I've moved — check out my new blog at cassyfiano.com!

Redirecting in 10 seconds...

Monday, June 11, 2007

Denver targets global warming after the coldest June morning in over 50 years

I couldn't help but snicker when I read these two headlines on The Drudge Report:

  • 'Warming' plan in Denver: Crackdown on residents
  • Denver sees coldest June morning in over 50 years

    First, the global warming:

    Denver is gearing up to fight global warming, and residents may soon be asked to make personal sacrifices to help save the planet.
    The new plan is aimed at making Denver a national leader in reducing gas emissions that have been linked to global warming, giving a major push to alternative energy, stepping up recycling and changing building codes to encourage energy conservation.

    But the proposal also contains some ideas that may be unpopular, such as penalizing heavy users of electricity and natural gas and basing auto insurance premiums on the number of miles traveled.

    The ambitious goal is to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 4.4 million metric tons by 2020, the equivalent of eliminating two small coal-fired power plants or taking 500,000 cars off the road.

    Mayor John Hickenlooper has made the "climate action plan" a centerpiece of his second term in office. More than two dozen people from business and community groups met for several months with city staff to hammer out the plan. Many of them fear Colorado will be slammed hard by global warming, with more droughts and forest fires.

    "There was a sense we have to be bold," said Beth Conover, director of Greenprint Denver, the city office that coordinated the plan. "What's the cost of inaction to our water supply and tourism industry?"

    The city also would give incentives for car pooling and the use of hybrids and other low-polluting vehicles, possibly by giving them priority in parking.

    To cut back on use of landfills - methane gas from landfills is a major contributor to global warming - the plan would encourage recycling and charge residents for the amount of trash they throw away.

    Denver may ask voters to approve higher rates for "excessive" use of electricity and natural gas. The plan also floats the idea of using insurance premiums to penalize people who drive long distances.

    "You can think of them as penalties or you can think of them as market signals," said Conover. "There's some choice involved."

    The nannyism. Oh, dear God, the nannyism!!

    Meanwhile, while Denver bureaucrats fret over global warming, its freezing there:

    Did you have frost on your windows this morning? It felt more like March or early April along the Front Range.

    The temperature at Denver International Airport fell to 31 degrees at 5:44 a.m. Friday, setting a new record low for the date.

    This shattered the old record of 37 degrees, last set in 1974.

    The new record low will also become the latest freeze on record for the city of Denver. The previous date of latest freeze ever recorded was June 2, 1951.

    Temperatures have only dropped below freezing two other times during the month of June; in 1919 and 1951.

    The coldest June temperature ever recorded was 30 degrees on June 2, 1951.

    Seriously. It's just too easy.

    COPioneer said...

    Just great, they're going to destroy our economy and liberty just so they can feel good about themselves. It's like a big 1960s love-in all over for these bureaucrats.
    I mentioned to some of my liberal friends that we need to worry about a lot of other things before we spend a dime on global warming, and they jumped all over me like I was a pariah.
    For me, I'm sure glad that Colorado continues to get great snow for skiing!

    KurtP said...

    So, The city is going to make people pay more for "exessive" garbage...
    Which leave two things I know of...

    FIRST- feed the livestock with boi-degradeabes -OOPS- more methane.
    SECOND- dump the extra somewhere besides the dump.

    Why do I not think that the resident Greenies would actually reduce consumption- or- pay more?