WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:03.000 When Emily asked me to come and speak with you 00:00:03.000 --> 00:00:06.000 I immediately agreed for two reasons. 00:00:06.000 --> 00:00:10.000 One, I don't think I've ever refused Emily anything 00:00:10.000 --> 00:00:17.000 and second, this subject of how to talk about climate change 00:00:17.000 --> 00:00:20.000 how to talk about environmental issues in general 00:00:20.000 --> 00:00:22.000 is something that is really important to me. 00:00:22.000 --> 00:00:28.000 Actually I'm just returning from a conference that was down in Los Angeles. 00:00:28.000 --> 00:00:34.000 I'm part of a group of legislators, the National Caucus of Environmental Legislators. 00:00:34.000 --> 00:00:39.000 And we meet once a year and kind of compare notes 00:00:39.000 --> 00:00:42.000 see what's going on in the different states. 00:00:42.000 --> 00:00:47.000 We spent a lot of time talking about climate action this time. 00:00:47.000 --> 00:00:53.000 But we also spent a lot of time hearing from communication specialists actually 00:00:53.000 --> 00:00:57.000 about this question of looking at polling 00:00:57.000 --> 00:00:65.000 and looking at what kind of messages resonate with the public around the environment. 00:01:05.000 --> 00:01:07.000 I'll get into some of that. 00:01:09.000 --> 00:01:14.000 The short answer I'll tell you as a kind of preview is it depends who you're talking to. 00:01:14.000 --> 00:01:20.000 And that's really the key about everything related to the environment. 00:01:20.000 --> 00:01:28.000 And the ability to find the words to find the sort of common space 00:01:28.000 --> 00:01:34.000 to be able to talk to people from all around the state all around the country 00:01:34.000 --> 00:01:38.000 and certainly just looking at Oregon 00:01:38.000 --> 00:01:44.000 to find the terms that bring urban Oregonians together with rural Oregonians 00:01:44.000 --> 00:01:48.000 to be able to talk about these issues is really critical. 00:01:49.000 --> 00:01:55.000 So just to back up I don't need to tell you I'm sure 00:01:55.000 --> 00:01:62.000 that climate change, global warming, is increasingly shaping up 00:02:02.000 --> 00:02:11.000 to be one of the most critical problems of our time and of the future. 00:02:11.000 --> 00:02:15.000 And we just have to look out and see what's happening with our fire seasons 00:02:15.000 --> 00:02:18.000 to see what's happening with droughts 00:02:18.000 --> 00:02:24.000 to see what's happening with all sorts of disruptive environmental events 00:02:24.000 --> 00:02:26.000 to know that, 00:02:26.000 --> 00:02:31.000 what has been talked about for many years actually 00:02:31.000 --> 00:02:38.000 as global warming coming our way at some point is here. 00:02:38.000 --> 00:02:45.000 It's funny I just had a text exchange with one of my colleagues this morning. 00:02:45.000 --> 00:02:50.000 There's a piece in today's New York Times in the online New York Times. 00:02:50.000 --> 00:02:60.000 Basically the point of it is that we knew back in the 70's that global warming was coming. 00:03:00.000 --> 00:03:03.000 And if we had taken action back then 00:03:03.000 --> 00:03:07.000 we could have made substantial headway. 00:03:07.000 --> 00:03:12.000 And maybe even ultimately been on track to avoid the problem. 00:03:12.000 --> 00:03:14.000 But we did not. 00:03:14.000 --> 00:03:18.000 And it was funny because I wrote back to him 00:03:18.000 --> 00:03:21.000 that I had recently, going through my old papers 00:03:21.000 --> 00:03:27.000 periodically I get ambitious and I try to go through my papers and throw things out 00:03:27.000 --> 00:03:30.000 I came upon some notes that I took. 00:03:30.000 --> 00:03:35.000 This was back in probably 1983 or 84. 00:03:35.000 --> 00:03:40.000 I was teaching a class on dystopian science fiction. 00:03:40.000 --> 00:03:45.000 You know science fiction that looks at sort of nightmare scenarios for the future. 00:03:45.000 --> 00:03:49.000 And the whole point of it is you kind of fictionalize 00:03:49.000 --> 00:03:53.000 create that fictional world that you want to avoid. 00:03:53.000 --> 00:03:59.000 Right? And so dystopian science fiction gives you lessons 00:03:59.000 --> 00:03:64.000 for how do I take action today to avoid that coming down the pike? 00:04:04.000 --> 00:04:10.000 So I was teaching that class and I had a guest lecturer who was one of my colleagues in the physics department 00:04:10.000 --> 00:04:16.000 who came in and talked about this greenhouse effect 00:04:16.000 --> 00:04:22.000 that scientists had known about since the 1800's actually. 00:04:22.000 --> 00:04:34.000 And ultimately it was what we know of as the science of climate science and global warming. 00:04:34.000 --> 00:04:39.000 And it was very scary at the time. 00:04:39.000 --> 00:04:44.000 And then just personally I moved on to other things. 00:04:44.000 --> 00:04:49.000 And it was only later that I realized 00:04:49.000 --> 00:04:55.000 people talk about global warming as this new concept 00:04:55.000 --> 00:04:60.000 that it's kind of a newfangled sort of theory. 00:05:00.000 --> 00:05:03.000 But it's actually been with us quite a while. 