Hawaii Passes Law To Make State Carbon Neutral By 2045 (fastcompany.com) 131
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Fast Company: In a little less than three decades, Hawaii plans to be carbon neutral -- he most ambitious climate goal in the United States. Governor David Ige signed a bill today committing to make the state fully carbon neutral by 2045, along with a second bill that will use carbon offsets to help fund planting trees throughout Hawaii. A third bill requires new building projects to consider how high sea levels will rise in their engineering decisions. The state is especially vulnerable to climate change -- sea level rise, for example, threatens to cause $19 billion in economic losses -- and that's one of the reasons that the new laws had support.
Transportation is a challenge -- while the state is planning for a future where cars run on renewable electricity, it also relies heavily on planes and ships, which will take longer to move to electric charging, and which Hawaii can't directly control. "Those are global transportation networks that don't have easy substitutes right now," Glenn says. "That's one of the reasons why we really want to pursue the carbon offset program, because we know we're going to continue to be dependent on shipping and aviation, and if they continue to burn carbon to bring us our tourists and our goods and our supplies and our food, then we want to try to have a way to sequester the impact we're causing by importing all this stuff to our islands." The government plans to sell carbon offsets to pay to plant native trees, which can help absorb CO2 from the atmosphere as they grow. The state is also working to become more self-sufficient. The governor aims to double local food production by 2030; right now, around 90% of what residents and tourists eat in Hawaii -- 6 million pounds of food a day -- comes from somewhere else, on planes or ships.
Transportation is a challenge -- while the state is planning for a future where cars run on renewable electricity, it also relies heavily on planes and ships, which will take longer to move to electric charging, and which Hawaii can't directly control. "Those are global transportation networks that don't have easy substitutes right now," Glenn says. "That's one of the reasons why we really want to pursue the carbon offset program, because we know we're going to continue to be dependent on shipping and aviation, and if they continue to burn carbon to bring us our tourists and our goods and our supplies and our food, then we want to try to have a way to sequester the impact we're causing by importing all this stuff to our islands." The government plans to sell carbon offsets to pay to plant native trees, which can help absorb CO2 from the atmosphere as they grow. The state is also working to become more self-sufficient. The governor aims to double local food production by 2030; right now, around 90% of what residents and tourists eat in Hawaii -- 6 million pounds of food a day -- comes from somewhere else, on planes or ships.
umm volcanoes emit CO2 (Score:3, Interesting)
So just how are they going to offset that???
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
then make diamonds and make billions.
If the current volcano doesnt destroy them when it sink and makes a 300ft tsunami
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Except that it doesn't. Most of our primary energy, and a large minority of our electricity, come from geothermal power. In one of our wells they actually drilled down straight into a magma chamber. It's one of the best wells in the country. And every bit of heat they take out is solidifying magma. It doesn't stop the plates from spreading, of course, it just shifts the pressure/heat balance that determines whether some arbitrary point is in a liquid or solid state.
Really, what we do is of such insignific
Re: (Score:2)
We can't. But you should know full well. When we say Carbon Neutral. We are talking about carbon output that we cause and can control. Carbon Neutral doesn't even factor in the air we exhale.
However in a million years, when all our politics have been forgotten and our technology at best would be lumped together into advancements of a few thousand years, but more likely forgotten. If there is still intelligent life on earth, and the geologist look at our past, they will probably expect that our time peri
Re: (Score:2)
Volcanoes are already carbon neutral. That's why CO2 was just going up and up in the last million years.
Re: umm volcanoes emit CO2 (Score:2)
Kilauea is helping reduce Hawaii's carbon footprint. Human-related energy consumption has drastically declined in Leilani, Kapoho, Vacationland...
Re: (Score:3)
So just how are they going to offset that???
Lawmakers in Hawaii don't care how they're going to offset that. 2045. The lawmakers who passed that law will be retired by then. It's someone else's problem.
