I think a lot about this, and about the misapplication of attention in much Californian climate politics.
It's the cars, which mostly means its the land use.
Then I think about our housing shortage.
That's the lack of homes, which also mostly means it's the land use.
Supposedly progressive governments, across a wide swathe of coastal CA, have planed cities that impoverish their non-land-owning residents, accelerate the planetary crisis and cheat the young.
By any standard of effectiveness — much less equity — it's an unmitigated debacle.
That is, of course, unless your *only* standard of effectiveness is how effectively plans and policies enrich current landowners with windfall profits from rent-seeking behaviors.
Doing really well, there.
There is no way to solve California's real problems without huge changes is what we build, where we build it, and how we spend public resources for the greatest benefit to all.
All for clean energy, electrification, cheap storage, efficient appliances, sustainable farming/diets, low-carbon and non-toxic materials, reducing consumption, closing resource loops, flying less, etc.
But we can't actually tackle our crises unless we build better cities, fast.
The single most effective kind of climate advocacy that most people can engage in is climate YIMBYism — pressuring your local government to zone for more housing, approve housing faster, reduce "impact fees", cut parking, fund transit and design streets for people.
You will invariably meet the "building things causes emissions, so we need to stop building in this city to fight climate change" nonsense.
We could build new, low-car, zero-carbon, walkable, affordable, vibrant districts on brownfields, transit areas, sprawling parking lots and dead malls, everywhere, drop our climate impacts permanently—and do it *fast*.
Not being "able" to do so is a political choice—a wrong one.
When it comes to the planetary crisis, the public good depends on protecting people from inaction by shattering barriers to action, speed is justice, and scale is inclusion.
Most people are vastly more endangered by the worsening impacts of climate change, ecological collapse, systemic brittleness and societal instability than they are by the price tags of investments in action.
"Specifically, modern AI is better understood as AT — 'Artificial Time' that can be prosthetically attached to human minds. And highly capable computing systems are best understood as existing in superhistory rather than embodying superintelligence."
Being heavily invested, emotionally, in the idea that the planetary crisis means a total apocalypse — even the extinction of all humanity — is not only NOT a more realistic understanding of the world, it actually aids and abets those opposing rapid change. alexsteffen.substack.com/p/were-not-yet…