I read a short article in the WSJ about how the utilities are backing a lawsuit to get auto companies to reduce emissions. Why would they do so? California has a goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions across the state significantly, I think 25% by 2020. So, where does the burden fall? If it doesn't fall on the auto companies, it would then fall on the utilities (like PG&E). That's why they're backing the lawsuit to shift the burden to the auto companies. Simple self-interest.
Read an interesting article a couple weeks back in the WSJ on how biofuels may actually increase carbon emissions in the medium to long-term. Apprently the shifts in land-use necessary to support the production of bio-materials like soybeans, corn, or palm could in fact release more carbon emissions. The time it takes to get carbon-neutral on some of these projects is pretty crazy - 319 years for soybean biodiesel from Brazil (assuming you're clearing rainforest), 93 years for corn ethanol from the U.S. (assuming you're clearing grasslands), 86 years for palm biodiesel from Indonesia (assuming you're clearing rainforest). I suppose biofuels really aren't meant to reduce carbon emissions, but just crazy that they potentially exacerbate the problem so much.
Comments