The latest report of the U.N.’s top climate science panel (IPCC) released last week is an urgent call to take strong action now to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. Current levels of warming have already reached 1 degree Celsius above preindustrial levels and will continue to rise with business as usual. The Arctic region has already seen levels of warming above the global average, with dramatic results in increased levels of melting sea ice and leaking methane from thawing tundra.
The IPCC call to rapidly phase out the use of coal, oil, and gas is even more ambitious than what’s called for in the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement that aimed to contain planetary warming to 2 degrees Celsius. What is most striking about the new IPCC report—apart from its implied call for a global climate Marshall Plan—is the contrast of its message to the priorities of the Trump administration, a loyal servant of the fossil fuel industry.
We still have a window of opportunity to make the necessary changes to prevent climate chaos. As Al Gore says, “We have the solutions now … renewable sources are going to be cheaper than fossil fuels.” Citizens of San Luis Obispo County can make an impact locally to move to a greener alternative by voting yes on Measure G in November’s upcoming general election. Measure G will protect our water by banning fracking and new oil well development. Vote for a healthy environment on Nov. 6.
Ted Hamilton
San Luis Obispo
This article appears in Oct 18-28, 2018.
Quoting Al Gore is the best part of this article.
If you believe what the IPCC dishes out then you will believe anything authorities say no matter how ludicrous.
Basing actions on folly and falseness will help no one. We all use oil and gas products, so we should all be willing to participate in the production.
Not one concern mentioned in the article is an actual concern, only distractions and distortions to manipulate and control the gullible.
Are you incapable of looking at the past climate history and noticing that nothing is going that has not gone on to a larger degree before?? Are you blind to the fact that the solar output is the lowest in recorded history?? Do you not know there has been no significant temperature rise in over 20 years..?? Thinking for yourself, knowing and understanding the facts, instead of parroting others talking points leads to the opposite conclusions of the poorly thought out article.
Lastly saying fracking will harm our water is pretty much a total lie.
I believe what I see! I’ve lived in California, both northern and southern for over 30 years. We used to have a 3 month fire season every 10 years……NOW, we have a 9 month fire season every year! The oceans are warming, the reefs are dying due to the acidity levels rising at a record rate! 93 scientist from around the world who have no political agenda, just science, say we are screwed if we don’t stop the warming. It has been proven that the oil companies did research back in the ’70s and knew this was going to happen. Just what is it going to take for you right wing conservative folks to understand you aren’t going to be able to eat or drink the friggin’ oil?
The No on G propaganda machine is spewing gushers of dirty, crude lies, most all of them derived from the big onelike Measure G will put hundreds out of work, millions in taxes will be lost, teachers and cops fired, etc. Hey wait! There is no shutdown of existing oil production, thus no jobs or taxes lost. People are blown away by the audacity of these lies. How can they get away with it? Well, they are Big Oil and they either bully or bribe youand we are being digitally bullied folks.
Jack, you literally just copied and pasted from Charles Varni’s OPINION piece. Looks like propaganda to me…
You’re right, you can’t drink the oil, but it does happen to be vital to modern civilization. Specifically, it helps out quite a bit when constructing roads, farming, making literally anything out of plastic (which is a lot of stuff including the computer and or phone you used to post your comment), and having power at night.
Also, I thought the scientists said it was sunscreen that was killing all the reefs.
Dear Voice – Why do you hide behind the name” Voice of Reason”?
Does my name matter? Does my name make the data/logic/facts any less meaningful? I don’t think so. I’m more concerned with the reasoning, validity, and feasibility of people’s discussions than their names.
Take this article for example. I find the last paragraph to be the most interesting. If renewable sources of energy were more cost effective and cheaper (I would argue that efficiency should matter here too) than fossil fuels, then I would support their implementation. The issue I take is that Measure G is NOT the greener alternative. It is simply a way to stop or severely limit something that environmental activists don’t like. Additionally, any reduction or limit in growth of California based oil production will result in an expansion of foreign oil importation. It’s simple supply and demand. The last 25 years of California imports supports my conclusion https://www.energy.ca.gov/almanac/petroleu…
If you want to make SLO greener, the focus should be on the demand for petroleum products, not on the supply. Supply will continue, whether it’s from California or somewhere else, as long as the demand is there.
