How about New Jersey's global warming plan?

Question

New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine, a Democrat, signed a law on Friday making the state the latest to bypass the Bush administration by setting mandatory regulations to fight emissions of gases scientists link to global warming.

{...}

The Global Warming Response Act mandates economywide cuts of greenhouse gas emissions by about 16 percent by 2020 and 80 percent by 2050 in the country's most densely populated state.

{...}

California -- the world's eighth largest economy -- recently enacted a tough greenhouse gas law. Like New Jersey's, it also mandates an emissions cut by 2020. But its long term goal of cutting emissions 80 percent by 2050 is a target, not a hard mandate. Environmentalists said the New Jersey law is tougher than California's because its 2050 target is enforceable.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070706/pl_nm/climate_emissions_nj_dc

Jersey ahead of California on an environmental issue? Wow. I know I'm impressed, how about you?

Evita - apparently you missed it, but the NYC taxi fleet is switching to hybrids.

http://www.climatebiz.com/sections/news_detail.cfm?NewsID=35130

Prius engines turn off when the car isn't moving. In other words, no idling.

Answer 1

I think its great that NJ is working hard to improve the environment but it will be tough going as a large part of the problem with air pollution is Midwest coal burning plants that spread their pollution on eastwardly bound winds. If New Jersey could control coal burning power plants in states like Ohio, then there is a chance that the environment could be cleaned up

Answer 2

Well, given that global warming is not the looming catastrophe that Global Warming Alarmists (such as you) claim it will be, I suspect that these measures will be all pain for no gain.

I would also suggest a couple of other outcomes:

First I would guess that they will fail in their attempts at an 80% reduction by 2050. However, Arnie and Jon Corzine can make these bold plans, because they know that they’ll never come back to bite them. They certainly won’t be in power in 2050 (they may not even be alive) so they can set these regulations with impunity. They get all the glory for being “good environmentalists”; it’ll be left to others to pick up the pieces.

Second, as these draconian regulations start to bite, I wonder how many of the population will vote with their feet and simply up-sticks and leave; moving to areas with less harsh policies? I would suggest that they’d use their votes to get these regulations overturned, but if the U.S.A. is anything like the U.K., that may not be an option. Here, the main opposition party has abandoned its constitutional duty to oppose the government and is adopting blindly Green policies similar to those of the party in power.

With a little luck however, it won’t take too long for the whole global warming bandwagon to fizzle out and then these useless regulations will be canned. Sadly, it won’t happen quickly, of course, because no one likes to be made to look stupid. So, the people who set, or supported, these regulations will fight tooth and nail to keep the bandwagon going, so that they can save face.

Well, those are my predictions – they have to be at least as good as the nonsense that the IPCC is predicting. See - http://ff.org/centers/csspp/library/co2weekly/20070706/20070706_01.pdf - the latest damning report on the inadequacies of the IPCC – for you to bury your head in the sand to avoid taking any notice of. Enjoy

Answer 3

Get ready for some of those lovely rolling blackouts and skyhigh energy bills.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/gate/archive/2001/05/08/lookhow.DTL

Maybe we should give state to state migrants an "illegal" status? Californians fleeing to Arizona, Oregon, and Washington have already had a negative impact on those states.

Wait a second, the same John Corzine who fractured his leg, collarbone, spine, and ribs speeding at 91mph in his SUV, subsequently flown to the hospital via helicopter and administered life-saving care at great expense to the citizens of New Jersey...all because he had to get to an all-important "summit" between Don Imus and Rutger's women roundballers - and couldn't be bothered as the state's chief law enforcer to buckle his seat belts or drive within the speed limits. That John Corzine? Sounds like someone who puts the environment first.
Well, you can guess what kind of people will be exempt from these new regulations....

Answer 4

I think our entire system and the way everyone is thinking about all these long term solutions are going to do anything are just butt backwards . But if it gives you hope and makes you feel better about the way we treat the planet then I'm happy for you . Half the people aren't going to be hear in 2050 so whats the point . We need to clean the planet now not in 43 years .Just how ignorant do they think we are . You need to stop hanging with the rich man he has your mind in the clouds.

Answer 5

Hybrids will prove to be overpriced lemons and anyone owning one will regret having thrown so much money away on a vehicle designed to last no more than 3 to 5 years.

Answer 6

More symbolic poppycock. How in the hell will they monitor compliance with all of those taxis idling across the river in NYC?

Dana: what fuel do you put in your hybrid out in California? Moonbeams?

Answer 7

Sounds like great news to the surrounding states who will open their arms to the businesses who relocate such a short distance away, if they don't go all the way to Red China.

Answer 8

It depends on your point of view. Some people might think that Jersey is ahead of California in the race to return to the dark ages.

Answer 9

I live in a place where the idiot politicians are trying to still put DUMPS in the middle of residential neighborhoods...They don't know anything about green except that it is the color of money...and they can be bought CHEAP....Come on up and wake them up....!!!

Answer 10

Ooooo I can't wait to see all of the NIMBY lawsuits over wind generators and nuclear plants.