Environmentalists are funny. Right?

I like to joke about global warming, especially global warming hysteria. The problem with humor is that it's like drugs; it relieves pain symptoms but does not make it go away. I suppose you could laugh at physical pain too, but that would not treat the underlying cause.

Pain that they are, global warming activists do not go away. Far from it. They aren't merely content to have an opinion; they want to reach out and meddle with people's lives. In the privacy of their own houses:

The classic Berkeley home - a creaky Victorian with drafty windows, a Wedgewood stove and musty furnace - will undergo a drastic makeover under the city's aggressive new plans to fight global warming.

Within the next few years, the city is likely to mandate that all homes meet strict energy standards. In many cases this would mean new double-paned windows, insulation in the attic, walls and floors, a new white roof that reflects heat, a forced-air furnace and high-efficiency appliances.

The cost: upward of $33,800.

In many cases, the figure will be considerably higher. These insane bureaucrats are hell-bent on invading every home in the city of Berkeley (if you think they'll be content to stop there, well, go ahead and laugh) and forcing people to spend a small fortune on upgrades they do not need. Like tearing off the roof and replacing it with a white roof. Or removing perfectly good vintage or antique windows to replace them with ugly, double-paned "energy efficient" ones. (Great thing to do when people are facing foreclosure, eh?)
The requirements, some of the most drastic efforts any municipality has taken to curb global warming, are part of the city's long-awaited Climate Action Plan. The 145-page report, which has been closely watched by other cities and states, covers everything from organic gardening to recycling to bike paths.

The plan, which the City Council is slated to approve Tuesday, aims to bring the city into compliance with Measure G, a 2006 initiative requiring the city to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent by 2050.

Under the proposal, all homeowners in Berkeley will be required to hire an energy auditor to inspect their home for leaks and inefficiencies.

Hire an energy auditor? If that isn't an invitation to bribery and fraud, I don't know what is. They're trying to literally invade each home and tell people how to live:
Each home will receive a rating, similar to a car's gas- mileage rating. The owner will be required to improve the home's energy efficiency to meet city standards.
This is mandatory stuff, and penalties will attach for non-compliance.

Whatever happened to the right to privacy? How much energy I use in my own house is no more the government's business than whether I smoke cigarettes or have sex in my own house. (Or does "privacy" only apply to sex?)

If they can do this, the next thing they'll do is tell you when you can and can't drive. What you can and cannot buy in the store. Precisely. The plan from which this emanates is full of such surprises.

As well as Sovietic exhortations that we all must do our part!

Turning this plan into action rests on more than just ideas and good intentions. It requires Berkeley residents, businesses, the City government and other institutions to urgently rise to the challenge of making big changes - changes in our infrastructure, technological advances, ramped up green workforce development, and change in the decisions we make every day as members of the Berkeley community. Everyone must play a role.
They're even trying to tell people what to eat:
Sustainable food systems reduce the distance food must travel to get to our tables. When food is produced, processed and distributed near where it is consumed, transportation miles are minimized as well as are the associated pollutants. According to a WorldWatch Institute study, a typical meal brought from a conventional supermarket chain consumes 4 - 17 times more petroleum for transport than the same meal using local ingredients.29 Despite California's massive food production capacity, the state imports 40 percent of its food, which translates into at least 250,000 tons of GHG emissions per year, according to an NRDC study.30

Sustainable food systems also prioritize the consumption of organic food over conventional food, and the consumption of vegetables rather than meat. Organic food production requires far less fossil fuel inputs than conventional systems, which in turn reduces GHG emissions. Likewise, a meat diet requires twice as much energy to produce as a vegetarian diet.31 Globally farm animals generate 18 percent of GHG emissions, according to estimates by the United Nations.
Local food systems offer a host of social and economic benefits as well. For example, growing a garden can make a difference for a family's food budget. And efforts to increase access to local, affordable, healthy food for low-income families, the elderly, and others with mobility challenges can improve public health. Local food systems also help to insulate communities from volatile oil prices, which in turn affect food prices. Finally, food localization can create high-quality local green jobs in the farming, food processing and distribution trades.
The City of Berkeley already has a foundation on which to build when it comes to promoting local, nutritious food. The City Council adopted a Food and Nutrition Policy in 2001. Its purpose is to "help build a more complete local food system based on sustainable regional agriculture that fosters the local economy and assures that all people of Berkeley have access to healthy, affordable, and culturally appropriate food."

