California’s Potemkin Environmentalism - PhillyBlog

raider.adam · #1 (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 10:00 PM

http://www.city-journal.org/2008/18_...mentalism.html

New article from the Manhattan Institute. With the discussion of electric cars and the power grid in another thread, I thought this might be an interesting discussion topic for people. Also with PA looking to take on a more aggressive energy policy.

Quote:

In truth, however, the Golden State’s energy leadership is a mirage. California’s environmental policies have made it heavily dependent on other states for power; generated some of the highest, business-crippling energy costs in the country; and left it vulnerable to periodic electricity shortages. Its economic growth has occurred not because of, but despite, those policies, which would be disastrous if extended to the rest of the country.

BeckyJ · #2 (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 10:10 PM

"Gray Davis - Building a Bridge to the 19th Century!"

Rolling black outs are fun, Adam! C'mon!

When all those power shortages were going on, my cousin discovered she's on the same grid as one of the hospitals in San Jose. No blackouts for her!

CA buys power from NV, UT, and CO at least. It's a joke.

Colin P. Varga · #3 (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 11:03 PM

To clean up the air in California the state exported it's power generating so that it would import electricity from other states, and the Navajo Nation I believe, and those states would have the pollution. Which is why the Grand Canyon has smog. When people outside of the state started to raise the cost of electricity and CA couldn't pay then CA had problems.

Of course no one should use this as a lesson becoming dependent on energy from foreign sources because this would never happen to the whole country.

phillyaggie · #4 (**permalink**) 05-07-2008, 11:28 PM

Don't under-estimate Enron's role in causing grid problems and fake electricity shortages in California during the infamous rolling black-outs or brown-outs.

OTOH, yes, it is true that California hasn't built a single power plant in a long time, certainly not a coal-fired one.

As for pollution in Grand Canyon, it is not just of local making. In fact, prevailing wind patterns change through the year and affect the general visibility conditions and beauty of many Class I areas which are essentially the big national parks and monuments in the West.

For example, I just recently visited Guadalupe Mountains National Park in far-west Texas, on the border with NM. The info I got there showed that Mt Capitan sometimes loses its visibility and charm because of pollution all the way from southern California, usually during summer. During winter, the prevailing winds bring pollution into the lovely mountains area from Mexico and southeastern Texas.

So, California still has air pollution issues, and it still exports its "bad air" to states downwind, and to the national parks.

Colin P. Varga · #5 (**permalink**) 05-08-2008, 12:01 AM

Aggie, your right about CA pollution problems and Enron. I think El Paso power was involved as well, and of course links to the Bush family and Cheney, etc. Republicans from Texas auditing the Democrat gov. in CA

The smog in LA was cleaned up by sending it's pollution elsewhere, but after the recent energy "crises" they had to start to generate there own power again they were using less efficient generators which made things worse than ever. Indeed CA's pollution does go to the Grand Canyon but when the smog was reduced in LA it was still in the Canyon. It seem normal that now LA's smog would reach Texas. Kinda ironic.

raider.adam · #6 (**permalink**) 05-08-2008, 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colin P. Varga

Aggie, your right about CA pollution problems and Enron. I think El Paso power was involved as well, and of course links to the Bush family and Cheney, etc. Republicans from Texas auditing the Democrat gov. in CA

The smog in LA was cleaned up by sending it's pollution elsewhere, but after the recent energy "crises" they had to start to generate there own power again they were using less efficient generators which made things worse than ever. Indeed CA's pollution does go to the Grand Canyon but when the smog was reduced in LA it was still in the Canyon. It seem normal that now LA's smog would reach Texas. Kinda ironic.

That is a lot of what the article goes into ... California policy is like "energy colonialism" with its surrounding states.

BeckyJ · #7 (**permalink**) 05-08-2008, 11:10 PM

But, nobody will allow the building of any new nuclear power plants which are the cleanest power plants around so far. There is less radiation standing at the dome than you get from an airplane trip at 30,000 feet.

I live in CA for over 30 years. Don't even get me started on the ridiculousness of its government & policies. And, I love the state.

raider.adam · #8 (**permalink**) 05-09-2008, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeckyJ

But, nobody will allow the building of any new nuclear power plants which are the cleanest power plants around so far. There is less radiation standing at the dome than you get from an airplane trip at 30,000 feet.

I live in CA for over 30 years. Don't even get me started on the ridiculousness of its government & policies. And, I love the state.

And not just nuclear reactors, but nuclear BREEDER reactors. (One of the bonehead things Carter did was ban these.)

These things are beautiful. They take fissile material like Uranium-238 and while running, creates a byproduct of Plutonium-239 which is also fissile (and generates much more power than Uranium-235). Meaning ... it actually creates further fuel for it to run... and the Putonium-239 keeps turning into other isotopes that are fissile. The process creates more fuel than it uses.

The technology is proven. The French have several of these.

Breeder reactors are one of the best solutions to energy independence in the US.

thunda · #9 (**permalink**) 05-09-2008, 12:37 PM

Raider, thanks for posting this. I check the City Journal site semi-regularly and this article had been listed as "coming soon" for a couple months now.

I won't be able to read the whole thing until tonight, but I would caution that while the CJ has interesting and well-argued articles, they often sketch over opposing viewpoints and data. It would be interesting for CJ to engage in some Slate-type dialogues with different writers.

But can't understand the left's aversion to nuclear power (which does seem to be lessening). After all the, French and the Swedes get large majorities of their electricity from nuclear. I think it's the technology that has the greatest potential to get the US off of fossil fuels.

raider.adam · #10 (**permalink**) 05-09-2008, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thunda

Raider, thanks for posting this. I check the City Journal site semi-regularly and this article had been listed as "coming soon" for a couple months now.

I won't be able to read the whole thing until tonight, but I would caution that while the CJ has interesting and well-argued articles, they often sketch over opposing viewpoints and data. It would be interesting for CJ to engage in some Slate-type dialogues with different writers.

But can't understand the left's aversion to nuclear power (which does seem to be lessening). After all the, French and the Swedes get large majorities of their electricity from nuclear. I think it's the technology that has the greatest potential to get the US off of fossil fuels.

Yeah, I am aware they have their own agenda as well. I just tend to like them because they seem to support their ideas in a very well written manner with data to support.

I know it isn't always the full story.