Re: (Score:2)
What is there to offset? The sum total of all CO2 out-gassed by active volcanoes amounts to about 1/150th of anthropogenic emissions. [grist.org]
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
So just how are they going to offset that???
They're going to plug all the volcanoes and hope they don't anger Kahapuahpuah, the Polynesian god of lava and cheap hotel fares.
Puerto Rico needs this right now (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Puerto Rico lost a lot of generating power, but they lost even more distribution capacity. Much of their power was left in excess but stranded. The power is also in poor condition in terms of voltage, frequency regulation, and general reliability.
That said, Tesla also does solar.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Carbon neutral by law? (Score:2)
It won't ever work!
Re:Carbon neutral by law? (Score:4, Insightful)
So far it seems to work better then Carbon Neutral by Free Market.
Re: (Score:2)
That depends on whether you get a cost of living raise or not. The economy is not a zero sum game.
Well there, COLA is only guaranteed in places where you have contracts with an employer. That means union shops, that means generally factories, and manufacturing. But this is Ontario, where the Liberal Party of Ontario's decisions have been against factories, manufacturing, and jobs that create a middle class. So where are you going to get that money from?
Let's look at that state of Ontario(the most populous province in Canada), where the liberals actions to offset high heating, high electricity, high r
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So you're saying Trump is trying to build the wrong wall. ;)
Considering the influx of '2nd party' illegals from the US in to Canada, it's very possible. That's only because the US has spent the last decade and change sitting on it's ass and not really deporting people, and whenever the idea comes up the first response from progressives is to screech "racist" luckily, that's lost it's effective power.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Hurting an economy is better then killing civilization.
Not everything is about economy, some problems are worth hurting the economy for in order to fix a foundation.
Now I couldn't find any reference about $9.00/L Canada prices, so I am going to place that under fake news to scare us Hard Working Americans about those dangerous LiBeRaLs. Or it was a passing phrase in a brain storming idea taken out of context.
Also to note, when Gas prices rise, people change their habits. We saw this back in during the 2008
Re: (Score:3)
Carbon taxes don't have to harm the economy as a whole, and especially not individuals. If they are used to fund development of cheaper, clean forms of energy and consumption they can be a net benefit.
Don't forget to factor in the reduced cost of dealing with the emissions and associated pollution either, e.g. healthcare, environmental disasters and cleaning.
Norway is an interesting example. Most new cars are electric. Charging infrastructure is extensive. Yet it didn't bankrupt them or make cars massively
Re: (Score:2)
Carbon taxes don't have to harm the economy as a whole, and especially not individuals. If they are used to fund development of cheaper, clean forms of energy and consumption they can be a net benefit.
Which is why every place that's done it the economy has slowed to a crawl, and/or went into deep recession. Nope, no hurting there.
Don't forget to factor in the reduced cost of dealing with the emissions and associated pollution either, e.g. healthcare, environmental disasters and cleaning.
Because you're only shifting one form of dirty to another, and think that it's cleaner. Useful tip: It's more expensive environmentally to dig up the materials to make those Li-ON battery packs then it is to go digging up shale or tar oil.
Norway is an interesting example. Most new cars are electric. Charging infrastructure is extensive. Yet it didn't bankrupt them or make cars massively more expensive or anything like that. In fact Norway is consistently rated as one of the best places in the world to live in terms of quality of life.
And in Ontario, the cost is estimated to be somewhere around $700M-1.4B for those charging stations. That's 4 new hospitals(desperately nee
Re: (Score:1)
Hurting an economy is better then killing civilization.
Really? Why don't you think about what a ruined economy would actually cost in lives and freedom...
If you are serious about this, I suggest you learn Chinese because they are going to take over if you wreak our economy and we cannot afford to defend ourselves. Get ready for communism and all the bad things that implies...
Personally, I figure it's better for everybody overall to just keep burring fossil fuels, keeping our freedom, while investing in R&D to replace CO2 emitters and deal with the envi
Re: (Score:2)
Hurting an economy is better then killing civilization.
