St. Paul City Council Considering Resolution on ‘Psychological Stresses’ of Climate Change

 

The St. Paul City Council will soon consider a resolution to acknowledge that the “climate crisis” has caused increased “economic hardship and psychological stresses.”

The resolution will be discussed at the city council’s November 6 meeting and builds on the “renewable, equitable, and locally-produced energy commitments expressed in the Climate Action and Resilience Plan.” That 60-page plan calls for a number of new climate initiatives throughout St. Paul, including reducing carbon emissions by 50 percent by 2030, and 100 percent by 2050.

The resolution opposes “proposed new fossil fuel energy infrastructure,” calling climate change an “existential threat.”

“The City of Saint Paul recognizes that the climate crisis caused by greenhouse gas emissions from burning fossil fuels and other sources is increasingly exposing Saint Paul residents to flooding, poor air quality, extreme heat events, loss of tree cover, economic hardship, and psychological stresses,” the resolution begins.

It claims that a 2017 report from the University of Minnesota showed that “Minnesota could retire the state’s coal plants, build no additional natural gas plants, and still meet energy demands reliably through clean, renewable energy sources while also reducing energy costs and tripling local clean energy jobs.”

The resolution praises Xcel Energy for leading “the nation in carbon-free energy production,” but expresses opposition to the company’s plan to build a new gas power plant in 2026.

“This proposal will make Saint Paul dependent on energy from fossil fuels for 25 percent of our electricity through 2030 and beyond, unnecessarily putting Saint Paul communities and our climate at risk at a time when renewable energy plus storage technology is already proving to be reliable and as affordable on a levelized-cost-of-energy-basis to new gas-fire generation,” the resolution says of the new gas power plant.

It concludes by declaring that the City of St. Paul will formally oppose the construction of the new plant via comment submitted to the Public Utilities Commission. The resolution is sponsored by by Council Members Jane Price and Mitra Jalali Nelson, and Council President Amy Brendmoen.

– – –

Anthony Gockowski is managing editor of Battleground State News, The Ohio Star, and The Minnesota Sun. Follow Anthony on Twitter. Email tips to [email protected].
Photo “St. Paul City Council” by St. Paul City Council.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Related posts

3 Thoughts to “St. Paul City Council Considering Resolution on ‘Psychological Stresses’ of Climate Change”

  1. […] this month to serve another four-year term after receiving 59 percent of the vote. She’s cosponsor of another resolution being considered by the city council that addresses the “psychological […]

  2. John D Bradford

    I thought we were supposed to worry about elephants in the traveling circus. Or better yet, we hear that our fellow citizens are worried the glaciers will melt and drown the muskrats?

    Between the St.Paul and Mpls City Councils, it is hard to find a wackier bunch of nut-cakes who fiddler around in emotionally lukewarm concepts which read like Nancy Drew mysteries without the hot chocolate.

    If this were lefty vs hard-core right ideologies being debated, it could be something to chew on,. But both of these groups focus on absurd and useless topics which feel good but advance the needs of citizens in the city not an inch.

    I never thought legislators should study government formally but I am beginning to see some value. The idea of representing folks is to move on major themes and matters which impact greatly on a broad cross-section of the society without heedlessly impinging on one or a million citizens’ rights and dignity.

    These people, with their petitions to the president and crap about “feeling good”, are useless, out of touch, and embarrassing.

    But watch them closely – they may find that sex or alcohol are bad for some and ought to be blocked.

    Then you’ll be sorry you supported these half-wits.

  3. Jeff

    Minnecalifornia.. Government induced rolling blackouts here we come. We’ll need to burn down the forests just to keep warm in the winter as the energy consumption in the winter is much higher. And “renewables” are stupid inefficient. Build a gen 2 nuclear power plant and quit being stupid.

Comments