The Golden State has been on a carbon kick since Jerry Brown rode into Sacramento in 2011, thanks major legislation imposing Cap and Trade.
Just a few months ago, Brown gallivanted across Europe to proclaim California’s growing victories over greenhouse emissions.
But, as CALMatters’ Dan Walters breaks down, the source of California’s enviro-victories isn’t exactly encouraging California’s liberals to pop champagne and host tickertape parades:
“…the state’s definition of renewable sources specifically excludes the hydroelectric power from major dams such as Shasta, Oroville and Folsom that was the major reason greenhouse gas emissions dropped so dramatically in 2016.
Legislative definition of renewable energy, Walters discusses, only focuses on miniscule hydroelectric generation operations, not major dams.
Why the official shunning of non-polluting hydroelectric generation?
Simply put, environmental activists just don’t like big dams for reasons that have nothing to do with climate change – even though we will need more water storage to capture winter rains if, as they contend, climate change reduces winter snowfall.
Walters even knocked Brown and his “climatic posse” for shunning nuclear power, despite the fact that France has achieved the most dramatic shift in greenhouse emissions due to its embrace of nuclear technology.