I am also waiting for someone to explain to me how SLO County won’t be held liable for compensating the oil companies for the minerals we would be blocking them from realizing the value of. The 5th Amendment clearly states “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” By not allowing new wells, this measure is taking private property away from the oil companies, therefore they must be compensated. Who pays for that?
Can you dispute any of this? Am I wrong in my reasoning? I’m looking for answers, not biased one-liners.
Dear Voice – Yes, names matter. California law requires donor-proponents and opponents to be identified so voters can better assess their arguments (http://www.fppc.ca.gov). Voters deserve to know because there are always facts on both sides. For the record, I am a retired engineer. I do not get any money from oil companies, or money from any environment group. Can you say the same? Is this why you are hiding?
You say Measure G , ” is simply a way to stop or severely limit something that environmental activists don’t like. Exactly! We want to protect our water, air, environment and major industry, even if oil companies must be forced to operate in an environmentally safe way. Sadly, SLO County petroleum companies have not operated safely. One example is the Avila Beach pipeline leak (http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Unocal-to-Tear…). Unocal originally fought the lawsuit. The oil company was forced to move much of the town to clean up its mess. Even with their cleanup, polluted water remains below Avila Beach.
You say Measure G will, result in an expansion of foreign oil importation. Reasons this is not true:
– Measure G does not shut down existing oil extraction.
– Existing SLO County oil extraction is negligible, less that 0.01% of US oil consumption.
– The US both imports and exports oil. The US could decrease exports
– The US could expand renewable energy sources slightly more quickly.
You also ask, how SLO County won’t be held liable for compensating the oil companies for the minerals. Im not a lawyer. Oil companies may well sue. Yet, anti-fracking laws are in place in 6 California counties, 3 other states, and 5 European countries.
We must stop the dangerous oil company practices. Vote yes on Measure G.
For the record I am an employed engineer, what are the chances? I also happen to be a citizen who is not paid by the oil companies for my opinions. I’m fairly certain I am able to say whatever I want, as they are my opinions and as it is my constitutional right. The facts make you nervous, I don’t blame you for focusing on my name instead of the realities.
Please answer me this. How many safety issues have occurred at the Arroyo Grande oil field? (hint: the answer is zero) If we judged every industry by your standards nobody would be in business. Take PG&E for example. It was found that their equipment caused fires in northern California that destroyed literally thousands of homes. I don’t see you going after them. Also, mining for rare earth materials used to create so called renewable energy is destroying the environment, it’s just not happening in your backyard. That makes it okay I guess?
To address each of your inaccurate assessments about Measure G
– Measure G will ultimately shut down the field sooner than it would without Measure G, and based on my calculations it would be within the next 5 years due to the natural field decline, the costly political environment, and the expensive reverse osmosis plant they run to keep the steelhead trout alive in the creek. (but who cares about the trout)
– Using the entire US is ridiculous. Let’s talk about CA. We import 60% SIXTY PERCENT of our oil from foreign countries. I believe we should try to minimize imports and not be reliant on Saudi Arabia, Columbia, or Iraq for our oil imports. If you let the field expand, it could contribute a lot more to the demand for hydrocarbons in CA.
– Yes, we import and export but as an engineer I expect a little more critical thinking from you on this one. Oil doesn’t cross the Rocky Mountains. Would you be in favor of building some large pipelines to solve our geographical constraints or help the transportation of oil between states? Didn’t think so. I’d guess you are against any pipelines. #Keystone
– The US is expanding renewable energy. I have no problem with that, but if you want less oil production it’s up to you to use less of it. Killing or limiting the supply doesn’t stop the demand. Am I wrong?
Sweet points on the fracking laws. I’d bet you there is no need for fracking in any of the places where it is outlawed. Prove me wrong on that one. If I had oil interests in SLO County, I wouldn’t sue based on the fracking, I would sue based on Measure G blocking my right to realize the value of the minerals on my property. NO expansion means they are not being allowed to obtain that value, therefore the county would be liable to give “just compensation”. It’s unfortunate that you are willing to sacrifice all of our taxpayer dollars to figure that out.
Stop living in fear. Stop being a hypocrite and using the products from the industry you are condemning.
Vote NO on G.