Monday, October 26, 2009

San Diego Union-Tribune: Sempra Energy Ranked Near Bottom On Global Warming

"With Joe and John it's the rule of opposites. They work for huge polluters, so they're green. They are for preserving Sierra Madre, so they push big developer agendas constantly. They're all about fighting for small cities, so they belong to the big regional organizations that reinforce the power grabbing of Sacramento." - 10/24 Tattler comment.

One of the gaping holes in the logic behind SB 375 is that while it identifies the global warming culprits, it puts them in the wrong order. According to the pie chart supplied by Stuff In The Air.com, it is not cars that are the major contributing factor to greenhouse gas emissions. A player to be sure, but by no means the largest. That honor would belong to power stations, those largely coal burning goliaths that help supply much of the electricity we use to light up our homes. And if you combine power stations plus "residential, commercial, and other uses" of that product, you're talking about nearly a third of all greenhouse gas emissions.

The basic premise behind SB 375 is that if you lay in another swath of high density development into already heavily built-out urban neighborhoods, people will willingly move there, give up their cars, and use public transportation. Thus somehow magically solving the greenhouse gas problem. However, wouldn't these uber-density neighborhoods be consuming a lot more energy in order to maintain the amenities of modern life? Including electricity, the production of which is the recognized leader in greenhouse gas production?

With a new generation of low-emission automobiles on the horizon, would the massive social disruptions and redevelopment being called for by Sacramento through its SB 375 lobby-driven high stakes gamble really be worth it? If the true intent is to cut greenhouse gas emissions, doesn't the sanctioning of vast increases in new housing construction seem just a little bit counterintuitive? Of course, we're assuming here that this is Sacramento's real intent, and they haven't just invented a cynical rationale for permitting some of their favorite (read: lucrative) lobbies to build with carefree abandon wherever they want.

Sierra Madre City Councilmember Joe Mosca is up for re-election this spring, and it is pretty clear where he stands on bringing generous amounts of unwelcome development to Sierra Madre. And that he actually heads the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments committee tasked with enabling SB 375's implementation in places like our quaint little town is of interest. Something that could mean large swaths of generic condominium and mixed-use nonsense throughout our community should this largely rubber stamp organization get its way.

Now you would think that someone engaged in an enterprise such as the one Joe Mosca is running would be as fresh as the driven snow on an issue like Global Warming, right? After all, the harsh sacrifices he is asking small cities such as ours to make are immense, so certainly he would want to live a life that could serve as an example of how it needs to be done.

If you click here you will be taken to something called the Southern California Leadership Network, "Class of 2009." Something cobbled together by the Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce. And if you scroll down to the "M" tier you will witness the following:

Joseph Mosca, Public Affairs Manager, Southern California Gas Company: ... Mosca practiced consumer and corporate bankruptcy law from 1999 to 2008 and is now employed by Southern California Gas Company, Sempra Energy Utilities.

Now why someone would go from practicing law to being a "Public Affairs Manager" is something of a mystery. Kind of like accepting a demotion from Colonel to Lieutenant in the Army. But that is not to our point today. What is, though, is that apparently Sempra Energy Utilities was recognized three years back as one of the worst greenhouse gas producers in the country. This from the San Diego Union-Tribune:

Sempra ranked near bottom on global warming

Sempra Energy was ranked near the bottom in dealing with global warming by a national investor coalition ... A national review of how 100 companies are addressing the risks and business opportunities arising from global warming ranked San Diego-based Sempra 18th among 19 companies in the electric industry ... The report, commissioned by Ceres, a Boston-based coalition of investors, environmentalists and public interest groups, ranked corporate response to global warming across five areas: board oversight of the problem, management performance, public discourse, emissions accounting and strategic planning ... The highest-rated company was BP, the British petroleum company, which was also among the five foreign companies that topped nine of the industries surveyed. A spokesman for BP noted that that the oil company has also become the third-largest solar company in the world ... Many experts say there are growing costs - including crop damage and flooding - that should be attributed to climate changes caused by greenhouse gas emissions. Most fear there will be far greater economic damage should global warming continue at its current rate ... In the electric power industry, Sempra ranked last among major California companies with utility operations and outpointed only Constellation Energy among the 19 companies reviewed overall. Sempra is a diversified energy company and parent of both San Diego Gas & Electric Co. and Southern California Gas Co. ... On the survey's 100-point scorecard, Sempra received 24 points, while Pacific Gas & Electric got 54 and Edison International 51 ... The study was conducted by the Investor Responsibility Research Center using information from public filings, company reports and direct company contact. The Center, based in Washington D.C., was founded in 1972 and specializes in corporate governance and social responsibility issues ... In contrast with companies highly rated in the assessment, Sempra doesn't have board or executive committees devoted to global warming, and its chief executives have failed to address the issue. The survey also found Sempra had no executive addressing the issue.

