Falling short of Kyoto goals, Boulder raises carbon tax
As long as it's their money....
BOULDER, Colo. -- Correction: A previous version of this story incorrectly reported the amount energy customers would pay under the increased tax. Most residential customers would pay $21 annually, not monthly.
So it's a feel-good, not a do-some-actual-good tax. Figures.
And commercial costs would increase from the current average of $43 a year to $94.
That's $94 too much.
It's time for an in-your-face approach to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, the Boulder City Council decided Thursday night. The council unanimously approved increasing the city's voter-approved carbon tax
The voters approved paying more tax
which is why this isn't listed under "Seedy Politicians." Idiots.
from its minimum to its maximum level beginning Aug. 6, providing an additional $810,000 annually toward meeting the city's carbon-cutting goals.
The tax, built into utility bills, is expected to help the city reach 95 percent of the Kyoto Protocol -- which calls for reducing greenhouse gas emissions 7 percent below 1990 levels -- before the tax ends in 2013.
David Driskell, Boulder's deputy director for community planning, said the city must reduce its carbon dioxide emissions by 400,000 metric tons by 2012 to meet its short-term goals. Estimates show the city is on track to fall just short of that, at 396,800 tons.
The council will have to give the tax final approval next month. The city expects to use the new tax money in part to pilot a program being called "two
dorks techs and a carbon-spewing truck," which would send out a trained staff of clipboard-toting technicians to go door-to-door offering quick consultations.
Anybody like that coming to my door can "consult" with my two friends - Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson. And I don't mean the cooking oil.
The meetings could lead to checking insulation in the attic, using a "kill-a-watt" meter to show residents how much electricity their appliances are using, replacing light bulbs and installing programmable thermostats. Technicians, in theory, would also be able to offer no-money-down, on-the-spot financing
Backed by Fannie and Freddie, no doubt....
to help homeowners make immediate energy improvements.
|I want TARP money myself ...|
Kara Mertz, an environmental affairs manager for the city, said the program is designed to "blanket the community, neighborhood by neighborhood ... to create a community buzz" about going green. She said the "two techs and a truck" initiative would also create up to 1,200 jobs.
Explain exactly how 2 magically becomes 1,200.
According to city estimates, the tax at its maximum rate would cost most residential energy customers $21 a year beginning next year -- up from the current rate of about $11. Commercial costs would increase from the current average of $43 a year to $94.
Nearly two dozen Boulder residents spoke at the Thursday meeting, most making impassioned pleas for city leaders to make the move to a higher tax rate.
"I care about how we use our energy here," said Judy Feland, who lives near the Valmont coal-fire power station. "I think we can do what we want to, which is decarbonize our energy."
I've got the popcorn concession to that event....
Stephen Keenan said he's all for higher taxes
since he's a farkin' loon and obviously has more money than brains, so long as they have a meaningful impact on the environment and climate change. "I think that the more carbon tax we have, the better," Keenan said , so the jobs can move elsewhere. "This city has the opportunity to lead the nation" in unemployment carbon reduction.
Councilwoman Angelique Espinoza noted, however, that whatever Boulder does to reduce its carbon emissions likely wouldn't make a real difference
Yep - it's a Liberal Left program all right....
unless the movement spreads to other communities.
It will - to other Liberal Left Loony ones. Y'all can compete amongst yourselves for the highest unemployment numbers of the Loony Left enclaves.
"We're trying to develop programs that motivate people
to give the government their money for pop-sci, feel-good programs that don't accomplish a damn thing but impoverish the citizens," she said.
"Too stupid to live" really should be a valid diagnosis....
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2009-06-08