Home | About | Donate

Because We're "Out of Time," Activists Storm Washington State Capitol to Launch "Climate Countdown"

Because We're "Out of Time," Activists Storm Washington State Capitol to Launch "Climate Countdown"

Andrea Germanos, staff writer

 "If we don't act now, our orcas and salmon are goners...and then we will be."

Washington State could be the first state to go 100% clean power.

1 Like

I think that is great idea- have a plan

WA is 85% clean power from our rich hydro. It would be doable to go 100%. Think of the prestige and leadership of 100%. We also have a green governor. It is doable.

1 Like

Renewable tag is OPEC era. Clean of dead carbon is the issue.

It’s time the fools in Capital Hill wake up and see the plight of Earth and all her children before industrial capitalism destroys the only means we have for living. I myself think it’s already too late but without action, real concrete action, it will be too late for survival. States have to take control and enact policy to assure a 90% cleaner footprint if survival is paramount. The ruling classes can’t have business-as-usual anymore, politicians have to let go of the moneyed teat of businesses and enact meaningful real legislation or it will all go down the memory holes of historical oddities. The future aliens exploring Earth will be struck by how shorted humans were when they actually could have saved themselves without all the greed and excess of the filthy rich.

1 Like

Plastic is not CO2, more like sequestered carbon.

For this year’s ballot (initiative)

https://jobscleanenergywa.com/

That is fantastic.

It’s one thing I would imagine to be doing something good with all that money and assets. It’s another thing just to pile on to make more money for oneself.

Here in Washington State we have a strong attachment to the natural world. To see it vandalized for increased profit or negligence appalls us. You ask laypeople to produce plans our national legislature will not pass because of the corruption of OUR national government. You demand timelines and cost breakdowns that we are not equipped to give. You are a drooling corporate shill with no regard for the planet that gives you life but urge procrastination for a looming crisis that will be unmanageable when it disaccomidates the likes of you. Stuff you and your horse, we do not have time to putz around dithering about but we can use every power we can muster to convince the people we elected that the time for corporate graft is over and the War on Climate change has begun. They asked us to give them the responsibility to get to get things done. Now is the time for them to do it.
Oh, and one other thing, Do you have the sense to get out of a hail storm?

1 Like

It certainly seems to be in a healthy competition with California for that goal. I guess it depends on which state’s “representatives” are more intrusive.

My field of activism is mass transit and urban/suburban planning. In the 1980’s-90’s I was a home insulation carpenter in a giant industry of small companies that got their start with President Carter’s Home Weatherization Tax Credit program. Enough energy was saved to undermine Western Washington Public Power System (Wwpps, pronounced whoops) plans to build 4 nuclear power plants. Oregon’s Trojan nuclear plant was decommissioned for the same reason: insufficient energy demand to justify operation. Today, I see potential for regional utility grid upgrades to accommodate electric cars, improve grid resilience and provide homeowners with a lifesaving backup power supply. However, the big push today is for self-driving cars, which is, trust me, never going to happen. At the very least, it’s like “putting the cart before the horse” to push self-driving cars before converting whole fleets of new cars to all-battery and hybrid EVs. Condemning self-driving car BS points blame at both political party leaders. And, it turns public attention back to the necessity of mass transit and against the corporate agenda to bankrupt brick and mortar small business, which is what Amazon is doing and has done from its start. Boycott Amazon.

Great post! Did you go to college for urban planning? Interesting field - quite honestly see no need to push more cars on the road- but like many would love to see better mass transit especially in rural and suburban areas. In addition, I would like to see better mass transit and van service for older people like myself. Additionally, I have no use for something like amazon- as I am not in the high tech world. These big businesses like amazon and Wal Mart hurt the backbone of society- like the small business or the farmer. These faceless corporations that operate around the world and pay their workers so little that they have to rely on gov aid- does that even make sense? Greed is running so rampant, yet those who have the most care nothing about anything but themselves. Boycott Wal Mart also.

From the article: “and to pass legislation ensuring the state’s energy is 100 percent powered by renewables by 2028.”

