Don's Tuesday Column

             THE WAY I SEE IT   by Don Polson  Red Bluff Daily News   12/22/2015

               Hope for the season and year

This week leads up to the Christmas Day commemoration of the birth of the Savior, Jesus Christ. For those that revere the event, the season of Advent precedes, and prepares us for, the arrival of Christmas. Hope is perhaps the finest, certainly the most appropriate, of emotions that rise in the heart. It could be well said that, setting aside the religious rituals and services, hope is of nearly limitless supply and equally needed for individual souls and also for many groups of people by belief, race, nationality or circumstance.

Where there is a downtrodden, beset upon person, family, community, culture or country—there is the reason for hope of deliverance from misfortune and persecution. I’m not proselytizing for my faith; I’m only suggesting that anyone can identify with the hope that springs from the heart’s desire for freedom from imposed limits, and freedom for fulfillment of one’s desired destiny. In that spirit, I say Merry Christmas to you.

There is another kind of hope, a more secular, mundane desire for one’s preferred outcome or direction. This can be an expression of personal, community or national betterment. Upon reflection, as we move toward an election year, this kind of hope often finds its expression in candidates, campaigns, issue advocacy and such.

It’s in this commonality of purpose, no matter one’s positions or preferred outcomes, in which I would like to acknowledge the good intentions among all of us for this coming cycle. I’ll have no harshness this week towards anyone at any level of our political disputes. Being magnanimous towards one’s adversaries can be refreshing and might be returned in kind—or not.

I’ll always have a place in my heart for the tale of the WWI battlefield where soldiers on both sides began singing carols, on Christmas Eve, and ended up engaging in some sort of athletic game and revelry together in “no man’s land.” Of course, after that harmonious respite, the trench warfare resumed, to the detriment of many, dashing the hopes of most, and leaving few with the satisfaction they expected when hostilities began.

Before me are numerous Daily News articles on the subjects of energy, climate change and global warming, with predictions, warnings, goals and expectations. There is a real and deep divergence among the voters and their leaders. There is consternation and accusations on both sides—one convinced of certain catastrophe to follow inaction, or even insufficient action, to reduce so-called “greenhouse gasses”; the other just as adamant that the threat is overblown and that the cost, to implement the desired measures, is a catastrophe of its own.

Consider from “Gov. Brown: Millions are suffering because of climate change” (July 22), to “UC leader: Fighting climate change is crucial” (October 28), to “Pope says it will be ‘catastrophic’ if interests derail climate talks” (November 27). One would expect that the Pope’s pronouncement would give it a rather transcendent imprimatur, perhaps a final word on the matter. But I also saw “Minority of US Catholics know pope’s climate views” on August 20; perhaps the Pope’s own flock is less than concerned or attentive to his seriousness on the issue.

In the August 18 issue, we were informed, “California measure fails to generate green jobs” with some rather sobering analysis of an obviously well intended ballot measure from 2012. The Clean Energy Jobs Act received strong majority support for “closing a tax loophole for multistate corporations…(raising) taxes on corporations (to) generate clean jobs by funding energy-efficiency projects in schools.” However, “barely one-tenth of the promised jobs have been created, and the state has no comprehensive list to show how much work has been done or how much energy has been saved.

“Money is trickling in at a slower-than-anticipated rate, and more than half of the $297 million given to schools so far has gone to consultants and energy auditors. The board, created to oversee this project and submit annual progress reports to the Legislature, has never met.” There are probably some “I told you so’s” among those congenitally suspicious of well-intended ballot measures that authorize the government to collect the money first, with promises of great things to come. However, today’s column avoids blame and finger pointing.

I read, on October 8, that the “State wants renewable energy for half of its power by 2030. I’ll be 80 that year; I’ve just turned 65 and have seen energy prices and costs dramatically rise over the years of analyzing PG&E bills. Just 4 short years ago, a similar usage, between 600 and 700 kilowatt hours for the month, was charged at about 12 cents per kwh for a total bill of less than $80. It’s now 17 cents per kwh for a bill well over $100 (higher without my medical device allowance). The only thing changed: the mandated building and use of renewable wind and solar that costs closer to 30 cents per kwh, compared to 5 cents for coal power.

Is the absolute prohibition on using any energy derived from coal a fanatical overreaction? It certainly is a structural inflation of energy costs that impact the poorest, and fixed-income seniors, the most. Many have rightly pointed to the artificially inflated cost of energy in California as a primary motivation for businesses to relocate, reduce operations in our state, or not even consider starting up here. Electricity is 7 cents per kwh in Bend, Oregon. Hmm.

            Finally, an August 4 Daily News AP article, “Obama power plant rules spark 2016 fight over climate change,” gave readers a “heads up” on an issue about which those on every side will be vesting their hopes, dare I say fears, leading up to next years elections. Would that we all could win but that might be hoping for too much.