Not everything is about economy, some problems are worth hurting the economy for in order to fix a foundation.
Which is why environmentalists are lining up for nuclear power right? Right? Oh, I guess not. Looks like they're just brushing off their inner malthus and waiting for everyone else to die for their perfect society.
Now I couldn't find any reference about $9.00/L Canada prices, so I am going to place that under fake news to scare us Hard Working Americans about those dangerous LiBeRaLs. Or it was a passing phrase in a brain storming idea taken out of context.
Your jumping off point is right there. [theglobeandmail.com] Now go finish reading the linked articles about how they'd really like the cabon tax to be $350-900/tonne. By the way, if you want to see all about those "dangerous LiBeRaLs" why not look at Ontario, which has a population of 1/3 the state of California an
Re: (Score:3)
The government of the Netherlands decided a few weeks ago that we have to get off the natural gas we pump out of the ground in 12 years, because of the earthquakes that occur due to the pumping. Our government has been trying to uphold the reputation of being even less interested in the environment than the US, so this was a big thing for us. But now it's a few weeks later, and people are asking how they can make their houses gas-free and who is paying for that. The government looks at its feet. Our prime m
Re: (Score:2)
Hope you know that we've been building LNG stations on the east coast of Canada and the US for the last decade with the entire purpose of being able to sell NG via tanker to Europe. Your politicians are simply idiots, vote for better politicians.
Re: (Score:2)
We don't have better ones. And indeed, the LNG thing is a good option but of course much more expensive than Putin's gas. But that's an incentive to finally make serious work of adhering to the Paris agreement.
Re: (Score:2)
There are always better ones. Be the change you want to see, otherwise you're only making your own misery. That's why over here in Ontario, one of the longest standing political parties(liberals at 150 years old) just officially became a non-party(less then 8 seats) in the new provincial government. The collapse is akin to the Progressive Conservatives of the 1990's not existing as an official party.
Re: (Score:2)
You're right, saying that there are no better ones was a bit pessimistic. Here the green party and the animal party have grown considerably. Also, people are getting annoyed by the way the liberal party is dealing with things like the environment and the treatment of the sick and the elderly. Hopefully that will lead to a different political landscape after the next elections.
Re: (Score:3)
Just think of 30m people fleeing to the US once that happens
They are already all lined up at Costco in Bellingham with gas cans.
Re: (Score:2)
Well you're talking about from BC, which might give you 3m from the mainland. And just think, the gas price is only $1.70/l($6.35/gal).
Re: (Score:2)
That's better than me paying money out of my pocket to support theocratic dictatorships and Healthcare for the poisons released by gas when I don't even use a car.
Yeah because the US is a net exporter of oil and gasoline and has been for a few years now. Even at that, about 1/3 of the oil the US buys comes directly from Canada.
And then 90 million flee back because Trump's AMERICA is that hostile.
Don't let the stupid hurt you kid, until you've actually lived in a hostile country.
Re: (Score:2)
Is this true, or something you heard or made up? Citation, please.
Just the fact [nationalpost.com] and remember it was the Ontario Liberals who wanted to ban natural gas for heating and force everyone onto electricity. [calgaryherald.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It won't ever work!
You think your puny mere natural laws can stand against the power of our government laws?? Bwa ha ha!
Re: (Score:2)
It won't ever work!
Quite the contrary, it will work. To support my statement I have historical example of dealing with the ozone whole. People holding decision power were clever enough to listen to scientists fortunately and now the whole is shrinking.
It is tough, but people in general are clever if only an issue is not politicized so people have access to the facts. Event (!) in the US, polls shows 64% population concerned about this issue. Global warming is not a problem of our kids, it is happening now, and the predicted
Re: (Score:3)
Great example, except it's hole, not whole. And I'm also convinced that we can pull it off. It will take sacrifices though, like not being able to fly to the other side of the planet for absurdly low prices. Wind turbines everywhere. But when the revolution is over we will look back and think: "How could we be so stupid?"
