Jessica, I agree somewhat, certainly in regard to the need for investments in resiliency (e.g. our water infrastructure) and a focus on our unique assets (e.g. forest policy), but I disagree when it comes to dismissing smaller efforts. Taken to the extreme, I suppose we could add up all of our possible actions to address climate change in Oregon -- from recycling to EVs to wind in the gorge and solar east of the Cascades and better storage of carbon in our coastal forests -- and still not move the global needle by 0.1 degree centigrade. But if we pioneer these approaches and do them well, there will be a modeling effect on other states and a proof of concept for the benefits of a less carbon-intensive economy that will can help drive a virtuous circle of investment within and beyond our borders. For years now, we've been talking about the need for an all-of-the-above approach to addressing climate change. If we're serious about that, we'll embrace the small as well as the big and work them both into an ethos of progress toward the larger, global goal.
Tim, I want to move the dial on this issue just as much as anyone else, but the state has a responsibility to properly vet and perform due diligence on policies it is advocating for. Oregon is facing multiple challenges with limited resources, and therefore needs to be strategic with its investments.
Except that global climate action is a cascade of actions that create a collective shift. This article ignores the collective momentum Oregon feeds and supports through climate action policies, ultimately helping move the US, which moves the world. "Outcomes focused" means decarbonizing a nation--the most important nation--which means decarbonizing all its regions, all its states--and adding to the momentum underway... in our region (CA, WA, ...) and country. "No measure impact" is a message and lens of hopelessness--in a world where all contributions matter, collective momentum matters, where tipping points are arriving and passing (good and bad). "Feel good" also omits the new economic reality of renewables -- where many of the power sector decarbonizing actions will save money, but need legal and policy frameworks to nudge incumbent utilities to change. Renewables are cheap. It's time to start building. It's all-hands-on-deck time.
In other words, “virtue-signaling”. Progressives have perfected that.
The idea that unreliable (“renewable”) energy is going to replace fossil fuels anytime soon is pure fiction. Perhaps you should “do the math” and think within the constraints of basic physics.
Jake, I do not want to discourage individuals from doing what they feel is right. We should all try to do our part. I believe Oregon’s own climate advocacy groups have had the greatest impact by raising the awareness of this issue to the level where decision-makers are ready to act. But we need to all be on the same set of data so we can make the best decisions possible and allocate resources responsibly. We have a finite amount of time to get this right. We need to be smart about it.
Jessica, I agree somewhat, certainly in regard to the need for investments in resiliency (e.g. our water infrastructure) and a focus on our unique assets (e.g. forest policy), but I disagree when it comes to dismissing smaller efforts. Taken to the extreme, I suppose we could add up all of our possible actions to address climate change in Oregon -- from recycling to EVs to wind in the gorge and solar east of the Cascades and better storage of carbon in our coastal forests -- and still not move the global needle by 0.1 degree centigrade. But if we pioneer these approaches and do them well, there will be a modeling effect on other states and a proof of concept for the benefits of a less carbon-intensive economy that will can help drive a virtuous circle of investment within and beyond our borders. For years now, we've been talking about the need for an all-of-the-above approach to addressing climate change. If we're serious about that, we'll embrace the small as well as the big and work them both into an ethos of progress toward the larger, global goal.
Tim, I want to move the dial on this issue just as much as anyone else, but the state has a responsibility to properly vet and perform due diligence on policies it is advocating for. Oregon is facing multiple challenges with limited resources, and therefore needs to be strategic with its investments.
Except that global climate action is a cascade of actions that create a collective shift. This article ignores the collective momentum Oregon feeds and supports through climate action policies, ultimately helping move the US, which moves the world. "Outcomes focused" means decarbonizing a nation--the most important nation--which means decarbonizing all its regions, all its states--and adding to the momentum underway... in our region (CA, WA, ...) and country. "No measure impact" is a message and lens of hopelessness--in a world where all contributions matter, collective momentum matters, where tipping points are arriving and passing (good and bad). "Feel good" also omits the new economic reality of renewables -- where many of the power sector decarbonizing actions will save money, but need legal and policy frameworks to nudge incumbent utilities to change. Renewables are cheap. It's time to start building. It's all-hands-on-deck time.
In other words, “virtue-signaling”. Progressives have perfected that.
The idea that unreliable (“renewable”) energy is going to replace fossil fuels anytime soon is pure fiction. Perhaps you should “do the math” and think within the constraints of basic physics.
Jake, I do not want to discourage individuals from doing what they feel is right. We should all try to do our part. I believe Oregon’s own climate advocacy groups have had the greatest impact by raising the awareness of this issue to the level where decision-makers are ready to act. But we need to all be on the same set of data so we can make the best decisions possible and allocate resources responsibly. We have a finite amount of time to get this right. We need to be smart about it.
We need to shut these businesses down completely and retrain. We can set an example for other states and the world that greed will not destroy us.