00:05:03.000 --> 00:05:11.000 And I will say that Oregon has been among the states to take this problem seriously for many years. 00:05:11.000 --> 00:05:18.000 We have started enacting legislation, setting goals 00:05:18.000 --> 00:05:22.000 and taking different kinds of action 00:05:22.000 --> 00:05:25.000 for recording our greenhouse gas emissions 00:05:25.000 --> 00:05:34.000 and in some ways actually requiring power plants to offset their emissions in different ways. 00:05:34.000 --> 00:05:38.000 We actually started that in 1998, 99 00:05:38.000 --> 00:05:44.000 which is interesting because the legislature at that time was under Republican control 00:05:44.000 --> 00:05:49.000 and this came at that time. 00:05:49.000 --> 00:05:58.000 In 2007 the Democrats took control of the House 00:05:58.000 --> 00:05:64.000 and so they actually had control of the house and the senate 00:06:04.000 --> 00:06:07.000 as well as the governor's seat. 00:06:07.000 --> 00:06:13.000 And started doing some very ambitious things. 00:06:13.000 --> 00:06:19.000 Set goals for us to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions 00:06:19.000 --> 00:06:27.000 by the year 2050 to get them down below where they were in 1990. 00:06:27.000 --> 00:06:32.000 Not only below where they were, but 90 percent below where they were. 00:06:32.000 --> 00:06:37.000 I'm sorry, 75 percent below where they were in 1990. 00:06:37.000 --> 00:06:41.000 That's what the best science of the day said we needed to do 00:06:41.000 --> 00:06:44.000 every jurisdiction needed to do 00:06:44.000 --> 00:06:52.000 if we were to control the eventuality of climate change. 00:06:56.000 --> 00:06:59.000 And we also took some other steps. 00:06:59.000 --> 00:06:64.000 We created a global warming commission here for the state. 00:07:04.000 --> 00:07:11.000 We created an inter-university Oregon Climate Change Research Institute. 00:07:11.000 --> 00:07:20.000 It's housed at Oregon State University but it involves scientists from all the universities 00:07:20.000 --> 00:07:23.000 you know whose job it is to brief the legislature 00:07:23.000 --> 00:07:27.000 on the best climate science to keep us up to speed. 00:07:28.000 --> 00:07:34.000 We took some steps around energy efficiency 00:07:34.000 --> 00:07:40.000 in 2016 I think. 00:07:40.000 --> 00:07:44.000 Yes we passed legislation 00:07:44.000 --> 00:07:51.000 curbing the electricity that was generated by coal. 00:07:51.000 --> 00:07:56.000 Oregon actually has no coal-powered electrical plants 00:07:56.000 --> 00:07:61.000 but we do get electricity from other states that's generated by coal. 00:08:01.000 --> 00:08:05.000 This legislation requires us over time 00:08:05.000 --> 00:08:13.000 to have all of our electricity to be generated 50 percent through renewables. 00:08:13.000 --> 00:08:17.000 And nothing by coal after the year 2030. 00:08:17.000 --> 00:08:22.000 The first state in the country actually to do that. 00:08:22.000 --> 00:08:26.000 So we've been doing a lot of good stuff. 00:08:26.000 --> 00:08:32.000 But a year ago I had a committee hearing 00:08:32.000 --> 00:08:36.000 jointly with the House Energy and Environment Committee. 00:08:36.000 --> 00:08:42.000 And we heard from the Climate Change Research Institute 00:08:42.000 --> 00:08:53.000 that you know that best science that said we needed to reduce 75 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 00:08:53.000 --> 00:08:56.000 it's not good enough anymore. 00:08:56.000 --> 00:08:62.000 Because climate change is happening ever more quickly. 00:09:02.000 --> 00:09:05.000 More quickly that we had originally thought. 00:09:05.000 --> 00:09:08.000 Because when you have things like icecaps melting 00:09:08.000 --> 00:09:16.000 that means that less of the light is being reflected back 00:09:16.000 --> 00:09:18.000 more is being absorbed into the ocean. 00:09:18.000 --> 00:09:24.000 As the ocean absorbs more, that creates other kinds of feedback loops. 00:09:24.000 --> 00:09:27.000 And so the problem is getting worse and worse. 00:09:27.000 --> 00:09:36.000 The best science now at least for now says that we need to get to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. 00:09:36.000 --> 00:09:41.000 So that was a little reality check. 00:09:41.000 --> 00:09:44.000 But then we heard from the Global Warming Commission 00:09:44.000 --> 00:09:50.000 that you know those goals that you set of getting to 75 percent 00:09:50.000 --> 00:09:53.000 you're not on track to reaching those. 00:09:53.000 --> 00:09:58.000 And so we realized that you know, 00:09:58.000 --> 00:09:63.000 we've been talking about putting a price on carbon here in the state for a while 00:10:03.000 --> 00:10:07.000 but that we really had to get serious about it. 00:10:07.000 --> 00:10:11.000 And so we really committed to that last year. 00:10:11.000 --> 00:10:19.000 We had a whole series of joint meetings of the House and the Senate work with the governor. 00:10:19.000 --> 00:10:26.000 If you know politics at all you know it's rare that you get House, Senate working together, let alone with the governor. 