Southern California Public Radio (KPCC-FM) reports
California will now be the nation's example for reducing climate change after Governor Jerry Brown signed sweeping legislation [September 8] that will require the Golden State to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below the 1990 levels by the year 2030. The law replaces a previous bill signed by then-Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger which required the state to be at 1990 emissions levels by the year 2020.
The law, SB 32 [1] also gives more authority to California's Air Resources Board to regulate emissions. A separate law the governor also signed yesterday gives lawmakers more power over that board.
[...] The Germans have a tougher target of 55 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. [California's is] the same level of ambition as the EU as a whole.
[...] The governor had tried to slip into this bill a late amendment authorizing the extension of cap-and-trade but that was rejected by lawmakers and instead the bill is silent. However, the bill could be an important cudgel for Brown in trying to negotiate an extension of cap-and-trade.
[...] implications of the law on employment in Southern California [...] The state, since the end of the recession, has been growing jobs at a 50 percent faster rate than the nation as a whole. There are studies showing that the renewable standards have created 30,000 jobs in some of the hardest hit rural areas of the state.
[1] Main content is behind a script. archive.li handles that.
(Score: 2) by curunir_wolf on Sunday September 11 2016, @04:56PM
implications of the law on employment in Southern California [...] The state, since the end of the recession, has been growing jobs at a 50 percent faster rate than the nation as a whole.
That's really not a very high bar these days, though, is it? Considering job creation in the nation as a whole is still FAR below replacement rate - that is, there are more people entering the workforce than there are jobs create.
There are studies showing that the renewable standards have created 30,000 jobs in some of the hardest hit rural areas of the state.
Well whatever statistics those studies are using, it's easy to show a "recovery" in a later period when the prior period killed off about 600,000 jobs.
I am a crackpot