[Greenbuilding] NYC 90% emissions cut with windows

[Reuben Deumling]

On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Michael Iversen <miversen at uic.edu> wrote:

> **
> Therefore, amazingly enough, a 90% GHG emission reduction by 2050 is a
> recipe for risking irreversible catastrophic change, as 2050 will likely be
> far too late.
>

And what I find even more amazing is that just about no one is taking note,
revising what pass for energy plans, up the ante on how we're going to dig
ourselves out of this predicament. Oregon's Ten Year Energy Plan, and the
reports put out by the Oregon Global Warming Commission, for instance, are
full of wishful thinking and jargon and do not come close to acknowledging
a 350 target much less how we might achieve it. They do not include any
mention of people, of non-experts, of behavior, or anything else that a
non-expert would understand or have any meaningful input on.
http://www.oregon.gov/energy/Pages/Ten_Year_Energy_Plan_Draft.aspx
http://www.keeporegoncool.org/sites/default/files/ogwc-standard-documents/2011Report.pdf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20130320/aae5f22f/attachment.html>