00:10:26.000 --> 00:10:30.000 But we did that 00:10:30.000 --> 00:10:36.000 to explore if we were to put a price on carbon what would be the best way to do it? 00:10:36.000 --> 00:10:43.000 And if you're familiar at all with carbon pricing 00:10:43.000 --> 00:10:50.000 economic theory is you put a cost on that kind of pollution 00:10:50.000 --> 00:10:53.000 and it creates those incentives. 00:10:53.000 --> 00:10:62.000 The market will figure out a way to in the least costly way find solutions, to find alternatives. 00:11:02.000 --> 00:11:09.000 So that if you're burning a fossil fuel and that becomes more expensive 00:11:09.000 --> 00:11:13.000 then renewables become more attractive. 00:11:13.000 --> 00:11:16.000 Not necessarily because the state has said you must tap renewables 00:11:16.000 --> 00:11:20.000 but the market is just gonna move you in that direction. 00:11:20.000 --> 00:11:27.000 And the two primary ways if you are gonna put a price on carbon: one is just tax it. 00:11:27.000 --> 00:11:34.000 Say it's gonna be this much per ton of emissions 00:11:34.000 --> 00:11:40.000 and that cost is gonna go up over time 00:11:40.000 --> 00:11:43.000 as you're trying to get the emissions level down. 00:11:43.000 --> 00:11:48.000 And if you're an economist then you believe that there is a one to one relationship there. 00:11:48.000 --> 00:11:53.000 Put an extra dollar on it, it's gonna go down by this much. 00:11:55.000 --> 00:11:60.000 Not all of us are true believers. Not all of us are economists. 00:12:00.000 --> 00:12:05.000 And so some of us prefer another way of doing it 00:12:05.000 --> 00:12:08.000 and that is you set the caps 00:12:08.000 --> 00:12:14.000 that you want for emissions. 00:12:14.000 --> 00:12:16.000 A reducing schedule of caps. 00:12:16.000 --> 00:12:22.000 We know we want to be at, well 80 percent is the best science. 00:12:22.000 --> 00:12:26.000 We want to be at 80 percent by 2050. 00:12:26.000 --> 00:12:29.000 We know where we are here. 00:12:29.000 --> 00:12:36.000 Let's just put a cap on how much we can reduce and have it go down say five percent a year. 00:12:36.000 --> 00:12:39.000 What that means is the sooner we do that 00:12:39.000 --> 00:12:43.000 the less steep that drop needs to be. 00:12:43.000 --> 00:12:46.000 And so the less difficult it is, the more gradual. 00:12:46.000 --> 00:12:50.000 The sooner you get at it the more gradual that downward slope could be. 00:12:50.000 --> 00:12:55.000 And so what you do is then when you set that amount 00:12:55.000 --> 00:12:62.000 you tell industry that you can't emit more than this 00:13:02.000 --> 00:13:07.000 unless you purchase offsets 00:13:07.000 --> 00:13:12.000 or set up a market 00:13:12.000 --> 00:13:17.000 where those who are decarbonizing more quickly 00:13:17.000 --> 00:13:25.000 can actually sell credits to those who are decarbonizing less quickly. 00:13:25.000 --> 00:13:30.000 And they can work that out among themselves. Let the market do it. 00:13:30.000 --> 00:13:35.000 It's a system that we used to deal with the problem of acid rain 00:13:35.000 --> 00:13:41.000 back in the, I forget when it was, 70's, 80's. 00:13:41.000 --> 00:13:48.000 And it worked really well, worked really well, this kind of cap and trade method. 00:13:48.000 --> 00:13:54.000 And it's a program that California has been using 00:13:54.000 --> 00:13:57.000 for several years now. 00:13:57.000 --> 00:13:65.000 And the more we looked at it the more it made sense to us to join California. 00:14:05.000 --> 00:14:12.000 California created a market together with the Canadian provinces 00:14:12.000 --> 00:14:15.000 of Ontario and Quebec. 00:14:15.000 --> 00:14:23.000 And the northeastern states have a similar kind of system just for power plants 00:14:23.000 --> 00:14:28.000 where they're using cap and trade and it's been working really well there. 00:14:28.000 --> 00:14:32.000 And the more we thought about it the more it made sense to us 00:14:32.000 --> 00:14:37.000 to kind of join up with other states and do this in a regional kind of way. 00:14:37.000 --> 00:14:42.000 The ideal would be for us to do it as a nation, right? 00:14:42.000 --> 00:14:47.000 But it's also clear to us that that's not gonna happen anytime soon. 00:14:47.000 --> 00:14:53.000 There was talk back when President Obama was first elected 00:14:53.000 --> 00:14:58.000 of us having a cap and trade kind of system for the country. They were looking at it. 00:14:58.000 --> 00:14:64.000 And we were looking at it back then as a state as well. 00:15:04.000 --> 00:15:06.000 But then the recession hit 00:15:06.000 --> 00:15:13.000 and the president decided to focus on healthcare rather than climate change. 00:15:13.000 --> 00:15:18.000 And it just became unworkable. 00:15:18.000 --> 00:15:23.000 And then with the current administration it's more than unworkable. 00:15:23.000 --> 00:15:27.000 They're actively opposed to efforts 00:15:27.000 --> 00:15:32.000 even by the states to deal with this problem. 00:15:32.000 --> 00:15:37.000 So it's clear that we need to do it at a local level. 00:15:37.000 --> 00:15:42.000 And ideally joining as I say with other states and provinces. 