Podcasts about ab32

Topic: Immigration Detention Centers, Segment: Ending Immigration Detention Centers: Until all of us free none of us are free. Participants: Hilda Cruz, Interfaith Movement for Human Integrity Reverend Jeffery Ryan , The Riverside Center for Spiritual Living Broadcast Air Date: 11/15/19 Time: 5:15 PM (PST) Station: KUCR 88.3 FM Riverside, CA KUCR station page: http://www.kucr.org Archive pages: https://soundcloud.com/stoppretending, http://www.dreport.org Send comments about this segment to: comments@dreport.org Segment produced in KUCR, the radio station of the University California in Riverside. Disclaimer: The views expressed are the sole responsibility of the respective speakers and do not represent the endorsed position of the UC Regents, UC Riverside or KUCR. Discussion Topics: -What is the relationship between the imprisonment of people and the subject of immigration? -What is the difference between an immigrant detention facility and general prison facilities? – Why are asylum seekers placed in detention centers? – The detention facility in Adelanto California holds approximately 2,000 people. -The Adelanto detention facility is a for profit facility that charges $120 a day for each person. -The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is funded by public federal money and then DHS contracts with private detention centers. – Do people in the detention centers have legal representation? -How does the non-visibility of detention centers facilitate their continual operation of violence? -How to we turn the hidden into the visible? -What are the alternatives to having people caged in detention centers? – Will AB32 terminate the renewal of contracts of detention centers in California? -Will the Adelanto Detention Center close with the passing of AB32? – What are the different systems that profit from manufacturing harm for people? -How do we create a just world where we truly feel safe? – We all have our own gifts as humans. – Why are people held in detention centers paid a 1 dollar a day for their work? – What is the nature of health care within detention centers? – How do “instant noodle” soup companies and telephone service providers benefit from the detention centers? – The bonds for release from detention centers can cost 30,000? – How does the pain being caused within the detention centers ripple out to our communities? – How do we envision a world that works for everyone? -Until all of us are free none of us are free.

Sven und Chris besprechen in der Jubiläums-Ausgabe einen Klassiker des Musik-Films: wir entstauben Blues Brothers! Hinterlasst uns doch gerne ein Feedback und eure Meinung zu dem Film und auch zu unserem Podcast.

Activist Amani Sawari talks about what the impact on people in private prisons and immigration detention centers will be if Governor Gavin Newsom signs AB32, which would phase out private prisons by 2028.

Nicole Lederer co-founded Environmental Entrepreneurs on the premise that the economy and the environment are not divergent interests. E2 has proven time and again that sound environmental policy is beneficial to our economy. At its core, E2 is a network of about 1000 leaders in business and that tent has now broadened to include military leaders and farms. This growth is all part of Nicole’s vision. With a background in zoology and healthcare, Nicole’s true talent is in activating unlikely alliances and finding common ground across the political spectrum—something that is all too rare in the climate policy arena.

Nichols served as CARB Chair in Gov Jerry Brown’s first administration in the late 70s and early 80s, and was appointed again in 2007 by Gov Schwarzennegar, a post she continues to hold today. In this conversation, recorded in front of a live audience at NRDC’s Santa Monica office in December 2018, Mary Nichols shares her personal story, from her roots in Ithaca New York, to her time as the first female reporter for the WSJ, to her post overseeing the air and radiation section of US EPA under Clinton, to one of her current roles as negotiator-in-chief with the Trump Administration, as they seek to pull the US out of the Paris Agreement and roll back California’s right under the Clean Air Act to regulate vehicle emissions.

Gary Gero has had a long career in energy, environmental policy and organizational leadership. From LADWP, where he oversaw renewable energy and energy efficiency programs, to leading the Climate Action Reserve where he played a key role in implementing California’s cap and trade program, to his current role as Chief Sustainability Officer for the County of LA, which includes nearly 90 cities. I enjoyed catching up with my old friend, and think you’ll enjoy getting to know Gary, his life and work and his advice to those seeking careers in sustainability.

California State Senator Fran Pavley is widely considered to be the mother of CA climate policy. From her humble beginnings as a 29-year 8th-grade civics teacher and then mayor of Agoura Hills, she burst onto the state political scene in 2000 as an Assemblymember before serving from 2008 to 2016 in the Senate. In addition to authoring the Global Warming Solutions Act, she held the Clean Cars Bill that Trump is now threatening to undo. Join our wide-ranging conversation about her career, her outlook on current climate policy, and her advice for those wanting to save the planet.

