Lets get under 350 by supporting Kevin de Leon’s S.B. 350

There’s a certain irony—or providence, depending on how one looks at it—in California Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León’s climate-change legislation package bearing the name Senate Bill 350.

That’s because 350 parts per million of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is the upper limit beyond which serious climate change isn’t just pending, it’s inevitable.

We’re currently at 400 ppm.

De León’s bill—or rather, the legislative package—would ask Californians to double our energy efficiency, get half of our power from renewable sources and cut our oil use in half by 2030.

Our only complaint about this legislation? That it will only be in force in California.

We might want to add some penalties for drivers that insist on low-mileage, high-emission vehicles, especially because we reside in a state where there are almost as many people as cars.

In fact, if vehicle-registration fees reflected the weight of vehicles (and thus the damage to roadways and infrastructure) and emissions (and thus the damage to our breathing and our planet’s climate), there might be enough economic incentive to get Californians out of our single-occupancy cars and into everything from public transport and carpooling to biking and walking. (Yes, we’d support some exceptions.)

We focused on that part of the law that will cut back our use of fossil fuels because that’s where the big opposition will come from; the Western States Petroleum Association has already weighed in against it. Big surprise there.

Here’s the simple reality: We’re past the point of no return when it comes to climate change. Now, we’re in the place where we can—at best—simply hope to adapt. Hope to mitigate the coming changes and reduce our contributions to the problem enough so that the effects aren’t completely devastating for our children and grandchildren.

The year 2030 is not that far away. The kids in their first soccer cleats this year will be young adults, worrying about the future of their own children. What are we going to say to them when they ask why we didn’t do more to stop a slow-motion disaster that we knew was coming?

We urge our readers to stand up in support of S.B. 350. Make sure that your legislators know that these proposals are the minimum that we should be doing if we’re to have a livable Golden State in our golden years. Call or email in support of these proposals, and resist the fear-mongering of the oil, coal and gas lobby.

It’s that sort of fossilized thinking that got us here. Now, let’s move ahead.