00:15:42.000 --> 00:15:50.000 Just on its own, I don't know if you know this, California is the world's fifth largest economy. 00:15:50.000 --> 00:15:57.000 It used to be the sixth but they have just surpassed England, Great Britain 00:15:57.000 --> 00:15:61.000 as the world's fifth largest economy. 00:16:01.000 --> 00:16:12.000 If we join them and together with the other entities that are a part of this market that they're a part of 00:16:12.000 --> 00:16:16.000 we would be part of the world's fourth largest economy. 00:16:16.000 --> 00:16:20.000 So even though Oregon on its own can only do so much 00:16:20.000 --> 00:16:25.000 in concert with others we can do a lot. 00:16:25.000 --> 00:16:32.000 And that is one of the pushbacks that we've been hearing from those who are opposed to this 00:16:32.000 --> 00:16:38.000 is Oregon is just this little state in terms of our economy. 00:16:38.000 --> 00:16:46.000 We have a large land mass but most of it is forest and things like that. 00:16:46.000 --> 00:16:50.000 A lot of cattle, not a lot of people. 00:16:50.000 --> 00:16:54.000 How are we gonna solve this problem on our own? 00:16:54.000 --> 00:16:60.000 Let's wait and let it be handled at the national level. 00:17:00.000 --> 00:17:05.000 Well as I think I've mentioned the pushback to that, what I would respond to that 00:17:05.000 --> 00:17:09.000 is A, we can't wait for national action. 00:17:09.000 --> 00:17:17.000 And B, yes I agree with that. On our own, certainly we're not gonna solve climate change on our own. 00:17:17.000 --> 00:17:20.000 But in joining other states 00:17:20.000 --> 00:17:26.000 we can be part of a really powerful entity that can make a difference. 00:17:26.000 --> 00:17:32.000 And the more that other states join together 00:17:32.000 --> 00:17:40.000 the more this could become even more powerful. 00:17:40.000 --> 00:17:47.000 So that's the other benefit of us taking action here. 00:17:47.000 --> 00:17:50.000 We can become a model for other states 00:17:50.000 --> 00:17:56.000 to show them that you don't have to be California to do this. 00:17:56.000 --> 00:17:61.000 You can be Oregon, and that you can be Washington. 00:18:01.000 --> 00:18:04.000 And then you can be the New England states. 00:18:04.000 --> 00:18:15.000 And pretty soon you have more than half of this country's economy taking serious climate action. 00:18:15.000 --> 00:18:21.000 So we came to this conclusion. 00:18:21.000 --> 00:18:23.000 We drafted legislation. 00:18:23.000 --> 00:18:26.000 The challenge that we faced was that 00:18:26.000 --> 00:18:31.000 the way that the Oregon Legislature works 00:18:31.000 --> 00:18:34.000 is in the odd numbered years we have long sessions 00:18:34.000 --> 00:18:37.000 and that's when we do most of our really serious work. 00:18:37.000 --> 00:18:43.000 We come up with a new budget. We're together for five or six months. 00:18:43.000 --> 00:18:48.000 So we have a lot of time to really work difficult, controversial bills. 00:18:48.000 --> 00:18:54.000 During the even numbered years we only meet for about five weeks. 00:18:54.000 --> 00:18:60.000 And that is to deal with sort of acute problems that have arisen. 00:19:00.000 --> 00:19:04.000 If there are serious budget issues that need attention 00:19:04.000 --> 00:19:11.000 if there's something that has almost passed in the previous session but doesn't quite get there 00:19:11.000 --> 00:19:19.000 then you have that short session to get it over the finish line. 00:19:19.000 --> 00:19:26.000 What we were proposing to do was to pass, very ambitious, legislation in the short session. 00:19:26.000 --> 00:19:28.000 And at the end of the day we weren't able to do that. 00:19:28.000 --> 00:19:36.000 We had actually a majority of legislators who said we'll support this 00:19:36.000 --> 00:19:38.000 but we're not going to do it during the short session 00:19:38.000 --> 00:19:42.000 because we need everything to be worked out 00:19:42.000 --> 00:19:46.000 and you have our commitment. 00:19:46.000 --> 00:19:54.000 You know 'if I'm reelected I will support this in 2019. 00:19:54.000 --> 00:19:63.000 And ultimately the leaders of our legislature, the senate president and the speaker of the house, committed to that 00:20:03.000 --> 00:20:09.000 that they would support it in 2019, the session that we have coming before us. 00:20:14.000 --> 00:20:20.000 In fact we created a new joint committee on carbon reduction 00:20:20.000 --> 00:20:24.000 in order to draft this legislation. 00:20:24.000 --> 00:20:29.000 And it's being chaired by the speaker of the house and the senate president. 00:20:29.000 --> 00:20:34.000 Just as a sign to everyone that this is coming. 00:20:34.000 --> 00:20:38.000 Industry, come to the table. 00:20:38.000 --> 00:20:44.000 You know, the old adage: you're either at the table, or you're part of the meal. 00:20:44.000 --> 00:20:53.000 And so together with the governor's office we created a new office in the governor's office. 00:20:53.000 --> 00:20:56.000 An office of carbon policy. 00:20:56.000 --> 00:20:64.000 And did a budget allocation at the end of the short session in 2018 00:21:04.000 --> 00:21:11.000 to fund that, to fund all the work and the studies that would need to be done. 00:21:11.000 --> 00:21:15.000 And we're hopeful that we're going to be able to get this in place. 