Climate Justice for Thee but Not for Me

Berkeley, California is arguably the most liberal city in the U.S. Tourist shops sell t-shirts touting its identity as a leftist hub.  The city is overwhelmingly white and wealthy, with large Asian and small Black minority populations, a median household income over $100,000, and median home value of nearly $1.3 million. When we think of the liberal elite, we think of Berkeley. So when residents last week voted down a new fossil fuel tax, it came as a rude surprise to green activists across the country.

From Watts Up With That?

By Neel Brown

Berkeley, California is arguably the most liberal city in the U.S. Tourist shops sell t-shirts touting its identity as a leftist hub.  The city is overwhelmingly white and wealthy, with large Asian and small Black minority populations, a median household income over $100,000, and median home value of nearly $1.3 million. When we think of the liberal elite, we think of Berkeley. So when residents last week voted down a new fossil fuel tax, it came as a rude surprise to green activists across the country.

On the Berkeley ballot this November was a local initiative that would have imposed a heavy tax on large buildings that used natural gas for heating, cooking, and for other purposes. Proponents argued that the measure would help rid us of fossil fuel use, following a trend across the country in which climate activists look for every opportunity to shut down natural gas.

In a resounding rebuke, Berkeley voters rejected the ballot measure 68% to 32%, sending the message that they were not interested in sacrificing their use of natural gas for any climate benefit that they thought it would net. To soothe their nagging climate conscience, donations to environmental activists will surely flow forth from Berkeley. The ability to avoid any sacrifice in the name of climate change only to demand those sacrifices from other, less wealthy communities is an environmentalist privilege that does not go unnoticed by working class Americans.

Effective federally-focused environmental activism will likely be on the wane following the Trump win and the ascension of an unfriendly bureaucracy. With hundreds of millions of dollars to spend, these groups will turn their money and organizers on state and local governments in an attempt to rid them of natural gas infrastructure. 

This strategy is a mistake. The Americans who live in our biggest cities are burdened by high energy costs, unreliable electricity grids, and often live in neighborhoods with inadequate infrastructure and inefficient, aging homes. The problems are worst in the parts of these cities with histories of segregation and redlining, and the disproportionately Black residents of these struggling communities are those who can least afford the additional energy burden brought by constricting energy supplies. While cities are the most efficient places to live in terms of carbon emissions, cities also have a crippling energy burden that falls mostly on these communities that cannot afford to weather the price volatility and reduced reliability that comes with removing vital energy infrastructure. The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) will be publishing a report on the energy burden in cities this year.

In addition to the important benefits, there are costs involved in modernizing our outdated energy systems and moving toward a greener, lower-carbon future. PPI works to inform decision makers about those costs, who is being asked to bear them, and how to minimize their impact. The U.S. needs a climate policy that reduces carbon emissions, encourages innovation in clean energy generation and transmission, meets the energy demands of households and businesses, and, critically, does so without laying the cost of that transition on the people who can least afford it. Continuing down the path of left-wing environmentalism is a political dead end for these working-class communities. Instead, we need a political push for effective and pragmatic state and local energy policy for deep blue states that shows we can reduce greenhouse gas emissions and cut the household costs that burden disadvantaged communities. 

City leaders should be on the lookout for dead-end environmental activists in their towns, fresh from a fundraiser in Berkeley, CA, demanding that their own community make sacrifices of cost, reliability, and convenience that Berkeley won’t in the name of climate justice. Watch closely what the funders of environmental activists do in their own communities while they make demands on others. 

In this recent election, the wealthy elite in Berkeley said to environmental activists, “We’ll keep our natural gas. Here’s some money. Go tell the poor people to get rid of theirs.” 

Is that just?

Neel Brown is Managing Director at the Progressive Policy Institute. Fnd Neel’s bio here.

This article was originally published by RealClearEnergy and made available via RealClearWire.

Federal Court Deals Knockout Punch To Blue City’s Biden-Backed Effort To Ban Gas Stoves

A federal appellate court ruled Tuesday that it would not reconsider an earlier decision that prevents the city of Berkeley, California, from enforcing its de facto ban on installing gas-powered appliances in new buildings.

From The DAILY CALLER

NICK POPE

CONTRIBUTOR

A federal appellate court ruled Tuesday that it would not reconsider an earlier decision that prevents the city of Berkeley, California, from enforcing its de facto ban on installing gas-powered appliances in new buildings.

