Kudos for
action to reduce energy and emissions as expected in the Climate Action Plan.

You show many
improvements to fixed facilities. Some density increase should be expected if
consistent with all individual communities’ functions.

However I
suggest a change to emphasize support for motor vehicles rather than mass
transit. Table 3.1 shows they give more than ten times the leverage to reduce
GHG compared to transit. Less than 2 mpg improvement reduces more GHG than the
entire transit system. Further, Federal 54 mpg kinks in in 2025 to increase
this superior reduction source.

Thus payoff to
public for reduced congestion, better use of roads, incentive to purchase
increasingly efficient autos, etc,.

Walt Brewer

catcar38@verizon.net

It's refreshing to see a Republican politician that's not a climate change and science denier. It may be far from perfect, but at least it's a plan that moves our beloved city forward into the future. Which looks to be hotter and drier!

What’s missing from this and most CAPs is a call to eliminate or reduce livestock consumption, which accounts for up to 51% of greenhouse gas emissions. http://blogs.worldwatch.org.... Not to mention, water usage: A single quarter-pound beef patty requires 660 gallons of water (to irrigate the grain, water the cow, process the meat...), enough for two months of daily showers. http://cowspiracy.com. Save the environment--and water--go vegan!

I agree 100%! Reduction of meat consumption is a critical component of any climate plan. It is also one of the easiest to implement.

Eating meat is a lifestyle choice and there are plenty of healthier and cheaper alternatives. That is not the case with our oil dependent society.

Let's go for the low hanging fruit first, pun intended.

Yea, that cowspiracy is complete bull (pun intended). Humans account for the GHGs, even the ones from our cows, but even without us, there would be billions of animals on the planet, and they could never produce the GHGs we do, because they don't mine carbon-fuels. You're leaning the right direction, but you are obviously unbalanced, probably lack of nutrition. Eat some protein.

There are lots of ways to reduced GHGs. Eliminating meat consumption is an easy one. It just takes education and a little willpower.

I know most people lack both, but it is much easier to shift people towards a vegetarian diet than to reduce dependency on oil and coal.

Eventually we'll get there, but we need to start with lifestyle choices that are entirely unnecessary and unhealthy.

I am shocked that the Mayor didn't press for Mandated Energy Upgrades, at least upon commercial buildings, but then he's not about creating thousands of local JOBS, especially living wage jobs for low-skill workers in this new industry. Energy Efficiency isn't as sexy as renewables, and it's profit margins aren't so big, but if we want to continue our lifestyle while reducing GHGs, it's necessary. At least property owners will have to reveal their high utility bills to new owners before they purchase, and that may mean some jobs for Energy Auditors.

Mandated Energy Upgrades might make sense for business, but it is stupid for residential sellers. In my area, flippers buy up the houses, tear out anything they don't like (which would include low bid retrofits that I'd be forced to buy since I can't afford to put in high quality items I'll never benefit from) just short of needing to pulling a permit for their renovations, and then they replace everything. Yeah, that makes jobs for some people, but it is a waste of money and material to install retrofits that no one wants. Buyers prefer to install what they choose rather than having a seller foist something off on them. I'm on a fixed income (retirement) and I can't afford to support an industry on my back.

Your ignorance is showing. First, flippers don't tear out insulation, or air-sealing, or even LED lights, they are out to maximize profit, just like any land developer. In our housing stock, there is room for a 50% decrease in energy use, by avoiding waste.

Second, you benefit day one from energy efficient effort due to lower energy use, lower utility bills, and lower carbon emissions. Now that people will be FORCED to reveal their high utility costs, people who have low bills will sell their homes faster and at higher prices, and that means energy efficiency pays for itself immediately in higher re-sale prices.

Houses, like all buildings, should not use energy, they should produce energy, but even with renewable energy, if all you do is waste it, you can't use it to power your car.

If you research Title-24, the state's mandated energy efficiency for new homes, then you will see how it has evolved since instituted, and the push-back from the building industries and real-estate. No building should ever be sold without an energy audit, just like a foundation inspection or a well researched title, it's common sense.

Insulting me is certainly the way to get me to listen to your argument....not. I am not talking about a house I intend to stay in...it would make all the sense in the world for me to spend the money I don't have to do retrofits I can't afford in order save money into the future with the possiblity that somehow it will be worth it to me personally and to the environment in general, but the fact is that I am going to be forced into selling my house so that I can downsize to something more manageable. And you want me to pay for a retrofit that will do nothing for me because I'm so warm and fuzzy about the flipper that will buy my house and tear it apart. I've seen this happen over and over again. I don't mind revealing my usage. That's no doubt a public record and in this privacy sucking society, it's nothing I'm ashambed of. Nor do I have a problem with new houses being made as an energy efficient as possible. That makes perfect sense and should have always been a goal. I am not for installing a bunch of equipment for the sake of creating jobs for an industry when I know that equipment, in some number of cases, will be removed and replaced because the next owner wants something else. Now you can continue to call me names because that says everything about you and nothing about me.

This is a critical step for our city to become more sustainable -- and create high quality jobs in the cleantech sector. It also will make us more resilient in the face of climate change, so we can better adapt and respond to the consequences of drought, wildfires and increasing temperatures. These goals will outlive the present council terms and will require us citizens to keep pressing for these civic investments in coming years

let's hope a transfer to clean technology does grow the economy... in the clean tech sector ...

Maybe it is all of the hot air from city hall causing the problem?? Where is an investigative reporter when you need them?