Also:

A representative of the Natural Resources Defense Council said Sempra's rating for addressing global warming was appropriately low. He was particularly critical of Sempra's plans to build coal-fired plants in Idaho and Nevada ... "Sempra is out there trying to build more coal-fired plants and that is exactly the wrong thing to do," said David Hawkins, director of the climate center for the Natural Resources Defense Council, a reference to Sempra proposals in Idaho and Nevada ... "The report is cutting-edge information," Hawkins added. "The people who did this report are serious people, and they do their homework."

Anybody surprised? Another example of that "rule of opposites" thing at work, I guess.

36 comments:

  1. The only thing guaranteed about J.M. and J.B. is the amount of "green" gas they generate on the city council on Tuesday nites.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The logical progression of SB 375 will be to require people to live next door to where they work.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Good morning Tattlers,
    I have posted 6 new videos that cover the conversations about the Forensic Audit Kurt called for.
    Neuroblast Films

    ReplyDelete
  4. Taking away peoples cars and forcing them to live in concentrated urban neighborhoods sounds so ... totalitarian. I wonder how they see this happening. Without an uprising, that is...

    ReplyDelete
  5. Council Member Mosca was the target of a recall campaign. He is justifiably villified on this blog for breaking campaign promises. The most politically active members of the community despise him and berate him at Council meetings. His fellow Council Members hold him in such low regard that they passed him over for Mayor twice and removed him from the Council of Governments. I think he needs to hire his own public affairs manager!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Does anybody really think Mosca will run again?

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'm the last person who wants to give the DIRTS and the DIC any political advice, but if they were smart, they would withdraw their support from Joe Mosca. After all, he has failed them miserably time and time again.

    ReplyDelete
  8. 10:16, DIRT and DIC support for Mosca appears to be evaporating. At the last Council meeting, nobody came out in support of Mosca when the Mayor proposed removing him from COG.

    Nobody.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Seems obvious to me that the less than motovated remnants of the No On V gang is waiting for the big money interests to come and float their boat one more time. They really are quite an entitled bunch.

    ReplyDelete
  10. is mosca the fly still holding office hours in kersting court these days?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Don't be fooled, Joe has a strong backing lurking in the background and will run a rough campaign. We should all be prepared with lots of facts to counter his political machine. Thanks to Sir Maundry for keeping us informed, we can build on his blogs to build a campaign against Joe. Personal jabs will not work, we need to be smart to show the non-active voters why Joe should not be re-elected for the good of Sierra Madre.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Joe and John don't care about global warming.
    I don't really care. What I do care about is that they both represent the interests of the BIA and the CAR, SCAG and COG.
    They do not represent the interests of the residents of Sierra Madre, or the residents of California for that matter.
    A vote for the likes of Mosca is a vote for developers, bureaucrats and sleazy Sacramento politicians who want to take away your rights.
    They represent people who do not care about our hillsides, our towns, our water or how much they will have to tax us to pay for all their grandiose plans to change California- for the worse.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Since Sempra energy and Edison Co. are very involved in solar power and other energy issues, why would Mosca or Buchanan be allowed vote on any issue that concerned Sierra Madre.
    Someone needs to inquire with the Political Fair Practices Com.

    ReplyDelete
  14. certainly Joe isn't niave or blind enough to seek relection is he?

