California is banning cars—13 years from now!?! If they were gonna give themselves a 13 year head start they should’ve done this in the 1960s.
If they had done this in 2007 (which would even then have been painfully late) it would’ve been enacted two years ago. Assuming it would’ve survived several administrations of political change 🤦🏻♀️
Where the heck do they even think the precipice is?! It’s like three centimeters away.
Future promises probably better known as blablabla!
Yes, soft landings and head starts and cushioned braking distances are great and life-saving but the time for them was yesterday!
California’s decis… uh, “promise” to end sales of new gas cars in the distant Star Trek cyber future while keeping the old ones on the road is getting backlash. From people who want to see action now? I wish. Instead, it’s from people who think even that is too much. GOP wants to cash in on gasoline populism.
Populism is the dark side of democracy because ¡El pueblo unido jamás tira bencina!
I used to be stoked when politicians made green promises, but learn to see through it. These future goals mean less than nothing. Instead of “In the year 2035, we’re gonna [some vague, unattainable goal]”, I wanna see “In the next few months, we’re gonna [concrete legislation and action]”.
Cali’s 2035 promise is ridiculous.
The EU commission and parliament just came out with a similar promise, also using 2035 as a goal. (The reason that’s the goal is because the average lifetime of a car is 15 years and we have CO2e goals for 2050 and people think average means more than it does.)
I’m not complaining, though. Why?
That last step is the only thing that matters. If they can pull that off, I’ll celebrate.
Someone in the comments section on that announcement (why the heck is the announcement on Linked In and not on a .eu page?) says:
Could you secondly explain how could a sector be “carbon neutral” individually, while the French Energy and Environment agency (ADEME) recommends to avoid using these terms to qualify a single entity as a company or a sector to avoid misunderstanding of this notion that, they said, “only has sense at global scale” ?
Yeah, we do need a holistic view, but we’ve also got to make sure that these nitpicks don’t lead to whataboutism: “Our carbon footprint is trivial compared to […]. Therefore it makes no sense for us to take action, at least until […] does so.”