Berkeley spends $30 million reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 8%

It only cost taxpayers $500 per ton — yesterday’s price of carbon in the EU emissions trading market was about $6.61.

Berkeleyside.com reports:

The city of Berkeley has reduced community-wide greenhouse gas emissions by 8% since 2000 despite a 10% increase in population, the city announced in an annual report mailed last week to residents and businesses throughout the city.

The mailing is the most comprehensive public report produced by the city to date on its progress toward Climate Action Plan goals established in 2006. The city has set a target of a 33% reduction in emissions by 2020, and an 80% reduction by 2050…

Much of the larger-scale work in Berkeley thus far has been funded by $30 million in grants received by the city since 2009, from the agencies such as the Alameda County Transportation Commission and Metropolitan Transportation Commission ($12.7 million) for transit improvements; the U.S. Department of Energy (about $1 million) for energy upgrades in 250 Berkeley buildings; and the state Department of Forestry to update the city’s tree inventory ($137,500)…

Read more…

10 thoughts on “Berkeley spends $30 million reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 8%”

  1. From the article-
    “The city of Berkeley has reduced community-wide greenhouse gas emissions by 8% since 2000…”
    “Burroughs noted Wednesday that the economic downtown of 2008 is believed to have made a difference…”
    “Much of the larger-scale work in Berkeley thus far has been funded by $30 million in grants received by the city since 2009…”

    So, an 8% cut of 750,000 tons CO2 is about 60,000 tons of CO2.
    Although they admit the recession provided some of the cuts starting in 2008, the $30M/60Ktons = $500/ton CO2 was spent starting in 2009, long after the recession hit. Therefore, only a portion of the 8% cut in emissions can be attributed to the projects, and the cost was likely much higher than $500/ton CO2.

    Are Berkeley people really this stupid?

  2. Even the 8% cut is utterly meaningless in the best interpretation available even assuming AGW is real. $30 million taxpayer bucks spent on NADA. Heck, even the Pentagon could at least get a hammer for that.

  3. If it cost $30 million for a small reduction in an area the size of Berkeley, your scientific calculator does not have enough space to total how much it would cost to obtain a similar reduction throughout the US.
    Worldwide??

  4. Berkelians are really THAT stupid. Even during the ‘civil rights’ demonstrations of the 1960’s they remained blissfully ignorant of the fact their eponymous Bishop George Berkeley was the owner of 3 slaves.

  5. It’s not their money, so why should they worry about the cost? They get to spend $30M, get more jobs, pass the gravy around and go home feeling really good about how they are saving the planet. Do you think they would spend their own money on this? Stupid is giving them any money for such paltry results.

  6. When you consider the greenhouse gas emissions around the world, it seems like a drop in the bucket. But we need to keep doing environmental testing and make efforts to clean up the water and air. Life depends on it.

Comments are closed.