00:21:15.000 --> 00:21:20.000 You know it'll take a couple of years to get the program actually designed and put together. 00:21:20.000 --> 00:21:22.000 But that's the plan. 00:21:22.000 --> 00:21:26.000 And we envision it, this is a really key thing, 00:21:26.000 --> 00:21:32.000 so another pushback is that you're going to ruin Oregon's economy by doing this. 00:21:32.000 --> 00:21:37.000 Right? Because fossil fuel is going to become more expensive. 00:21:37.000 --> 00:21:41.000 Heating your home is going to become more expensive. 00:21:41.000 --> 00:21:44.000 Electricity is more expensive. 00:21:44.000 --> 00:21:48.000 Gas will be more expensive. It's going to ruin Oregon's economy. 00:21:48.000 --> 00:21:56.000 In the states that have done carbon pricing already the states or the provinces they have not seen that happen. 00:21:56.000 --> 00:21:62.000 In fact the most dynamic economies in this country 00:22:02.000 --> 00:22:10.000 are those New England and East Coast states and California 00:22:10.000 --> 00:22:13.000 that do have some kind of carbon pricing already. 00:22:13.000 --> 00:22:16.000 We actually think it can be really good for Oregon's economy 00:22:16.000 --> 00:22:22.000 especially the rural parts of our economy the rural parts of our state. 00:22:22.000 --> 00:22:30.000 Because first of all Oregon is not a state that really generates its own fossil fuels. 00:22:30.000 --> 00:22:37.000 Right? We import all of our fossil fuels that generate energy. 00:22:37.000 --> 00:22:43.000 But we have a lot of potential for wind power, solar power. 00:22:43.000 --> 00:22:48.000 We're already seeing it play out. We're already seeing that happen. 00:22:48.000 --> 00:22:51.000 There are parts of Oregon that have a lot of wind power 00:22:51.000 --> 00:22:55.000 and their local economies are doing great. 00:22:55.000 --> 00:22:61.000 Actually during the entire recession, those areas along the Columbia River and the Gorge that have wind power 00:23:01.000 --> 00:23:05.000 they never saw a downturn in their local economies. 00:23:05.000 --> 00:23:09.000 Their county budgets went up during that period rather than down. 00:23:09.000 --> 00:23:12.000 The only part of the state to have that. 00:23:12.000 --> 00:23:17.000 So we think that the kind of investments in renewable energy that would flow from this 00:23:17.000 --> 00:23:20.000 can really be good for Oregon's economy. 00:23:20.000 --> 00:23:28.000 But also if the goal here is to reduce emissions 00:23:28.000 --> 00:23:32.000 it's not just reducing emissions 00:23:32.000 --> 00:23:35.000 reducing carbon that we're generating 00:23:35.000 --> 00:23:39.000 but it's also getting carbon out of the atmosphere 00:23:39.000 --> 00:23:42.000 and locking it up somewhere. 00:23:42.000 --> 00:23:48.000 And that's what we refer to as carbon sequestration 00:23:48.000 --> 00:23:52.000 where you're taking carbon out of the atmosphere 00:23:52.000 --> 00:23:58.000 and putting it somewhere where it's not contributing to global warming. 00:23:58.000 --> 00:23:64.000 And as you probably know trees are just about the best way to do that. 00:24:04.000 --> 00:24:11.000 And if there's one thing we can do here in Oregon particularly Western Oregon it's grow trees. 00:24:11.000 --> 00:24:17.000 And we see this as a way of generating some revenues 00:24:17.000 --> 00:24:20.000 to invest in our forest practices 00:24:20.000 --> 00:24:24.000 so that forestry can be more sustainable. 00:24:24.000 --> 00:24:30.000 The trees that really lock up carbon well are the older trees actually. 00:24:30.000 --> 00:24:35.000 Those that are about 80 to 100, 120 years 00:24:35.000 --> 00:24:39.000 they really lock it up 00:24:39.000 --> 00:24:47.000 and they also have thicker bark. They're more resistant to fire and to pests. 00:24:47.000 --> 00:24:52.000 And so there are just a lot of benefits to that. 00:24:54.000 --> 00:24:63.000 More and more our industrial forestry in the state has gone to a shorter rotation, like 40 years. 00:25:03.000 --> 00:25:08.000 And you know they'll grow for 40 years, clear cut 00:25:08.000 --> 00:25:11.000 replant, 40 years later do the same. 00:25:11.000 --> 00:25:15.000 Those stands are very vulnerable to forest fire. 00:25:15.000 --> 00:25:20.000 They just burn up. 00:25:20.000 --> 00:25:22.000 And they're also not locking up as much carbon as we need to. 00:25:22.000 --> 00:25:28.000 So we see some of the revenues from this program 00:25:28.000 --> 00:25:33.000 used to help make our forests more sustainable, forest practices. 00:25:33.000 --> 00:25:38.000 Create more jobs in the forest, in planting, in thinning 00:25:38.000 --> 00:25:41.000 in you know forest health. 00:25:41.000 --> 00:25:48.000 We also see that the people who are already being hit the hardest by climate change 00:25:48.000 --> 00:25:51.000 and who will certainly in the future 00:25:51.000 --> 00:25:58.000 are tribes and low-income communities of color. 00:25:58.000 --> 00:25:68.000 Those who maybe are living in places that don't have good insulation, they're not weatherized. 