To the editor: I disagree that AB 398, which would extend California’s cap-and-trade program “for the sake of the planet,” is the “balanced approach” that Gov.
While the current cap-and-trade program has not been shown to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, AB 398 would make things worse by prohibiting local air quality districts from enacting tougher greenhouse gas limits. It's no surprise this bill is supported by corporate polluters that will be able to pay their way out of reducing pollution.
Legislators who care about our state's future and clean air should reject this industry giveaway and instead demand that polluters make real emissions reductions at the source.
Adam Scow, Oakland
The writer is the California director for Food and Water Watch.
..
To the editor: Brown is to be congratulated for his continued leadership in the United States and globally on climate change, including his plan to extend the state's successful cap-and-trade program.
The High-Level Economic Commission on Carbon Prices, which I co-chaired with
California is showing the way to a much stronger, more attractive and sustainable pattern of growth. It is also demonstrating to the world that there is a clear commitment in the state to the modern way of doing things, thus greatly enhancing the confidence necessary for investment and economic growth.
Nicholas Stern, London
The writer is a professor and the director of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics and Political Science.
Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook
