Why We Must Defeat Prop. 23, the Green Jobs Killer

Published October 6th, 2010 in Miscellaneous | No Comments »

I don’t usually write about politics in this blog, but there’s a proposition on California’s November ballot that would be so damaging to green, sustainable, and clean tech businesses, I just have to speak out: if you’re a California voter, please vote no on Prop. 23, aka the Dirty Energy Proposition.

If passed, Prop. 23 would essentially repeal AB 32, California’s landmark Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. (Technically, it would suspend implementation of AB 32 until unemployment reached 5.5 percent for four consecutive quarters—but that has occurred only three times in the last 40 years, and it’s highly unlikely to occur in the next several years.) Prop. 23 is funded largely by Texas oil companies that don’t want to clean up their act in the state or face competition from clean energy sources. The companies and others have engaged in a long-term, multipronged effort to delay, repeal, or disable AB 32 (we covered this back in March, before the proposition qualified for the ballot, in the newsletter we produce for the California Natural Gas Vehicle Coalition).

Prop. 23, their latest effort, is a cynical and dishonest effort portray AB 32 as a job killer. UC Berkeley researchers Carol Zabin and Lisa Hoyos do a good job of explaining why that isn’t so in their op-ed in today’s San Francisco Chronicle, “Setting the record straight on AB32 and jobs.”

The real job killer is Prop. 23—if it passes it will stall California’s clean energy and clean tech sector, which is growing 10 times faster than the state’s economy as whole and enabling California to attract 67 percent of clean energy venture capital invested in the United States. (Get even more facts on the Stop the Dirty Energy Proposition website.) Prop. 23 will also lead to increased air pollution, threatening public health.

But the effects of Prop. 23 would extend beyond California and its sustainable businesses, bad as its results for our state would be. The passage of AB 32 spurred other states to adopt climate regulations and it jump-started the Western Climate Initiative. It also put pressure on the federal government to at least consider climate legislation, an uphill battle that almost certainly will be lost if California backs off its commitment. And if the United States continues to do nothing, other major greenhouse gas emitters will follow suit, leaving us in an ever-deepening climate crisis.

Many of us feel helpless in face of climate change and environmental disasters. Here’s something positive and incredibly easy you can do: vote NO on Prop. 23. And tell your friends.

Business Alliance Supports AB 32 Global Warming Bill

Published March 30th, 2010 in resources | No Comments »

Thinkshift has added its name to the California Business Alliance for a Green Economy, joining more  than 750 businesses, small and large, that have signed on with the organization. (As has our client, New Resource Bank.) It’s a nonprofit, “created to amplify the business voice in support of policies to help move us toward cleaner energy, less dependence on fossil fuel, and to help us avoid the economic and social disruptions associated with climate change.” The organization supports AB 32, California’s groundbreaking Global Warming Solutions Act.

The Alliance website has good background info, including the March 24 news that the California Air Resources Board analysis of AB 32 shows that it will have a positive effect on the economy and a roundup of op-ed pieces from around the state, both pro and anti.

Go ahead, sign on with the Alliance—it’s an easy way to show your support for a growing, more sustainable economy in the state. Of course, this is a simple step, but every little bit helps, and we think that taking action to develop a clean energy economy is one of the most important things anyone can do to fight pollution and climate change.

Survey Says: More About the Questioners Than the Respondents

Published October 1st, 2009 in Miscellaneous, sustainability | No Comments »

Do a survey about attitudes on any sustainability topic and it will get reported. And commented upon. And tweeted and retweeted. Everyone’s looking for insights on the cultural moment—or something that looks like insights because it has a number attached to it.

But what do surveys (about sustainability or anything else) really tell us? More and more I think, not as much about the people answering the survey as about the people constructing it. Case in point: a recent Rasmussen Reports survey finding that 47 percent of Americans reject the idea that they are selfish for putting economic concerns ahead of the fight against global warming.

What struck me was not the result—hardly a shock, since people don’t like to think of themselves as selfish—but the assumption behind the question: it’s the climate vs. the economy. This is a trope of anti-environmentalism, so perhaps it shouldn’t be surprising, but it’s particularly wrong-headed in this case, since multiple reputable examinations of the issue have found that not addressing climate change is far more costly than acting to curb it. When you know that, the question makes no sense.

Twenty-four percent said they weren’t sure—which reminded me that just about every time I’ve been surveyed, I’ve been asked at least one question I couldn’t answer. Not because I didn’t have an opinion on the issue, but because I rejected the premise of the question.

If you’re conducting a survey and want an honest read on what people are thinking, it’s essential to examine the assumptions behind your questions. Are you closing off the possibility of opinions that don’t conform to your perceptions? And when you’re evaluating survey data, it pays to think as carefully about the questions as you do about the answers. Whose opinion is being reflected here?

Poll Highlights Contradictions in Global Warming Attitudes

Published August 13th, 2008 in communications strategy, sustainability | No Comments »

A new poll conducted by ABC News, Planet Green and Stanford University on Americans’ attitudes about global warming shows a few alarming trends and sheds some light on persistent contradictions and communications issues.

On the upside, more people (seven out of 10 surveyed) say they’re doing something to reduce their carbon footprint (such as driving less, conserving power and water, recycling), and most believe global warming presents a real threat.

Doing the right thing is not a primary motivator for most people. Of the 71 percent who said they’re taking action, only one-third are doing it to improve the environment, a quarter to save money, and 41 percent of them say both reasons apply equally.

Most alarmingly, now that we’re really feeling the pinch of sky-high gas and oil prices, more people than ever are in favor of environmentally unsound practices to meet energy needs. Among those polled, 63 percent say we should drill for oil offshore, and 55 percent favor drilling in wilderness areas. Support for nuclear power is the highest it’s been in nearly three decades, with 44 percent in favor; those opposed are still a majority (55 percent) but that’s trending down. Previous polls, says ABC, showed more support for alternative energy sources.

The conservation message is getting lost: 64 percent of people believe finding new energy sources is more important than improving conservation efforts, up nine points since 2001. This conflicts with the finding that nearly three-quarters of those polled believe global warming will be reduced only if people make “major changes in their lifestyles.” (Interestingly, 44 percent of respondents believe those changes will cause them financial hardship, and half say they won’t.)

There is confusion about what to do. Of the 28 percent of people who aren’t doing anything to reduce their carbon footprint, about 20 percent say they don’t know what to do. Other resisters say that it’s inconvenient, it won’t make a difference, it’s too expensive or they’re just not interested.

Some inaction could be attributed to a perception that individual action isn’t a significant cause of global warming. Only 33 percent of respondents say it’s caused by “things people do.” When the choice also includes business and industrial activities, the response rises to 63 percent.

The green message may be losing traction. While 25 percent of people say global warming is our biggest environmental problem, that’s down from 33 percent last year, and fewer say it’s important to them personally. Survey analyst Gary Langer points out that the subject is getting less attention in the media, too: there were half as many news stories on the subject in the month prior to this year’s poll, compared with the month prior to last year’s poll.

Langer also points out that if the danger isn’t immediate, people aren’t worried about it. While more people now believe that if global warming continues unchecked it will be a serious threat in their lifetimes, the vast majority say it will only be felt in future generations.

History bears this out: witness the many alarms raised in the past that have gone unheeded. Now we’re busy playing catch-up, and struggling to find messages that have resonance and motivate without causing people’s eyes and brains to glaze over.

Communications that are honest, informative and relevant to people’s lives can make a difference. And don’t forget a sense of humor. Ponderous gloom-and-doom is definitely not appealing. (See Grist.)