The budget passed by both chambers of the legislature last week contained a few hopeful signs toward measuring the environmental effectiveness of government policies. When Governor Inslee signed the budget on Sunday, however, he vetoed three sections of the budget that would have helped assess and promote the effectiveness of the state's environmental policy.
There are some promising signs that legislators are beginning to demand environmental effectiveness when funding projects designed to protect Washington's natural resources. In addition to the clause in the Governor's climate bill requiring projects to be prioritized based on carbon reductions per dollar spent, there is budget language requiring a similar approach in other environmental arenas.
Today, President Obama outlined his new strategy on climate change, calling for more support for a range of politically chosen strategies. Prior to the speech, Governor Inslee released a statement saying the approach is "a smart, practical and cost effective set of policies."
The approach proposed by the President, however, stands in contrast to Inslee's own climate legislation and model legislation passed by the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC).
It is a simple reality that you are more careful with your own money than with others'. The latest example comes from Seattle Times business columnist Jon Talton, who has argued repeatedly that the world is about to run out of oil. The theory, called "Peak Oil," says that since oil is a finite resource, we will run out in the near future, causing massive economic disruption. This is often used as an argument for increased political control of the economy.
The Army Corps of Engineers announced it won't consider the impacts of burning coal in China when examining the proposed export terminal in Washington state. Those who oppose exporting coal from the U.S. to China argue that such an analysis was necessary to understand the full impact of the exports.
Attempting to calculate all potential carbon emissions from coal exports, however, is completely unscientific and contradicts Seattle's own position when analyzing its carbon footprint.
Sometimes the simplest things can expose so much. Seattle's debate about the impact on climate policy of growing pot within city limits demonstrates how silly and ineffective some of Seattle's climate policies really are, contradicting the city's own "buy local" efforts.
As KUOW reports today, Seattle City Councilman Mike O'Brien is concerned that growing marijuana in Seattle will make it difficult to meet the City's goal of becoming carbon neutral by 2050. O'Brien told KUOW:
When innovators working in a free-market come up with a better, environmentally friendly solution to a problem, what is the reaction of government agencies? Attack it.
Tom Watson, a King County employee who calls himself the "EcoConsumer," offers his thoughts on how to be a good environmentalist. On his (taxpayer-paid) blog, you will find a range of topics, from praise for Occupy Wall Street to recommending that people eat more kimchi (he calls it one of the "most enviro-friendly foods you can eat" but doesn't explain why).
After other local cities have banned plastic grocery bags, the City of Kirkland commissioned a public opinion survey to see what residents would think about bringing the policy to the community. Not much, apparently.
As part of its (taxpayer-funded) campaign to ban plastic bags, the staff at Thurston County Solid Waste released a new report called "Reducing Our Use: Plastic Shopping Bags," that purports to provide the science of the impact of plastic bags. The report, however, includes claims that have been called false by the nation's leading science organizations. Other claims simply ignore key data to reach the politically desired conclusion.
The sun is slowly arriving and the bees in my new beehives, as well as bees across the Northwest, will be happier for it. As they begin to pollinate flowers and orchards, however, they will face a number of challenges: Varroa mites, wasps, pesticides and loss of suitable bee pasture.
Yesterday was Earth Day and Governor Inslee and Mayor McGinn attended the opening of the Bullitt Center, billed as the "greenest" building on the planet. One of the selling points is that it creates more energy than it uses. But, is it really green?
With great fanfare on Tuesday, the Governor signed his climate legislation, designed to prioritize the best ways to reduce carbon emissions by 2020. The event, moderated by the Washington Environmental Council, promised a new approach to climate policy.
Just two days after its signature, however, a new bill attempts to sidestep the promise of that approach.
There has been a great deal of emotion related to the fight over transporting coal in Washington state, with environmental groups rallying their supporters against sending coal to China. While the focus has been on the potential impacts of tangible coal, what has gone unaddressed is the metaphorical toll that coal causes every day in Washington state.
Today, the Washington Policy Center is announcing an effort to reduce that psychic toll.
A bipartisan majority passed the Governor's climate legislation today in the State House, sending it to Jay Inslee's desk for his signature. The bill enjoyed bipartisan support in the Senate as well.
The reason so many legislators crossed the aisle to support it, is that it included a measurement of environmental effectiveness. Previous climate legislation simply adopted the latest politically trendy option without an up-front assessment of potential effectiveness.