Over 95% of climate scientists have concluded that CO2 is the primary cause of global warming. Solving the problem requires a dramatic reduction in CO2 emissions. Some people are altruistic, but almost all businesses are bottom line oriented and will not reduce their CO2 emissions unless they have an economic incentive to do so. There are two realistic incentives: taxing CO2 emissions or setting up a cap and trade program for CO2. Since increasing taxes is politically unfeasible, the most practical approach is with a cap and trade program. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency implemented a cap and trade program for sulfur dioxide (the primary contributor to acid rain) in 1995. This program was a great success, and essentially eliminated the acid rain program. California passed AB32 in 2006 to accomplish the same goals for CO2 emissions. This law sets a cap on emissions from almost all sources, and gives polluting companies a certain number of allowances. If companies reduce their CO2 emissions (with renewable power generation, more efficient processes or smokestack scrubbers), they can trade these emissions to companies that still pollute. Many California companies succeeded in reducing their emissions. In fact, utilities installed so much wind and solar (courtesy of their RPS requirements) that they now have excess allowances to trade. But the gas refining industry didn't act, and starting on January 1, 2015 they will have to purchase extra allowances. How much? When a gallon of gas is burned it emits about 20 pounds of CO2, which is 0.009 tons. At the current market price of CO2 allowances of $12/ton, that extra CO2 amounts to about 11 cents. So the downside of cap and trade is that the price of gas in California is likely to go up by about a dime. The upside is that we get cleaner air and an even stronger green economy. But not everyone wants this outcome. In particular, the oil and gas refining industry tried to suspend AB32 in 2010 when they sponsored Proposition 23 (which was defeated by 62% of voters). This year they are sponsoring AB69, which will delay the application of cap and trade to transportation fuels. It's shaping up as a battle between deep-pocketed dirty fuel polluters -- and just about everybody else in California. I'm hopeful that California's cap and trade program continues to succeed, and maybe someday soon will be adopted by the other 49 states. Please join me on this week's Energy Show on Renewable Energy World as we talk about the real economic impact of cap and trade.

Guest this hour - Brian Jones (State Assemblyman). -Brian Jones talks with Mark Larson on AB32 as it was proposed, and what it intends to do! Why is it being reformed? Can it be stopped? He shares as well, his bill to show people what it's actually going to cost us. -The House of Representatives, does a 'hands-up' gesture on the floor, but why? -And Mark has MORE on the criticism of the Obama daughters over dress and turkey pardoning. Are they good role models? These aren't Mark's criticisms, it's from a certain Facebook user! LIVE, LOCAL - news and comment on The Mark Larson Show. 1170AM KCBQ!

Crops, Cattle and Carbon Cynthia Cory, Director of Environmental Affairs, California Farm Bureau Federation Paul Martin, Director of Environmental Services, Western United Dairymen Jeanne Merrill, California Climate Action Network Karen Ross, Secretary, California Department of Food and Agriculture Making California’s farms more energy efficient, and ensuring that farmers can adapt to a warmer planet, will be a decades-long challenge, agrees this panel of experts gathered by Climate One. That a serious conversation on the linkages between agriculture and climate change even exists in California is largely thanks to passage of the state’s landmark climate change law, AB32. Cynthia Cory, Director of Environmental Affairs, California Farm Bureau Federation, says the way to sell this new reality to her members, most of them family farmers, is to focus on the bottom line. “What they think makes sense, is energy efficiency,” she says. Jeanne Merrill, Policy Director, California Climate and Agriculture Network, elaborates on what AB32 could mean for farmers. The proposed carbon trading system, currently under development by the California Air Resources Board, would enable a farm, she says, “to reduce its own emissions, voluntarily, by being part of the carbon market.” Still other opportunities await farmers. A cap-and-trade system would generate revenue, a portion of which, her organization argues, “should go for the key things that we need to assist California agriculture to remain viable when temperatures rise and water become more constrained.” Paul Martin, Director of Environmental Services, Western United Dairymen, says farmers should be guided by a three-legged stool of sustainability: ethical production, scientific and environmental responsibility, and economic performance. His distilled message: “We need organic food because people want it. We need grass-fed because people want it. We need natural because people want it. And we need conventional because people want that kind of food.” California’s new Department of Food and Agriculture Secretary, Karen Ross, is encouraged that food had finally entered the policy debate, and expresses optimism that young people will carry it forward. “There’s a renewed interest in where our food comes from, how it’s produced, and who is producing it.” She highlights the role of cities in shaping a more sustainable food policy. “It’s the real intersection of agriculture, food, health, and nutrition,” she gushes. “Cities are saying, ‘We can do something about this.’ It’s about identifying open plots for community gardens. It’s about making sure access to nutritious, locally grown food is available. It’s about understanding what it takes to help those farmers on the urban edge, or right in our local communities.” This program was recorded in front of a live audience at the Commonwealth Club of California, San Francisco on June 14, 2011

