Rather than cost money, California's plans to fight global warming and improve energy efficiency will boost household incomes by $48 billion and create as many as 403,000 jobs in the next 12 years, according to a UC Berkeley economic study released Monday. Full Story »
Posted by Kaizar Campwala
A very short article on a very complex subject. However, I applaud the effort to delve beyond the attention grabbing numbers cited in the first paragraph, to explain how the study reached the conclusion it did. As always, I die a little inside when the result of complex quantitative model is summarized as 'Plan X will boost household income by $48 billion in 12 years.' But when it comes to journalism about science, beggars can't be choosers.
This article is ojective in the case that it presents both sides of the story. Instead of it just stating the pros about using less energy, writer, Baker, also states the critics view points about how implemting a cap and trade system would raise consumer prices, instead of lowering them. The main focus, however, is that the "Green efforts boost economy." Since this article is objective, it is quality journalism.
This story was informative and looked at both sides of the issue. The author balanced the view points with good quotations and I feel like I learned something.
If the government keeps taxing the hell out of corporations and the wealthy, they won't be able to open new businesses and provide jobs, which is what is going to fix this economy. I really hope alternative energy is an incentive to help America get back to where it needs to be.
Retrieving Comments
