissions obligations.
As the CEO of multinational infrastructure and environmental consulting firm Mazzetti puts it, “I learn more here than in any other other conference I attend.”
Maybe you’re thinking that your business is only indirectly affected by issues like these, or that California’s influence on the world is limited by the fact that it represents only a little more that one-half of one percent of the world’s population. That’s fine, but keep in mind that lots of big, important business ideas start here in the Golden State, and that it takes very little time for concepts that prove themselves here to make a positive impact on literally everyone living on the planet.
Note: I just verified the truth of this last statement using my Apple (mkt cap $815B) iPhone with its Intel (mkt cap $171B) processor, to Google (mkt cap $649B) the subject, and if I weren’t an environmentalist I might have sent my findings to my HP (mkt cap $33B) printer via my Cisco (mkt cap $159B) router.
Seriously, I hope to see you there.
@Craig
Hi Craig, I tackle this subject from a different perspective from time to time as you are aware, so I hope this short piece is not to far out of sync with your subject in general.
It is becoming inevitably more apparent to many, that history may reflect rather scathingly on how the global renewable energy technologies period 1995 – 2025 was largely ill-conceived and mismanaged through emotional bordering on irrational thinking and decision making, rather than professionally detached scientific and visionary thinking, by most nations. Most certainly reflections by responsible decision makers in the sector in hindsight, about this protracted period of “lost scientific and commercial opportunities” will ruminate widely throughout the global energy technologies and scientific establishments, and no nation will go untouched by this introspection in varying degrees.
What might be the tipping point therefore that weakens the bonds that bind us to the renewable energy paradigm that has been embraced globally with near hysterical fervor at times? Well foremost might be a universal recognition and acceptance that future global clean energy generation imperatives cannot be satisfied by renewable energy technologies. Equally important is that a prosperous and “equal opportunity for all people” world of the future (which is a critical global aspiration) is only possible by affordable access and availability by all peoples to ‘huge energy generation technology’ to power new age energy intensive industries; and economy modernization industrialization technologies and opportunities.
An emerging global ‘push back’ counterbalancing renewable energy technologies is unfolding already; and a lesson we can take from the history of human technological endeavor over several centuries hitherto, is that in general terms there can ultimately only be one winner in any technology type.
A recent article published in the highly regarded South China Morning Post (Hong Kong) 19/08/2017 by US correspondent Robert Delaney headed, “Nuclear Renaissance – China is set to make an emphatic statement in clean power generation as it prepares to commission its revolutionary AP1000 reactor in Sanmen”, provides a compelling insight and analysis into the key ingredients of this important subject.
http://www.scmp.com/business/companies/article/2107354/china-pips-us-race-start-worlds-most-advanced-nuclear-power-plant
19/08/2017
Lawrence Coomber
Progressive government increasingly proves it’s inability or REFUSAL? to understand market forces. While legitimate studies are in place to research the environmental impact of any advancement in sustainability, Globalist forces are 1st at the plate to fund antithesis to any reasonable analysis. The intent is clear to us that study, an intent to deny, neigh suppress self sustainability through, at first, distribution of our own resources. We Fund terrorism, manipulate money by subsidies that fund “foundations” to launder partisan repatriation. Why would anyone believe that ENVIRONMENT is first and foremost on any politicians mind?
Carbon punishment is just another attempt at enslavement because THEY timed out on Indgen (silent “G”) oppression. Look deeper into methodology of control. How they have learned from mistakes made allowing MLK, JFK to influence opinion. We are in dire times and Al Gore’s opinion & failed second attempt to drive us all into petrified fear is another portfolio of “garbage” science to divide and conquer. Our climate adapts accordingly, according to some studies. Denial? may put us in finite jeopardy. Concern should be more closely focused on the divisions within society that allows main stream media to tout AntiFa as a legitimate representative of ideology and colour the rest as ALT right. Fix this intentional misappropriation of youth. Re establish a common goal of unification against abusers of tax funded corruption to embrace all. We can easily address climate once we dispel the myths of dominance by peoples and entities that have repeatedly proven to be without… Disjointed? try writing in this format.
Christopher,
Good to read your contribution, although it’s difficult discerning whether you are serious or not ? (paragraphs are useful)
While it’s true ‘progressive’ governments do have a leftist tendency to be overly idealistic and not think through the consequences of policy decisions, conservative governments often discourage innovative ideas and technology simply from fear of disruption.
The wisest and most productive governments try to implement policies which are both social and economically progressive while ensuring the conservative principles of prudence, careful planning, monitoring, scrutiny and responsible analysis are applied.
Modern government relies upon support and trust by the majority of the people to accept their elected representatives act in the best interests of the nation.
The expect the civil service to be politically unbiased and professional.
Citizens have a right to expect their taxes are spent wisely on services and not wasted on ideological crusades. Citizens understand and approve of limited government taxpayer funded investment for incentives, subsidies etc to encourage economic activity and innovation.
Such policies are entrusted to governments as part of a mandate to manage national economic policy.
The most successful governments are centrists, who can encourage social and economic reform within a stable environment, bringing the majority of citizens to freely understand and embrace new concepts and policies, while respecting and including those with opposing views or concerns.
We tolerate the rantings of Anarchists, AntiFA etc, along with the crazy ultra right, because we know it’s the price of upholding the precious right to free speech.
We tolerate the sensationalist distortions and dishonesty or the mainstream media, because that’s the price of a free media.
We tolerate “imperfection” because we know the awful price exacted in the past by those who promised and demanded “perfection”.
We accept fallibility, because it’s fundamental to human nature and just as precious all the virtues of human nature.
We accept and encourage debate, because it’s better than physical conflict or totalitarian oppression.
We keep striving, because we’re human.