00:26:08.000 --> 00:26:14.000 If they're driving they're probably driving older cars that are less fuel-efficient. 00:26:14.000 --> 00:26:23.000 And so we want to make sure that a lot of those revenues that are coming in by pricing fossil fuels 00:26:23.000 --> 00:26:32.000 go to help them make the transition to this new environment. 00:26:32.000 --> 00:26:36.000 And also to create new jobs for them and new pathways of opportunity. 00:26:36.000 --> 00:26:40.000 So that's also a really key part of that. 00:26:40.000 --> 00:26:52.000 We also want to make sure that the workers in our current economy are not displaced. 00:26:52.000 --> 00:26:61.000 It may be that carbon-intensive kinds of industries are going to have to become more efficient 00:27:01.000 --> 00:27:03.000 more energy-efficient. 00:27:03.000 --> 00:27:07.000 And as they do that they may have to retool completely. 00:27:07.000 --> 00:27:08.000 Workers could be laid off. 00:27:08.000 --> 00:27:12.000 So we want to make sure that there are retraining opportunities for workers 00:27:12.000 --> 00:27:19.000 and also for new pathways for opportunity for people who have been left out. 00:27:19.000 --> 00:27:22.000 So that's all part of it as well. 00:27:22.000 --> 00:27:33.000 So I think you can hear that what we're talking about has a lot of potential positive consequences, right? 00:27:33.000 --> 00:27:36.000 We can really reduce our emissions. 00:27:36.000 --> 00:27:41.000 We can become a model for other states to show that this can be done 00:27:41.000 --> 00:27:44.000 and it can actually help your economy not hurt your economy. 00:27:44.000 --> 00:27:55.000 We're looking for a program that is going to help those parts of the state that are suffering much more 00:27:55.000 --> 00:27:59.000 from our current economy more than the urban areas. 00:27:59.000 --> 00:27:61.000 The urban areas of our state right now are doing pretty well. 00:28:01.000 --> 00:28:04.000 Certainly not everyone in them 00:28:04.000 --> 00:28:11.000 but overall unemployment is very low in our urban areas. 00:28:11.000 --> 00:28:16.000 But in the more rural frontier parts of the state that's not the case. 00:28:16.000 --> 00:28:20.000 So we see this as a really beneficial thing. 00:28:20.000 --> 00:28:28.000 The challenge is how to convince everyone in the state that this is the case. 00:28:28.000 --> 00:28:35.000 Right? Because there is still a lot of resistance to what we're trying to do here. 00:28:35.000 --> 00:28:41.000 So that's what we're spending the next nine months doing. 00:28:44.000 --> 00:28:49.000 The next session will conclude in July 00:28:49.000 --> 00:28:53.000 or actually at the end of June it'll conclude. 00:28:53.000 --> 00:28:56.000 And so that's our deadline for getting this done. 00:28:56.000 --> 00:28:61.000 So from now to then we not only have to craft the program 00:29:01.000 --> 00:29:10.000 do the drafting and the working out agreements with industry and other partners. 00:29:10.000 --> 00:29:15.000 But we have to convince the general public that this is a good thing. 00:29:15.000 --> 00:29:21.000 And that takes us back to the whole point of your class. 00:29:21.000 --> 00:29:28.000 How do you talk to people about this in a way that they'll listen to and hear? 00:29:28.000 --> 00:29:33.000 And a lot of it does depend on your audience. 00:29:33.000 --> 00:29:45.000 We know from polling that everything related to the environment is a very partisan issue, right? 00:29:45.000 --> 00:29:53.000 If you're a Democrat then environmental concerns are going to be much higher 00:29:53.000 --> 00:29:57.000 on the list of where you're concerns are. 00:29:57.000 --> 00:29:64.000 I will say for most Oregonians environmental concerns are there. 00:30:04.000 --> 00:30:10.000 When they're polled, the environment and even climate change is on the list. 00:30:10.000 --> 00:30:20.000 But it's not at the most intense level of people's preoccupation, looking large. 00:30:20.000 --> 00:30:25.000 Now if you break that down as I say by party 00:30:25.000 --> 00:30:29.000 you'll see that for most Republicans it's way down here 00:30:29.000 --> 00:30:32.000 and for Democrats it's higher. 00:30:35.000 --> 00:30:40.000 When you look at age there's a real difference between older people 00:30:40.000 --> 00:30:44.000 irrespective of party 00:30:44.000 --> 00:30:50.000 if they're young it's going to be much higher than if they're older. 00:30:51.000 --> 00:30:56.000 And so if you're going to talk to Republicans 00:30:56.000 --> 00:30:60.000 you have to do it in a different way than you're talking to Democrats. 00:31:00.000 --> 00:31:04.000 If you're talking to young people 00:31:04.000 --> 00:31:07.000 you can talk about it in a different way than with older people. 00:31:07.000 --> 00:31:09.000 If you're talking to urban people 00:31:09.000 --> 00:31:14.000 you have to talk about it differently than rural people. 