An article in the Wall Street Journal explained how proposition 23, which would suspend California's climate laws, was rejected in yesterday's election. This proposition would have suspended California's climate laws in order to create more jobs to help the state's economy. If proposition 23 had passed, it would have had a positive impact on many in the oil industry. Many oil refiners backed this proposition because it would leave the industry less regulated, making it easier for oil companies to make a larger profit since money won't have to be spent on complying with regulations.
This proposition also had enemies in the energy industry. Many green Californian businesses supported proposition 23 because it would bring them more business. For example, since the climate laws required California to cut its greenhouse gas emissions by 2020, many businesses probably want to go "green." If the proposition passed, it would have negatively impacted these businesses because the climate laws would have been suspended.
After blogging about this proposition last week or a couple weeks ago, personally, I am very glad that this proposition did not pass. Although it would have had a positive impact on the oil industry, it would have been taking a step backward in saving the environment. I think it is important for the development of the "green" energy business that this proposition did not pass. Now, this industry will be able to continue to impact the state of California and, can hopefully, illustrate to the rest of the country how to be "green" and how it positively impacts the environment.
Sources:
-Rianna Das
No comments:
Post a Comment