Culturally appropriate food? To think I was complaining about the failure of humor. These people are funny. In fact, the more serious these people are, the funnier they are.

But how do you keep them the hell out of your house?

MORE: They're also planning a major crackdown on driving, by means of new and aggressive citywide parking enforcement campaign:

• Identify areas in Berkeley in which increased parking rates would effectively discourage driving and generate new revenue while not having a significant negative effect on local businesses. Such neighborhoods should be well served by alternative transportation options. • Identify areas in Berkeley in which extending parking meter hours of enforcement would effectively discourage driving and build new revenue while not having a significant negative effect on local businesses. • Consider the establishment of Parking Benefit Districts, which would receive a portion of parking revenues generated in the area. 30 • Evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of redesigning the Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) Program so as to apply it citywide (in every neighborhood) and utilize the revenue to design programs and infrastructure that make alternative transportation options more accessible, convenient and attractive. • Structure RPP permit costs so that each additional permit acquired by a given household escalates in cost. • Consider setting RPP permit prices based on the fuel efficiency of the vehicle for which the permit is being acquired. • Install RPP permit holder-exempt parking meters in some RPP zones. • Make on-street parking rates equivalent to or higher than off-street (parking lot) parking rates. • Raise on- and off-street parking rates as appropriate. • Consider putting an increase to the City's 10 percent tax on off-street parking revenue on the ballot. • "Un-bundle" prices for housing and parking so that parking spaces require separate payment and are not included in the rent or purchase price of a unit. Those who choose to live car-free should not be burdened with the cost of a parking space they do not need. And those that do require a car should be made aware of the full costs associated with owning it.
posted by Eric on 04.19.09 at 09:17 AM





TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/8168






Comments

But how do you keep them the hell out of your house?

Burn it to the ground.

And savor the sweet, sweet greenhouse gasses it emanates one last time.

brian   ·  April 19, 2009 11:42 AM

I repeat these people do not understand that all life (plant, animal and human, their own included) depends on carbon dioxide. We do need a balance, but elimination is innane.
They will not be satisfied until all life is eliminated, producing another barren planet like Mars.

Hugh   ·  April 19, 2009 11:50 AM

Exactly the reason why California must be allowed to fail.

Roy Mustang   ·  April 19, 2009 11:56 AM

Sounds like rule .303 needs to be applied. Honestly, you want a revolution or not?

Eric Blair   ·  April 19, 2009 12:04 PM

White asphalt roofs lose their granules more quickly than a colored roof because white granules aren't pressed in as firmly. What color does that expose again?

Ten years after this mandate, they'll need an inspector to gauge the effective reflectivity of the roofs, and as warranted issue misdemeanor tickets for failing to meet the standard.

chuckR   ·  April 19, 2009 12:48 PM

Then there's all those little problems that happen when you seal an old house up all nice and tight... things that used to escape now stay in. Mold, moisture, etc.

Hugh is right.

Donna B.   ·  April 19, 2009 01:03 PM

This is so beautiful. I wonder if CA keeps good data on how much the various universities in the system cost per pupil for maintenance. I would not be surprised if UC Berkeley was significantly above average.

Fritz   ·  April 19, 2009 01:32 PM

California has always seen itself as ahead of the curve. So how has this worked out for them exactly?

Penny   ·  April 19, 2009 05:19 PM

This new Berkeley energy law does not just cover new construction. Federal law already requires new homes to meet energy efficiency standards. It covers every building in the city, that is, privately owned buildings. Berkeley 'energy auditors' will have the power to order homeowners to do a lot more than just insulate their attics. They will be able to order homeowners to replace their refrigerators, washing machines, windows, doors, and even porch lights if they are deemed too inefficient by the auditor.

chocolatier   ·  April 19, 2009 07:05 PM

Think of the slap fests and hissy fits between the Historic District Commission and the enviros. Hilarity will ensue.

chuckR   ·  April 19, 2009 07:50 PM

I hope Berkeley does pass this and reap each and every consequence. We can call this a "social laboratory".

I suspect we will learn yet another way that does not work. Berkeley will pay the price and, for a change, Berkeley will actually help the rest of the country.

