Cecilia Bits, John Ryan, Seattle discussed on The Takeaway

The Takeaway
|

Automatic TRANSCRIPT

Of the ballot hoodoo who's supporting this and who's behind it. So far, it's really a product of the environmental movement and their allies. They spent a lot of effort this time around after a failure two years ago. They spent a lot of time building a big coalition to make sure that they weren't having any. Journal infighting. So it's basically big environmental groups groups representing communities of color, some of labor and some businesses as well. And who's on the flip side to that? Because we understand that. There are what twenty eight million dollars being funneled into advertising against the ballot measure. It's already just bumped up to thirty one million keeps coming up day by day and almost a more than ninety nine percent of that money opposing come from one source. It's the oil industry handful of big companies with names, you might recognize Phillips sixty six Chevron BP, their funding almost entirely this effort to block, what would be the first carbon tax or carbon fee in the United States. So John you interviewed Cecilia bits who's a climate scientists at the university of Washington in Seattle. And here's what she had to tell you the truth is we need to reduce dramatically. But the way we start is one step at a time. Right. We need to be not producing any human sources Kerman. Dioxide within few decades. And that's a very tough. What does she mean? I mean, what point do we start? What is her concern there? Well, I've also heard climate scientists say that now is the best time to start reducing emissions. But in better time would have been thirty years ago that it's really a very urgent problem. And when she says we need to get down to zero. That's what the the big UN panel internet intergovernmental panel climate change with her big fairly alarming report a few weeks ago saying the world has good down to zero emissions of carbon by the year. Twenty fifty and I would take unprecedented change to make happen and the point of Cecilia bits. There is that we we have to start somewhere. The opponents of this measure in Washington state say that well, yes, we agree that climate change is a problem. But we just think this is not the right way to go about tackling it. I mean is this really a big step? Or would this be a big step toward battling climate change? Or is it more like putting a band aid on a on a broken leg? I guess you could call a more of a band aid or. Maybe a baby step towards tackling a very big problem. It's noteworthy that that big you and report if you weeks ago highlighted carbon taxes as an effective way to tackle that problem and the Nobel prize for economics zero also went to William Nord house who's known for studying carbon taxes and their affect on the climate. So if the oil industry doesn't want this solution have they proposed alternative solutions given the urgency of that climate report and given the fact that this is the spell of measure is just a couple of days away from being voted in or out. In an interview I had with one of the main campaign no-campaign spokespeople. They refused upon repeated questioning to present a different proposal in another setting. The did say, well, we would like to see government provide incentives or what you might call subsidies to help big polluters reduce their pollution. So instead of making polluters pay the solution was to basically pay polluters to pollute less. Well, we'll be paying attention to see how this plays out on election day. John Ryan environmental reporter for K U O W in Seattle, John. Thanks so much. You're welcome..

Coming up next