I was at a private event where this guy spoke, a few weeks ago. Found him self-aggrandizing, irritating and uninspiring.
Leadership in American cities is extremely troubling. I foresee a continued trend for businesses and families to move to low-tax, low-crime areas. This will leave a hollowed out core of a downtown with far less opportunity than what exists today. More problems would follow, including social unrest.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/berkel...k-bumatay-645478c8?mod=hp_opin_pos_5#cxrecs_s Gas Stoves Triumph Over Berkeley A federal appeals panel overrules the California city’s ban on natural gas hookups. By The Editorial Board April 17, 2023 at 6:43 pm ET The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday delivered a setback to the progressive war on gas stoves by holding that federal law pre-empts local bans. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, take note. Berkeley, Calif., in 2019 became the first city to prohibit natural gas connections in new buildings. San Jose, New York City, San Francisco, Seattle and others have followed. Ms. Hochul has proposed a statewide ban on gas hookups in new small buildings in 2025 and larger ones in 2028. Not so fast. The California Restaurant Association challenged Berkeley’s ban in federal court, arguing that the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) pre-empts local regulation of gas appliances. A lower-court judge disagreed but was overruled Monday by a three-judge Ninth Circuit panel. Judge Patrick Bumatay explains for the panel that the EPCA explicitly prohibits states and localities from regulating “energy efficiency, energy use or water use” once a federal energy conservation standard becomes effective for a “covered product.” The law’s federal pre-emption sweeps broadly and covers local regulations “concerning” gas appliances. Berkeley argued that the law only pre-empts local standards dictating the design and manufacture of appliances—not regulations that affect the distribution of energy sources such as natural gas. The Biden Administration essentially agreed in an amicus brief. But as Judge Bumatay points out, federal law defines “energy use” as “the quantity of energy directly consumed by a consumer product at point of use” by appliances, and Berkeley’s ban on new gas hookups “necessarily impacts” the quantity of gas used. “By its plain text and structure, EPCA’s preemption provision encompasses building codes that regulate natural gas use by covered products. And by preventing such appliances from using natural gas, the new Berkeley building code does exactly that,” he wrote. “States and localities can’t skirt the text of broad preemption provisions by doing indirectly what Congress says they can’t do directly.” Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain noted in a concurring opinion that the judiciary’s federal pre-emption doctrine is “troubling and confused” and merits more clarity from the Supreme Court. Fair enough. But as usual, progressives are seeking to advance their anti-fossil fuel agenda through a legal back door when they can’t get it through Congress. Appeared in the April 18, 2023, print edition as 'Gas Stoves Triumph Over Berkeley'.
Climate change and flying: what share of global CO2 emissions come from aviation? Flying is a highly controversial topic in climate debates. It accounts for around 2.5% of global CO₂ emissions, but 3.5% when we take non-CO₂ impacts on climate into account. https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions-from-aviation
I've watched all of ~7 minutes of him on video giving ~2 separate speeches and came to the same conclusion. I hope the hors d'oeuvres were good, though.
It was a 1 1/2 day event with pretty good food, a private concert by my former colleague John Legend, Naomi Campbell, Julia Roberts, etc., thanks.
Question to those who believe very strongly in "climate change". Do you do anything in particular to "reduce your carbon footprint"? I don't even believe in the climate religion, but pay for the allegedly 100 % solar only plan from Florida Power & Light, drive an electric car which we charge at home (supposedly only solar power - not sure how this can even be separated, but whatever). https://www.fpl.com/energy-my-way/solar/solartogether-res.html I do fly around A LOT, sometimes I pay to "offset". But other than the flying, our entire direct energy consumption, whether it's for the car, AC, fridge, light, whatever, is from solar. What do you do?
We bought heat pumps which was probably the best decision ever. Saving alot of $$$. You get 30% off now as a tax credit. Also planning to get energy efficient windows and will eventually move to all electric appliances. The govt is giving you up to 1500 to switch windows and proper ventilation. https://www.kiplinger.com/taxes/605...ax-credits-energy-efficient-home-improvements There's tons of money for developers to deploy solar and energy efficient materials on new projects. Developers can get up to 50% of the cost paid for. Imagine the mark up you can make as Developers. People don't realize how much money will be flooding into this in the next decade. We're going through a radical transformation and nobody in America seems to know.
Oh for ****sake..."religion"... At what point is anyone supposed to take you as a serious person in a serious part of a serious conversation?
calling climate alarmism, or even climate science, a "religion" is not necessarily unserious. Durkheim's functional-structural conception of religion has been influential for over a hundred years, and there are plenty of reputable scholarly works that analyze different knowledge enterprises as religion--including scientific disciplines. Philosopher Mary Midgley for example has written two excellent books on the topic, Science as Salvation and Evolution as Religion. So there is nothing inherently "unserious" about labeling climatism, climate alarmism, and/or climate science a religion. It may be that ATW failed to justify and/or explain his choice of words, but in that case that's what he should be called out on. An ad hominem about how he is not a "serious person" isn't a serious response.