Rick

Rick Caird   ·  April 19, 2009 08:03 PM

"Culturally appropriate food?"

These progressives sure do get militant about Das Kultur.

pst314   ·  April 19, 2009 09:44 PM

In the environmentalists world, only the rich should be able to afford imported food and out of season fruits and vegetables in the winter. The poor should just eat whatever can be grown locally, eat less meat than the rich, and eat pickles and cabbage and squash in the winter, just like the good old days! Keep the poor in their place!

Plus the rich can afford to pay off the inspectors, and thus avoid paying through the nose for upgrades. Another blow for the rich! woohoo!

plutosdad   ·  April 20, 2009 10:29 AM

free Kim Kardashian sex tape [url=http://www.planetpapers.com/profile.php?Username=naderchi]free Kim Kardashian sex tape[/url] Lesbian twin sex [url=http://www.okuyamaupk.com/users/index.php?home=browndw20032003]Lesbian twin sex[/url]

Kim Kardashian sex tape   ·  April 20, 2009 12:36 PM

The affected owners should form a class and sue the city council members personally in federal court and seek an injunction to prevent the city from paying their attorneys bills or using city insurance policies from paying the bill.

The defendants should be required to prove that AGW actually exists and that their votes for the measure was not a form of personal benefit to maintain their office if they cannot prove AGW exists. That they are using their authority for their own personal aggrandizement in doing so are causing a harm to the property owner is the justification for the lawsuit against them personally. Unless their is sufficient proof that AGW exists to satisfy the legal threshold of proof and that is action has a demonstrable proof of having any real effect if AGW were proven to exist then this measure is on its face an illegal taking not for the public use but for their own political benefit and hence they should be personally liable to the owners for all of their costs. Lawmakers should be expected to have a duty to pass laws that are based on irrefutable facts before passing them.

cubanbob   ·  April 20, 2009 01:54 PM

Bob, "proving" global warming should be no problem in a Cali court, before a Cali judge and jury. The science, y'know, is settled.

I note that the "plan" mandates forced-air furnaces. In the rest of the world, these are the damned-old-things the righteous want to legislate away. Makes you say "hmmm."

comatus   ·  April 20, 2009 07:47 PM

I wonder how one would go about selling California short. Might be a profitable trade...

david foster   ·  April 20, 2009 11:39 PM

I hope Berkeley does pass this and reap each and every consequence. We can call this a "social laboratory".

Problem Rick. I live in Sacramento. These aren't lab rats, they are brain dead liberals who are the human virus that inspired the profilactic. They will leave their city a wasteland, and move to my neighborhood to repeat the process anew.

No no no. No sir. We need to nip this in the bud right now. Before the cancer becomes inoperable. Court actions. Yes.
A courtroom won't have newspaper editors removing inconvenient testimony, or limiting a responce to 300 characters or less.
Slim chance in a California court, is better then grabbing ankle and taking it.

James Mayeau   ·  April 21, 2009 12:48 AM

Hey, look on the bright side. This is going to drive up the cost of housing for all those Cal students who keep voting for the left-wing idiots who rule Berkeley.

It really is time that they learn that actions do have consequences.

KODjr   ·  April 21, 2009 06:30 AM


- · Topical creams containing retinol or retinoic acid Retin-A should be increased further. [url=http://cpspnvlzk.977mb.com/ju.html]what is a molar pregnancy[/url]

Elaccigma   ·  April 21, 2009 03:34 PM


cancun getaway mexico romantic weekend [url=http://wgbuhlzyu.1stfreehosting.com/wallid.html] package [/url]

enforiheitoro   ·  May 3, 2009 12:07 PM


cancun getaway mexico romantic weekend [url=http://wgbuhlzyu.1stfreehosting.com/wallid.html] package [/url]

enforiheitoro   ·  May 3, 2009 12:09 PM


cancun getaway mexico romantic weekend [url=http://wgbuhlzyu.1stfreehosting.com/wallid.html] package [/url]

enforiheitoro   ·  May 3, 2009 12:10 PM

July 2009
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

ANCIENT (AND MODERN)
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR


Search the Site


E-mail



Classics To Go

Classical Values PDA Link



Archives



Recent Entries



Links



Site Credits