00:31:14.000 --> 00:31:18.000 And that is kind of what we have to figure out 00:31:18.000 --> 00:31:25.000 and that's just a lot of conversations about how to do the organizing around that. 00:31:25.000 --> 00:31:27.000 There has been a lot of work done 00:31:27.000 --> 00:31:35.000 in getting people to reach out to their legislators 00:31:35.000 --> 00:31:41.000 and to reach out to their communities, organize, etc. 00:31:41.000 --> 00:31:44.000 But there's a lot, a lot more to go. 00:31:44.000 --> 00:31:50.000 So I would love to hear your thoughts 00:31:50.000 --> 00:31:54.000 now that you're en route to being the experts in this area. 00:31:54.000 --> 00:31:58.000 It is a growing field in employment opportunities as well. 00:31:58.000 --> 00:31:62.000 It is actually really to be honest. 00:32:04.000 --> 00:32:09.000 It's a growing field for people who are advocating for climate change. 00:32:09.000 --> 00:32:12.000 It's also, I have mixed feelings about this 00:32:12.000 --> 00:32:19.000 a growing field for industries that want to greenwash their practices. 00:32:19.000 --> 00:32:22.000 Right? Are you familiar with that term greenwashing? 00:32:22.000 --> 00:32:31.000 You know where Shell Oil can talk about all that they're doing for the environment 00:32:31.000 --> 00:32:34.000 and how supportive they are of the environment. 00:32:34.000 --> 00:32:39.000 And there are some things that Shell is doing actually 00:32:39.000 --> 00:32:41.000 on behalf of the environment. 00:32:41.000 --> 00:32:48.000 But I think largely it's kind of a smokescreen for real productive action. 00:32:48.000 --> 00:32:53.000 It really doesn't help our economy at all to be importing fossil fuels. 00:32:53.000 --> 00:32:58.000 And as I don't need to tell you the price of gas just goes up and down. 00:32:58.000 --> 00:32:64.000 And it's very hard for business to predict what their costs are going to be. 00:33:04.000 --> 00:33:13.000 On the other hand if you're powering your plant mainly by solar or wind or hydro 00:33:13.000 --> 00:33:18.000 you know what it's going to be. It's very stable and steady 00:33:18.000 --> 00:33:20.000 and increasingly low. 00:33:20.000 --> 00:33:23.000 So there are real benefits. 00:33:23.000 --> 00:33:25.000 Climate change was going to be a problem back in the 70s. 00:33:25.000 --> 00:33:28.000 And I know Shell did studies and chose not to release their information. 00:33:28.000 --> 00:33:34.000 Did the government know explicitly that this was going to be a problem? 00:33:34.000 --> 00:33:40.000 I mean I guess Shell knew but did we know? 00:33:40.000 --> 00:33:41.000 Probably. 00:33:41.000 --> 00:33:46.000 I mean certainly some people in the government knew. 00:33:49.000 --> 00:33:59.000 At that time I think solar power was probably still kind of a fantasy. 00:33:59.000 --> 00:33:63.000 Right? I don't think people at that time were ready to predict 00:34:03.000 --> 00:34:07.000 that renewables would really be able to bring the costs down 00:34:07.000 --> 00:34:10.000 and have it be workable. 00:34:10.000 --> 00:34:14.000 But if we had started doing some things that we definitely could do back then 00:34:14.000 --> 00:34:19.000 like more energy efficiency, more insulation of homes 00:34:19.000 --> 00:34:22.000 more of that kind of thing 00:34:22.000 --> 00:34:26.000 that we could have started really making some strides. 00:34:26.000 --> 00:34:32.000 Again, I've been thinking about this lately 00:34:32.000 --> 00:34:35.000 trying to come up with good analogies for this. 00:34:35.000 --> 00:34:38.000 And as you know as communicators 00:34:38.000 --> 00:34:41.000 coming up with a good analogy 00:34:41.000 --> 00:34:48.000 something where you talk about something complex in terms of something simple and understandable 00:34:48.000 --> 00:34:52.000 that can really help to convince people. 00:34:53.000 --> 00:34:60.000 Those of you who are young are probably already being told by people 00:35:00.000 --> 00:35:04.000 that it's never too early to start thinking about retirement. 00:35:04.000 --> 00:35:08.000 And start thinking about setting money aside. 00:35:08.000 --> 00:35:13.000 Because when you're young you don't have to set aside that much 00:35:13.000 --> 00:35:17.000 because the benefit will build over time. 00:35:17.000 --> 00:35:22.000 If you start early you are gonna have to set aside a lot less. 00:35:22.000 --> 00:35:27.000 On the other hand if you're 50 years old 00:35:27.000 --> 00:35:33.000 and you decide hey that's where I want to retire in 10 years or 15 years 00:35:33.000 --> 00:35:35.000 I should start setting money aside. 00:35:35.000 --> 00:35:41.000 You're gonna have to set aside two thirds of your paycheck at that point which is really hard. 00:35:41.000 --> 00:35:46.000 Well it's kind of similar here in terms of this decarbonization. 00:35:46.000 --> 00:35:51.000 Right? The longer the time period that you're playing with 00:35:51.000 --> 00:35:54.000 the more gradual you can be. 00:35:54.000 --> 00:35:57.000 The longer you wait the harder it's gonna be. 00:35:57.000 --> 00:35:64.000 The tendency that we always have is to kick the can down the road. 00:36:04.000 --> 00:36:06.000 No matter what we're talking about. 00:36:06.000 --> 00:36:11.000 And so I have some of my colleagues who are saying 00:36:11.000 --> 00:36:18.000 well ok you need to be at such and such a place at 2050 00:36:18.000 --> 00:36:24.000 let's talk in like 2030 or 2035. 