Different Ways To Respond To The Crisis

US states differ wildly in response to climate crisis; New York legislates for ambitious climate action, while Ohio protects failing coal companies

Tan Copsey, 12 August 2019 (ChinaDialogue)

“…[B]attles over climate policy have broken out across the country…[S]ome states have put in place radical and ambitious new climate change laws and targets…[O]thers have given polluting power plants more money…In late July, Ohio passed a bill to rescue three coal and two nuclear plants using money intended for renewable energy and energy efficiency. This may increase Ohio’s greenhouse gas emissions relative to if the money had been used for its original purpose…[D]espite the rapid, nationwide decline in coal use and the bankruptcy of many coal companies…[many Ohio Republicans see protecting] coal jobs seems a more powerful political force than creating new, green ones…[Some Republicans are worried] the state will miss out on renewable energy investment, which has grown rapidly in neighbouring states…

click to enlarge

…New York provides a different vision of the future…Governor Andrew Cuomo has signed into law the country’s most ambitious climate goals. These will cut greenhouse gas emissions 85% by 2050 and require utilities to source 70% of their energy from renewables by 2030…New York is the sixth state to mandate 100% renewable energy, following Hawaii, Nevada, New Mexico, Washington and California…[They are pushing back against White House efforts] to protect polluters…New York’s new laws will require renewable energy and infrastructure construction at a scale and pace never seen before…[Many, often as a result of partisan politics,] have concerns…[When Oregon] Democrats attempted to pass a cap-and-trade scheme to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 80% by 2050…[But Republican state senators forced a delay. It appears state lawmakers in Ohio and Oregon] will play a disproportionate role in determining all of our futures.” click here for more

click to enlarge

Tweet