    I can't wait to lie to him and tell him that he has my support. I may even ask for a lawn sign and after it is safely behind my fence, I'll write "LIAR" across it.

    we all need to watch out for the next "endorsed by" candidate or one that has an all of a sudden community volunteer look at me please list, ala Shirtless Pete.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Great comments, all.It's very true that we have to watch the money.The Dirts & Downtown Investors Clubs will undoubtedly try to make their investments pay off.Someone once posted that there was a certain amount of time that the D.I.C.s could make that happen, that they wouldn't give up trying for political control until their investments collapsed.Look they fooled us more than once,Doyle and his pals were supported by many, many people who were astonished at how he turned on them.All the people who fought the Carter Disaster were astonished by Stockly, Torres, Buchanan and Joffe, and then there were Mosca and Buchanan.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Somewhere in the new Neuroblast clips, Buchanan speaks about needing development here because there will be increasing population here, and then he does one of his mumbling things, but I think he said something like "whether there are the resources or not."
    I don't think I have the stamina t listen to the clips again, but if somebody does....
    Does he mean that we will build homes for people and not have water for them?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Yeah, 12:53, that's exactly what it means.
    People like Joe and John and the rest of the dirts, don't care.

    ReplyDelete
  18. If the fly runs again I think a great anti-fly symbol would be for the citenzry to get flyswatters and display them constantly everywhere.
    Probably a cheap effective tool to battle the pesky mosca.

    ReplyDelete
  19. There is a bumper sticker that says "for a forester, everyday is earth day" so it really infuriates me to see politicians hijacking the important point that we all need to conserve earth's resources. So, how can we all be smarter with our footprint and at the same time discredit these boneheaded politicians?

    ReplyDelete
  20. That's the question, Mercy.
    For one thing we can hope for wider distribution of the excellent articles in the Tattler, so that the public "servants" can educate themselves about what the priorities need to be.

    ReplyDelete
  21. They were here firstOctober 26, 2009 at 2:32 PM

    Everybody know about the environmental wisdom applied to the bear "problem"?

    From the Arcadia Police Blotter:

    Wed. Oct. 7. Around midnight units responded to the 200 block of Hillgreen regarding black bears "nesting" at several different locations in the neighborhood. For the last several months, the bears ate fruit from fruit trees, rummaged through trash cans, and damaged fences. Officers found several nesting sites and sprayed repellant at the locations hoping to deter the bears from returning.
    The department of Fish and Game was contacted regarding the possibility of either trapping and relocating the bears or destroying the bears, and the decision was made that if the animals wear seen again they must be destroyed in the interest of public safety.
    Thursday, Oct. 8. Around 6:10 PM officers returned to the 200 block of Hillgreen regarding a black bear in the back yard. Since all the deterrent had failed and for the safety of the residents, the bear was killed and the Department of Fish and Game responded to remove the carcass.
    Friday, Oct. 9. A second bear was seen in the 200 block of Hillgreen around 8:30 PM and the bear was also destroyed.


    Sierra Madre, remember, DO NOT CALL THE AUTHORITIES. Bear Proof your trash, alert neighbors to the presence of bears, bang pots & pans together to chase them away from fruit trees. A fed bear is a dead bear, so help them live.

    ReplyDelete
  22. 2:32, who is responsible for "the decision was made that if the animals were seen again they must be destroyed in the interest of public safety." Outrageous.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Came across bear deterrent information used in Canada recently--people were using sling slots and pinging the bears with marbels. If you actually hit the bear it stung a little bit and the marbles clanked off the metal and plastic trash cans and wood fences (and no doubt a few other metal sounds--cars come to mind) making a jarring noise to annoy the bears. Annoying bears to get them to go elsewhere was the goal. Canadians may have pretty good skills with sling shots and can make this work. You would need some distance and be awake when the bears are out. Here in the canyon you see trash cans toppled over, contents smeared around showing bear activity the morning of trash day. Come on people, secure your trash, protect wildlife. A garbage eating bear is dying slowly on your lazy trash disposal or quickly if the armed officials are called in. Repeat what 2:32 p.m. stated: DO NOT CALL THE AUTHORITIES.

    ReplyDelete
  24. The environmentalists have been saying for quite some time now that the greenest thing that can happen is for people to move into the inner city and let the suburbs return to what they were before people moved there. What Sacramento has done is endorse the idea of people living in dense urban neighborhoods, and then pressuring the suburbs to become, you got it, dense urban neighborhoods.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Joe Mosca has said he will run for reelection. What other dirts will be running with him?