Sustainable Urbanism Stuart Cohen, Executive Director, TransForm Mike Ghielmetti, President, Signature Development Group Ezra Rapport, Executive Director, Association of Bay Area Governments Infill development is hard. Even in California, one of the few states to have given local officials guidance on how to plan for growth, building smart, sustainable projects close to transit is a challenge, says this panel of experts.“People say, ‘We can’t do enough infill.’ There are too many obstacles to doing it right,” says Stuart Cohen, Executive Director, TransForm. “But those are obstacles we have control of. I am hopeful for the future, but we need to create a vision for the future that people can believe in. Infill development, if done right – and it’s a big if – can actually enhance our communities.” Mike Ghielmetti, President, Signature Properties, a Bay Area developer, describes a process riddled with uncertainty and risk. Will city council members be in office and planning officials their jobs over the five to 10 years it may take to build a project? Who will pay for schools and parks? Does the project site contain historic buildings? Is the site contaminated? Despite the challenges, “We have to push this vision forward,” Ghielmetti says. “We have to figure out a way to accommodate growth, so that we can provide housing for all levels of society. We can provide for new jobs and economic vitality.” Realizing that California could not meet its greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction goals under AB32 without tackling emissions from cars, lawmakers, in 2008, passed SB375. The law directly confronts emissions from transportation by forcing cities to plan for growth that reduces miles driven and clusters new development near existing transit and services. Ezra Rapport, Executive Director, Association of Bay Area Governments, says the process outlined in SB375 should help reduce uncertainty and insulate planning decisions from local political considerations. Under the law, 18 metropolitan planning organizations (MPO) will set regional 2020 and 2035 GHG reductions targets for cars. Each MPO will then prepare a Sustainable Communities Strategy that demonstrates how the region will meet its greenhouse gas reduction target. Rapport says those plans will remove some of the project-by-project uncertainty. “The election cycle is obviously paramount in all politicians’ minds,” he says. “But when they’re sitting on the city council, talking about the plan for growth that will take place over the next 10 to 20 years, they’re not really challenged in their election cycles by those decisions.” “In my point of view, if a project is properly planned, and it has community buy-in, and it’s continually refreshed, you will get support,” he says. This program was recorded in front of a live audience at the Commonwealth Club of California, San Francisco on May 25th, 2011

Reducing carbon emissions to mitigate the effects of climate change and help usher in a clean energy economy has been a contentious issue for companies and governments alike. Despite the failure of Congress to regulate carbon emissions nation-wide, the state of California is earning credibility as an economic and governance innovator by forging ahead with its own carbon-cutting legislation. In 2006, California passed Assembly Bill 32 – The Global Warming Solutions Act, which requires the state to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. After a failed attempt by the oil and gas industry to delay implementation of AB32 through a ballot initiative in the last election, the state is starting to employ carbon reduction strategies this year. In this episode, we’re joined by Kevin Kennedy, executive officer of California’s Air Resources Board’s climate division and main architect of the bill’s cap-and-trade rules. Kennedy describes the process and progress on climate policy in California and what it might mean for carbon management in the rest of the country. [Music: Debashish Bhattacharya, "Amrit Andand" from Calcutta Chronicles: Indian Slide-Guitar Odyssey (Riverboat, 2008); Beach House, "Zebra" from Teen Dream (Sub Pop, 2010)]

You can call California a bellwether state for environmental policies, or you can be accurate… and call it the rock star state for bold environmental movements. In 2006, Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed AB32 into law, which aimed to curb greenhouse gas emissions and move toward a clean energy economy. It gained worldwide attention as one of the first large economic forces in the world putting “green” on the front burner. But as he prepares to term out of office, an initiative backed by big oil companies from outside the state will appear on the November ballot. Today, we are joined by Steve Maviglio, who had a front row seat to the inner dealings around the original piece of legislation, and who currently heads the campaign going up against the crude industry in order to preserve California's landmark climate change bill.

By Alison van Diggelen, host of Fresh Dialogues You’ve no doubt heard about the November ballot measure (Proposition 23) which aims to to scupper California’s landmark climate change legislation, AB 32. In this Fresh Dialogues interview, Carl Guardino, CEO of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, didn’t pull any punches in his response to those behind the plan. “We’re […]

By Alison van Diggelen, host of Fresh Dialogues Ask Akeena Solar CEO Barry Cinnamon about the current brouhaha on repealing AB 32 and he’s likely to “get political.”  Since the 1970’s, he’s been a strong advocate for solar power and is an active member of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group. I met with Barry at the […]

California is in the process of implementing AB32, a global warming law designed to cut state emissions by 80% by 2050.  But the law has come under threat by anti-tax groups who are backing a ballot initiative to roll back the law in the name of jobs.  Terra Verde speaks with the Global Warming Action Coalition and the Apollo Alliance about what environmentalists are doing to fight back.   The post Terra Verde – The attack on California's global warming law appeared first on KPFA.

For years there's been buzz - both positive and negative - about generating ethanol fuel from corn. But thanks to recent developments, the Bay Area is rapidly becoming a world center for the next generation of green fuel alternatives. Meet the scientists investigating the newest methods for converting what we grow into what makes us go.

Lecture on California energy and climate. This lecture is part of the Energy Seminar, an interdisciplinary series of talks primarily by Stanford experts on a broad range of energy topics. (October 31, 2007)