Re: (Score:3)
This is Hawaii. They are an island with no coal, oil, or natural gas reserved. Everything comes in by boat. Barrier to entry is really the only reason renewables aren't preferred.
All the energy providers in the state need is a nudge or subtle threat against their future to move a little faster in diversifying.
Re: (Score:3)
No, lack of acreage is really the only reason renewables aren't preferred. Admittedly, they're getting some free new acreage right now, but that probably isn't going to continue long enough....
Re: (Score:3)
It's meaningless.
Any future law automatically supersedes existing law. So they're making themselves look good, without actually imposing any immediate changes.
When the time for real change comes along, if it turns out to be too expensive, the then legislators will be on the hook for changing things (including taxes) that the current legislators carefully skipped in the process of writing a bill to make themselves look good without actually doing anything.
Volcanos (Score:4, Funny)
Given the volcanic activity on Hawaii I can't imagine it ever being carbon neutral.
Uphill battle (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Then how about an electromagnetic catapult-assist jumbo glider? Shoot it up along the side of a tall mountain (ok a VERY tall mountain) into low earth orbit and then it falls back into the atmosphere and glides to its destination.
Re: (Score:2)
Funny, I don't see any carbon in that chemical formula.
Perfect sort of law... (Score:5, Insightful)
No one who passed it will be in office in 2045. As such, they don't own ultimate accountability for actually making it happen, but they can pat themselves on the back for 'driving it to happen'.
Reminds me of when IBM CEO declared a certain crazy fiscal target for 5 years out, and immediately retired so it would be someone else's fault the target was not feasible.
Re: (Score:2)
I both appreciate and hate these types of laws. I work in an industry where it's my job to help the State of California attain the goals set forth by 2006 California Assembly Bill 32 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Warming_Solutions_Act_of_2006). The crux of the bill is that the State (in the form of its own agencies and in the form of all businesses/organizations with 500+ employees) has to go back to 1990 levels of greenhouse gas emissions by 2020. Note that it's not "per capita"... it's raw emissio
Re: (Score:2)
In 1990, California had 29.81 million residents. In 2017, it had 39.54 million. In other words, we have to have made enough efficiencies by 2020 so that 39.54 million emit no more GHG than 29.81 million.
I have an idea that might help. Ban the use of refried beans on taco trucks. That should cut down on a lot of carbon dioxide & methane emissions!
Re: (Score:2)
It is a tricky situation. If your intentions are genuine, a timeline for which you could be held reasonably accountable is unrealistic.
However a realistic timeline takes burden of accountability away, and then insincere politicians have an opportunity for some easy 'wins'.
Re: (Score:2)
These laws are a variation on the religious claim that the world is ending soon so rement...and give the priest money.
This is just the secular politics/religion parallel.
27 year deadline (Score:5, Insightful)
Any law which has a deadline so far in advance that no one who votes on it will be around to see it come to fruition is, pretty much by definition, "feel good legislation". ie: horseshit.
Re: (Score:2)
Transportation is a challenge -- while the state is planning for a future where cars run on renewable electricity
Given Hawaii is a bunch of volcanoes rising out of the ocean, I don't understand why Hawaiian cars even need engines since they only need to roll downhill.
Re: (Score:3)
Yet we see many counter-examples of this.
Kennedy couldn't have been in office by the end of the decade even if he hadn't been assassinated. He proposed a literal moon-shot and it happened.
Germany proposed a massive change to its energy infrastructure and generation, with the initial legislation in 2010 and the expected end date around 2024. Merkel may still be in power but could hardly count on it, and many of those involved are already out.
The Kyoto agreement, limited as it was, resulted in real changes an
Re: (Score:3)
Yet we see many counter-examples of this.
Yet we see many examples as well. California has been kicking the ZEV can for two decades; they re-revise it as each new deadline approaches and reality asserts itself.
This new 2045 deal is essentially a can kicking maneuver for the 2008 Hawaii Clean Energy Initiative with an arbitrary 2030 deadline that has zero chance of being met.
