Talking about direct benefit to households, South Coast Air Quality Management District’s rebate program—for replacing gas or propane HVAC or water heaters with heat pumps—still has money left. https://www.aqmd.gov/go-zero
Electrification is not cheap. It’d be interesting to see a report from SCAQMD on the demographics of the households that made claims, lessons learned, etc.
Sammy, why don't you write an op-ed for the NYT refuting Yglesias? Or ghost-write it for a political celebrity who has a chance of being published (if that's a criterion). :-) K
I'm with you that there are few things as aggravating as seeing someone capitulate to fossil fuel industry talking points when they should really know better. Plus all the polling I've seen suggests that climate / clean energy is one of the few issues where Democrats consistently out perform the opposition. The challenge is how to link climate-friendly messaging with affordability messaging without getting caught in the trap set by fossil fuel companies and their enablers that preaches a world of energy scarcity and anti-consumer tradeoffs. The truth is that we can have our cake (clean energy) and eat it too (affordable energy).
"He also mused that electric cars “may be bad for America,” because “we’re just getting our butts kicked [by China] in a way that I think is bad and way more important than climate change.”"
Yglesias is profoundly ignorant about the current state of EVs. EVs are good for everybody except the oil industry. And China is going to dominate most ground transportation going forward if legacy auto doesn't quickly reverse its foolish efforts to delay the transition. Fully-electric and fully-autonomous, that's the future. If these words don't convince you, then watch this 11 minutes of Farzad explaining why.
Ugh, Sammy, a hard way to start Monday! In answer to your question, “Are these people really so determined to protect the fossil fueled status quo that they’re willing to send America back to the scientific dark ages, endangering countless lives?” A simple Yes. But Yglesias is clearly wrong. Democrats need to embrace climate issues, such as you suggest, tying them to affordability and quality of life, rather than competing with Republicans in the race to be Most Oily. My advice to Democrats: Go Big on climate, universal health care, gun control, student loan relief, etc. Serve the public interest.
The thing with Yglesias is that like many other popular pundits that are 'very online', they simply have no principles. If you fail to make the argument in the short term, well there is no long term you must pivot to what the polling tells you to pivot to. In my view, the rampant opportunism in American politics is what really muddies the water for Democrats trying to pitch to the public. The strongest political realignment showing in the polls right now is anti-Trump because Trump is unabashedly pursuing the things he said he would do in the most blunt and aggressive manner and everyone hates it. If we had an IRA that saw more direct relief to the public and aggressive build outs of energy generation/storage within the year instead of the complex bureaucratic bill we got, the public would acknowledge the commitment to the principles and truly decide if they like it or not. But if politicians won't commit strongly to the vision proposed today, the public will never really trust anything they say tomorrow and thus we find ourselves in an endless game of catch up. Saying things the polls want us to say only for the public to react skeptically to the new talking points and shifting the polls again to some other ideas.
Enjoyed all your posts ... but the success of the "back to the past movement" can easily be ascribed to the lack of good education amongst so many in this country... An engineering professor at UNR has told me that students coming from Reno High Schools all need remedial English and maths, so they can take any science-related classes. The fact that UNR spent $$$ on their sports programs, to the detriment of science, is obvious.
Through Citizens Climate Lobby (Reno/Sparks), we have sponsored programs and scholarships (aimed at the University and High Schools). It is indeed unfortunate that so few students take any interest in the future of our planet and modern societal needs for all!
Giving up on Science is like taking an express train back to the Dark Ages. Closing down science at weather centers, especially important for agriculture, and for pre-disaster weather event mitigation … makes no sense!
China will be the leading global power by 2030, yes 4 years of backwardness will do that to the USA, R&D $ will be spent in the EU, Brazil, SE Asia, not here. Our Universities will become glorified minor league sports teams! Not centers for educational excellence, progress!
This isn't a good-guy / bad guy situation. It's a matter of different frames of expertise and argument. Matt Yglesias is correct that social and political science shows Democrats need to be back in power if there's any chance of restoring science-based policy (on climate, vaccines and the rest), and the only path to retaking Congress involves states that are very different than California. We can discuss when we chat today! :)
The problem is that Matt Yglesias doesn’t do his research and is stuck in a Washington DC and consultant/pundit bubble. That doesn’t make him a good guy or a bad guy, but it does make him a mediocre journalist, at least on this topic. Sammy Roth does his homework and gets to know people and policymakers in many different places and sectors, which is why he is so effective.
Talking about direct benefit to households, South Coast Air Quality Management District’s rebate program—for replacing gas or propane HVAC or water heaters with heat pumps—still has money left. https://www.aqmd.gov/go-zero
And Rewiring America provides lots of info to people across the country who want to electrify their homes and utilize the Inflation Reduction Act tax incentives. https://homes.rewiringamerica.org/personal-electrification-planner
Electrification is not cheap. It’d be interesting to see a report from SCAQMD on the demographics of the households that made claims, lessons learned, etc.
I agree, this kind of report would be interesting!
Sammy, why don't you write an op-ed for the NYT refuting Yglesias? Or ghost-write it for a political celebrity who has a chance of being published (if that's a criterion). :-) K
Maybe someday I'll write something for NYT!