    ReplyDelete
  26. Argh!!!! He actually has said that!??? Mosca will just ignore EVERYTHING and run again?

    ReplyDelete
  27. Joe lives in the DIC bubble. The only people he talks to are those who will say what he wants to hear.

    ReplyDelete
  28. well, all i can say if Joe does run again, I'm gonna lie to him just like he lied to me, tell him he has my full support and then vote for anybody else, except Shirtless Pete

    Joe's entire record is a sham or at least 90% of it

    ReplyDelete
  29. Joe probably has a lot of LA County Democratic party money lined up and thinks that is what it takes to win in Sierra Madre. And don't forget the Dem phone banks in Glendale. It'll ber a "hearts and minds" kind of campaign. We'll be bombed with cloying postcards and unctuous phony issue free talk about how wonderful and caring he is.

    ReplyDelete
  30. They'll have a very different reception this time....and Bad Karma, are you sure about that? Are the Dems really going to push such a demonstrated loser? Kind of like people sitting around and strategizing about Adams for a run at the governorship.

    ReplyDelete
  31. I can't see Joe even thinking about running unless he had the go ahead from his party bosses.

    ReplyDelete
  32. u really think Joe Mosca is on the mind of the Dem party? he was a blip a few years ago and I would imagine he has little value to them now - the same value he has demonstrated to Sierra Madre

    u know that Susan "I lie about everything" Henderson will be slanting her articles to bolster Joe's public perception for reelection.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Still read the papers, but not that oneOctober 26, 2009 at 6:57 PM

    Yeah 6:35, but Susan must be under an awful strain now.
    She has to actually produce a paper every week, which is a switch from what she's been doing for the last year or so.
    That's probably going to cause some problems down the road.
    And doesn't she have to pony up some money according to the judge?
    She might not be in the best position to endorse anybody, though through some gobsmacking lack of consciousness, she became president of the Kiwanis.
    What did they ever do to deserve that?

    ReplyDelete
  34. There has been something of an exodus as of late from The Iguanas Club is what I'm hearing. Just about the only people left are the ones that fall asleep during the meetings.

    ReplyDelete
  35. An Urban Planner told me years ago what the conventional thinking was regarding land use and density.This of course was when inner cities were abandoned and suburbia was eating away at all available land away from the city centers and established neighborhoods.The thought at the time was to revitalize the inner cities, hence the mixed usage commonly seen and advocated widely. Trying to literally bring life back to the heart of the downtowns. Increase density in existing neighborhoods in an attempt to halt suburban sprawl.The problem with the sprawl is that it literally eats undeveloped land that was once habitat to various forms of flora and fauna, watersheds and forests.Creating more demand on scarce resources and forever altering the natural landscape. Longer commutes, more gas and water demands, more heat zones created by the endless amounts of concrete and asphalt. This was the theory held and taught to the Urban Planners for the last 20 years or so. What they did not account for was the enormous consequences of density.Like too many rats in a cage that turn on each other, basic needs of privacy, light, water and air have become essential elements that everyone seems willing to fight for. And, it is this premise which drove SB375. But it was the BIA which chose to see the silver lining in this dark cloud and manipulate it for their personal gain of more growth and more growth which feeds the beast. After all, isn't the uptick of the bottom line the only thing that is relevant? Let's hope not.

    ReplyDelete
  36. A good number of folks that have populated the inner citie(s) are predominantly coming from third world countries where the population densities their make LA and environs look like lilly covered fields.Our perspective of what high density is compared to someone coming from maybe Sao Paolo Brazil or Managua Nicaragua or Mexico City is like comparing apples to rubber bands. As is with everyone, opinions and prejudices are formed by our own experiences, I am not condoning that, it just is what it is. These trends are going to continue, growth is inevitable, especially in Southern Cal, people from all over the world still see this area as having tremendous potential for them, the rate at which they come will fluctuate, but they will come. The question is, do we subject ourselves to the monied interests that have run the show for decades or do open the window and shout "I'm mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore!" the choice is ours to make, personaly, as soon as i can I'm sellin' the house and gettin' the ***K outta here!

    ReplyDelete