Berkeley, one of the most liberal cities in America, enacted the policy in 2019, marketing it as a means of countering climate change while others railed against it as a de facto gas stove ban. The California Restaurant Association sued the city over the ordinance, losing its challenge in federal court initially before a three-judge panel vindicated the trade group in April 2023, a decision the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals opted against revisiting on Tuesday.

“By completely prohibiting the installation of natural gas piping within newly constructed buildings, the City of Berkeley has waded into a domain preempted by Congress,” Patrick Bumatay, a circuit judge on the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and member of the panel, wrote in his opinion. “The Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA), 42 U.S.C. § 6297(c), expressly preempts State and local regulations concerning the energy use of many natural gas appliances, including those used in household and restaurant kitchens. Instead of directly banning those appliances in new buildings, Berkeley took a more circuitous route to the same result.” (RELATED: Electric Appliance Advocates Backed Study Driving Push To Ban Gas Stoves)

Notably, the Biden administration made a direct appeal to the Ninth Circuit to reinstate the ban in June 2023, calling the decision to toss the ban “erroneous.” A month prior to issuing that brief, the Department of Energy asserted that it is “misinformation” and a “myth” that “the federal government wants to ban gas stoves.”

The issue of gas stove bans has proven contentious, as Consumer Product Safety Commission Commissioner Richard Trumka, Jr. said in January 2023 that “any option is on the table” and “products that can’t be made safe can be banned” in reference to gas stoves, according to Bloomberg News. Those comments and subsequent actions from the Biden administration targeting gas stoves and other gas-powered appliances spurred considerable pushback from elected Republicans; the House passed a bill in June by a bipartisan vote that would prohibit a federal ban on gas stoves.

The administration has also committed to spending hundreds of millions of dollars to help municipal and state governments craft “building electrification” codes, a move which several energy policy experts told the Daily Caller News Foundation amounts to a de facto backdoor attempt to ban gas-powered appliances in a way that is less politically toxic than doing so via federal action.

Neither the city of Berkeley nor the White House responded immediately to requests for comment.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Appeals Court overturns Berkeley, CA gas stove ban

In a unanimous decision that could have national repercussions, a federal appeals court has overturned a ban on new gas-powered stoves in Berkeley, California. The ruling has metaphorical implications as well, as Berkeley’s ban on gas stoves was the first to be enacted in the nation.

By Adam Houser 

From CFACT

In a unanimous decision that could have national repercussions, a federal appeals court has overturned a ban on new gas-powered stoves in Berkeley, California. The ruling has metaphorical implications as well, as Berkeley’s ban on gas stoves was the first to be enacted in the nation.

The ruling also overturns a lower court’s ruling that had initially upheld the Berkeley law. The decision is likely to be appealed once again and it is very possible it could end up before the Supreme Court.

As reported by the Washington Times:

“A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco handed down the unanimous ruling during a brewing nationwide battle over natural gas.

“Dozens of other Democratic-led municipalities in several states have approved legislation to ban or restrict natural gas in new construction to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

“Roughly 85 localities, most in California, have adopted some prohibition on the direct use of natural gas, according to the American Gas Association. Municipalities in other Democratic-led states, including Washington, Massachusetts, New York and Oregon, have enacted laws to limit or ban natural gas appliances.”

The ruling comes in the wake of proposed regulations from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that would make it very prohibitive to manufacturers to develop, and consumers to purchase, new gas-powered stoves. While the Biden Administration has insisted it is not trying to ban gas stoves, regulations such as those by the EPA call such claims into question.

The Washington Times report continues, saying:

“The Biden administration is also looking for ways to end natural gas use in homes in a quest for net-zero carbon emissions in the U.S. by 2050.

“The Consumer Product Safety Commission is “researching gas emissions in stoves and exploring new ways to address health risks,” said Chairman Alexander Hoehn-Saric, although much of the research that found health risks from using the appliances was flawed.

“Mr. Hoehn-Saric said the commission is ‘not looking to ban gas stoves.’”

Read the story in the Washington Times here.

Author

  • Adam HouserAdam Houser
  • Adam Houser coordinates student leaders as National Director of CFACT’s collegians program and writes on issues of climate and energy.