I'm with you that there are few things as aggravating as seeing someone capitulate to fossil fuel industry talking points when they should really know better. Plus all the polling I've seen suggests that climate / clean energy is one of the few issues where Democrats consistently out perform the opposition. The challenge is how to link climate-friendly messaging with affordability messaging without getting caught in the trap set by fossil fuel companies and their enablers that preaches a world of energy scarcity and anti-consumer tradeoffs. The truth is that we can have our cake (clean energy) and eat it too (affordable energy).
Agreed!
Thorough, thoughtful, and well researched reporting, Sammy. I felt the same fury about Yglesias, and you demonstrate why he is so out of his depth.
Thank you, Mary!
Argh. Well, at least there's some good news. How about pushing balcony solar? Cheap, easy, and good for the climate.
Yes to all this. Thanks for speaking up for rooftop solar and climate action, Sammy!
"He also mused that electric cars “may be bad for America,” because “we’re just getting our butts kicked [by China] in a way that I think is bad and way more important than climate change.”"
Yglesias is profoundly ignorant about the current state of EVs. EVs are good for everybody except the oil industry. And China is going to dominate most ground transportation going forward if legacy auto doesn't quickly reverse its foolish efforts to delay the transition. Fully-electric and fully-autonomous, that's the future. If these words don't convince you, then watch this 11 minutes of Farzad explaining why.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rtt740mLFFA
Recommended for Yglesias: Mark Jacobson’s work, No Miracles Needed, https://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/WWSStillNMN/StillNMN.html
Ugh, Sammy, a hard way to start Monday! In answer to your question, “Are these people really so determined to protect the fossil fueled status quo that they’re willing to send America back to the scientific dark ages, endangering countless lives?” A simple Yes. But Yglesias is clearly wrong. Democrats need to embrace climate issues, such as you suggest, tying them to affordability and quality of life, rather than competing with Republicans in the race to be Most Oily. My advice to Democrats: Go Big on climate, universal health care, gun control, student loan relief, etc. Serve the public interest.
Thank you for making me feel less bonkers, Christine!
The thing with Yglesias is that like many other popular pundits that are 'very online', they simply have no principles. If you fail to make the argument in the short term, well there is no long term you must pivot to what the polling tells you to pivot to. In my view, the rampant opportunism in American politics is what really muddies the water for Democrats trying to pitch to the public. The strongest political realignment showing in the polls right now is anti-Trump because Trump is unabashedly pursuing the things he said he would do in the most blunt and aggressive manner and everyone hates it. If we had an IRA that saw more direct relief to the public and aggressive build outs of energy generation/storage within the year instead of the complex bureaucratic bill we got, the public would acknowledge the commitment to the principles and truly decide if they like it or not. But if politicians won't commit strongly to the vision proposed today, the public will never really trust anything they say tomorrow and thus we find ourselves in an endless game of catch up. Saying things the polls want us to say only for the public to react skeptically to the new talking points and shifting the polls again to some other ideas.
Sammy
Enjoyed all your posts ... but the success of the "back to the past movement" can easily be ascribed to the lack of good education amongst so many in this country... An engineering professor at UNR has told me that students coming from Reno High Schools all need remedial English and maths, so they can take any science-related classes. The fact that UNR spent $$$ on their sports programs, to the detriment of science, is obvious.
Through Citizens Climate Lobby (Reno/Sparks), we have sponsored programs and scholarships (aimed at the University and High Schools). It is indeed unfortunate that so few students take any interest in the future of our planet and modern societal needs for all!
Giving up on Science is like taking an express train back to the Dark Ages. Closing down science at weather centers, especially important for agriculture, and for pre-disaster weather event mitigation … makes no sense!
China will be the leading global power by 2030, yes 4 years of backwardness will do that to the USA, R&D $ will be spent in the EU, Brazil, SE Asia, not here. Our Universities will become glorified minor league sports teams! Not centers for educational excellence, progress!
I certainly hope this does not occur!
Hi Sammy, you thought this column was bad, his substack is even WORSE. He doesn't get it and he's being a lazy reporter.
https://open.substack.com/pub/matthewyglesias/p/a-bolder-vision-for-american-energy?utm_campaign=post-expanded-share&utm_medium=web
Yeah, I've read a lot of his climate/energy stuff. Unfortunate.
This isn't a good-guy / bad guy situation. It's a matter of different frames of expertise and argument. Matt Yglesias is correct that social and political science shows Democrats need to be back in power if there's any chance of restoring science-based policy (on climate, vaccines and the rest), and the only path to retaking Congress involves states that are very different than California. We can discuss when we chat today! :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWcRDcTIR78
The problem is that Matt Yglesias doesn’t do his research and is stuck in a Washington DC and consultant/pundit bubble. That doesn’t make him a good guy or a bad guy, but it does make him a mediocre journalist, at least on this topic. Sammy Roth does his homework and gets to know people and policymakers in many different places and sectors, which is why he is so effective.
Clean up this New Mexico mess, https://www.nmlandairwatersacred.org/sacrifice