Please, authors, you need to stop making this mistake. No, there is no legislation to make the state’s energy 100% renewable by any date. It’s electricity this debate is about, not energy. “Energy” includes electricity plus primary energy–transportation, heating, industrial processes, etc. That’s going to take a lot more effort to power by clean safe renewables than the electrical grid.

We COULD make the state’s, or the country’s energy 100% renewable by 2028; there’s no technological, technical, logistical, industrial or other physical reason we can’t. The only thing stopping us is politics, which means the only thing stopping us is psychology.

So we’re not going to make even just the electricity renewable by 2028 unless we have a peaceful revolution in the next year or so, take over the states and federal government from the Republican-Democrat corporate duopoly and put in office people who are sane and wise.

(We should do that, by the way. Every year we delay doing it the chances that civilization will collapse into chaos and violence increases. Exponentially.)

I agree with mealouts: “great post.”

I once read that evaluating automobile impacts requires consideration of the full life-cycle cost of each car, and that the most significant environmental cost of each auto comes from manufacturing the car (resource extraction for steel and plastics, energy costs for manufacturing), not from operating the car. In other words, making “green” cars is still making cars, and quite unsustainable.

Tony Seba on disruptive technologies.
Ignore the 8 min. video, watch the 1 hr. one. If you haven’t been keeping up with the subject, prepare to have mind blown

Nope. SelfDrivingCars, various estimates: https://qz.com/943899/a-timeline-of-when-self-driving-cars-will-be-on-the-road-according-to-the-people-making-them/

See what’s happening in China now? Electric buses are already running and orders are in for thousands more! What we need to do in the US and elsewhere is what the Roosevelts got the country to do in 1942–stop producing private vehicles for the duration of the crisis–or at least as long as it takes to replace all public vehicles with EVs, build a comprehensive rail and high speed rail system and make rail, HSR, and self-driving EVs, all publicly-owned, the dominant forms of transport (yes, of course rural people still get to drive, but we should rethink ownership and use patterns of vehicles.)

I’ll try to answer these three responses collectively. Ed, the household EV is also a means to more closely monitor and reduce household energy consumption. They’re an ideal match to rooftop photovoltaic solar energy storage. They offer a choice to use energy for household or for driving which in turn leads to less driving that supports local retail rather than wholesale like Walmart and Costco. The EV driven less, Ed, lasts years longer, thus reduces the impact of their manufacture. (switching to the other posts…)

J4Zonian, the idea of making “self-driving EVs publicly-owned” neglects the benefits of household EVs described above. In an emergency grid failure, household EV will keep important electric devices operating - communication, refridgeration, heat etc. EVs are however portable and can be used to deliver power where needed. But the idea of locating self-driving cars at central garages to be dispatched on demand is a takeover by corporations like Uber which incidentally charges according to variable supply/demand schemes. The more demand, the higher the price. Their scheme is increase to demand by owning self-driving cars. (switching to last post…)

1 Like

Mealouts, when self-driving cars are finally rejected as impossible, mass transit will become the more fundamental mode of travel it really needs to be. However, we are due for new model buses. The standard 40’ bus gets 4mpg and are run on routes at schedules that guarantee low ridership. At the top of my list for new model buses is the paratransit van. The currently 1970’s tech vans should be low-floor and low-emission for seniors, the disabled and all riders. They could replace at least 40% of the standard 40’ bus on stop-n-go local routes with many turns. Their hybrid and all-electric drivetrains could get as much as an effective 30mpg. They are also low maintenance thus can be operated by private companies on specific routes. Urban planning to direct growth and development is part and parcel of transportation planning. Bankers will gladly finance suburban sprawl housing knowing they’ll be financing an average 5 to 10 cars per house. Suburban housing as it is today however can and will redevelop to add complementary services, retail, dining, medical, agricultural plots, entertainments, community centers, etc, as the needs arise. The trick is to make these changes sensibly to entice whole communities to see the benefits. Thanx you guys.