Hawaii generates a large fraction of it's electricity — 33% — with imported fuel oil, and over 85% of all energy with oil. Oil plus coal accounts for over 92%.
Re: (Score:2)
California is leading the country in terms of EV ownership, right?
Re: (Score:1)
California leads the nation in naive soy boys that cream themselves whenever some state passes another fatuous mandate. And yes, California has the largest number of mostly fossil fuel powered token EVs.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh god, you aren't of those soy-brain-pill crackpots are you?
Anyone who starts quoting Infowars and Paul Joseph Watson isn't doing their credibility any favours.
Re: (Score:2)
Why is geothermal less than 8%? Is there some quality of the landscape or magma that makes it unsuitable for geothermal, compared to Iceland?
Re: (Score:2)
Would it have happened if he had NOT been shot, though? That's the question. Even if he wanted to do so, would Congress have agreed with him enough to spend money hand-over-fist to do so?
Re: (Score:2)
And how long do you propose it takes?
It's a long road to carbon neutrality, especially if you want to do it yourself without crippling your economy. You can cheat and buy carbon credits, but again, see the part about crippling the economy.
The only alternative is you do it immediately, which given how deeply fossil fuels are
Follow the money on this (Score:5, Insightful)
a second bill that will use carbon offsets to help fund planting trees throughout Hawaii
I bet the recipients of the funds will be reading like a who's who of Hawaii's political donors.
Re: (Score:2)
carbon offsets are a scam, they are the stupid equivalent of buying medieval indulgences to get pass to sin.
billions of euros of scam known about, plus even the "non-scams" are just mostly just funding things a venture capitalist wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole.
bullshit, is what it is.
the only proper and real solution is adopting alternative energy, and Hawaii is a fantastic place for at least 4 techs. Wind, solar, wave, geothermal....but no, the easy "wave of the pen" solution is done instead.
2045? (Score:5, Insightful)
It is almost 30 years in future.
Hodja Nasreddin once offered Persian Shakh to teach his donkey speak and read in 30 years. Then he explained that either Shakh or donkey or Hodja himself would definitely die in 30 years, so he wouldn't be punished for breaking this promise.
It seems that Hawaian lawmakers expect that either they will be dead or state would be submerged by 2045.
Giant Drones (Score:2)
I mean yeah, isn't all you have to do is scale up your typical recreational drone to airplane size?
I can offset carbon for them! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
They're going to trigger a mini fauna extinction on their tiny islands if they pull this stunt and then they're going to blame it on climate change just like California did after they spent 40 years planting the wrong pine-trees (the type that are susceptible to pine beatles infestations)
John, Paul, George, and Ringo?
which helped to exasperate
Yes, this is exasperating...
the frequency of forrest fires... Sigh
Gump?
Me, Tamerlan, or the donkey (Score:1)
Tamerlane was looking [naqshbandi.ca] for someone to teach his donkey to talk. Nobody wanted the job. Finally the wise men of the dunes - Hodja Nasreddin [wikipedia.org] took the position and promised to teach the donkey to talk in 10 years time.
- Are you crazy? — his friends asked him.
- Not really, — Hodja answered, — the money is good, the job is not hard, and in 10 years a lot might happen: I might die, or Tamerlane might die, or su
More good legal ideas (Score:2)
I have some other suggestions for laws. 1. Forbid bad weather on weekends 2. Eliminate bad manners in children 3. and so on.
Solar (Score:2)
Hawaii is, mostly, a sunny place. Yet on the Big Island, I see very few solar panels on buildings. In fact the only reference I've seen anytime recently was some dude in the houses near the current eruption who said "I got my solar panels and batteries out, phew, saved $4000 of gear". If Hawaii is serious about reducing CO2 emissions, every house should have solar cells and many should have large storage batteries too.
The mostly fossil fuel-generated electricity is expensive (most expensive in the USA) so e