00:36:24.000 --> 00:36:28.000 But again the longer we wait 00:36:28.000 --> 00:36:30.000 the harder it's going to be. 00:36:30.000 --> 00:36:36.000 That decarbonization curve instead of being kind of like this 00:36:36.000 --> 00:36:39.000 it's gonna have to be like this. 00:36:39.000 --> 00:36:42.000 And there you're gonna talk about some real disruptions. 00:36:42.000 --> 00:36:45.000 And businesses will go out of business 00:36:45.000 --> 00:36:49.000 because it's going to be hard for them to convert overnight. 00:36:49.000 --> 00:36:56.000 Yeah so these are the kinds of metaphors and analogies 00:36:56.000 --> 00:36:62.000 that we're struggling to come up with to help make things clearer for people. 00:37:02.000 --> 00:37:07.000 Unfortunately these weather events that we're having and these fires 00:37:07.000 --> 00:37:12.000 are helping us because people are seeing it. 00:37:12.000 --> 00:37:17.000 Now you do have some people who are resisting even that. 00:37:17.000 --> 00:37:21.000 Even though we're seeing these horrendous fires in our forests 00:37:21.000 --> 00:37:24.000 and we know that they're going to be worse and worse 00:37:24.000 --> 00:37:30.000 because it's a function of the hot days being longer. 00:37:30.000 --> 00:37:36.000 The fire season starts sooner and it extends later. 00:37:36.000 --> 00:37:38.000 So you're just going to have more acres burning. 00:37:38.000 --> 00:37:42.000 But in addition with the days being hotter 00:37:42.000 --> 00:37:45.000 it just makes the fires more intense. 00:37:45.000 --> 00:37:54.000 Another sort of side effect of climate change and global warming is very intense wind patterns. 00:37:54.000 --> 00:37:58.000 You have these wind patterns. 00:37:58.000 --> 00:37:63.000 The wind spreads the fires a lot more than they were before. 00:38:03.000 --> 00:38:07.000 You would think that would be kind of a no-brainer 00:38:07.000 --> 00:38:14.000 but we also have people who are questioning the fact that we've reduced our timber harvests 00:38:14.000 --> 00:38:20.000 and the reason that we have bigger fires is because there's more wood to burn. 00:38:20.000 --> 00:38:24.000 And so you have to figure out a way. 00:38:24.000 --> 00:38:28.000 And there is some science to support that. 00:38:28.000 --> 00:38:34.000 That our forests have become unhealthy for two reasons. 00:38:34.000 --> 00:38:37.000 One, we actually are suppressing fires more. 00:38:37.000 --> 00:38:40.000 So fires are kind of a natural thing. 00:38:40.000 --> 00:38:49.000 And if left to burn that can actually be good in terms of survival of the fittest. 00:38:49.000 --> 00:38:52.000 Some of the big trees remain, the little ones burn 00:38:52.000 --> 00:38:56.000 and overall it makes our forests healthier. 00:38:56.000 --> 00:38:64.000 But the challenge is that we have more people who are building homes 00:39:04.000 --> 00:39:07.000 closer to the danger zones. 00:39:07.000 --> 00:39:13.000 We have to protect them so we have this build up of fuel. 00:39:13.000 --> 00:39:15.000 That is an issue. 00:39:15.000 --> 00:39:20.000 But we therefore have to invest in making our forests healthier. 00:39:20.000 --> 00:39:28.000 But at the same time understand that the fires are gonna get worse just because of climate change. 00:39:28.000 --> 00:39:32.000 That's the other reason I say that we should step forward. 00:39:32.000 --> 00:39:34.000 If Oregon doesn't, who will? 00:39:34.000 --> 00:39:40.000 Already a lot of our power as I mentioned comes from hydro, right? 00:39:40.000 --> 00:39:46.000 We don't rely heavily on coal generated power 00:39:46.000 --> 00:39:49.000 to the extent that other states do. 00:39:49.000 --> 00:39:57.000 We don't have fracking here or other fossil fuel generation. 00:39:57.000 --> 00:39:64.000 So we don't have to worry about the effects on our workforce of ending that. 00:40:04.000 --> 00:40:08.000 What's kind of intriguing now is talk about 00:40:10.000 --> 00:40:21.000 there's some research that's showing that the amount of, if you'll pardon me, burping and farting that cattle do 00:40:21.000 --> 00:40:23.000 which generates this methane 00:40:23.000 --> 00:40:28.000 which is really significant it is really a significant thing. 00:40:28.000 --> 00:40:29.000 Yeah, yeah. 00:40:29.000 --> 00:40:33.000 A lot of it is a function of the diets that they're on. 00:40:33.000 --> 00:40:37.000 and if we can change their diets 00:40:37.000 --> 00:40:43.000 that actually helps the problem. 00:40:43.000 --> 00:40:51.000 One of the foods that apparently can help with that is kelp of all things. 00:40:51.000 --> 00:40:56.000 And there's research that's showing 00:40:56.000 --> 00:40:62.000 that a cattle diet that's supplemented with kelp, seaweed 00:41:02.000 --> 00:41:09.000 can actually reduce their methane by up to 50 percent. 00:41:09.000 --> 00:41:16.000 Oregon also has a real capacity to grow kelp. 00:41:16.000 --> 00:41:25.000 And so there's some people who are thinking about this as a really rich area for a positive feedback loop. 00:41:25.000 --> 00:41:31.000 There is still talk though and some efforts to establish a coal export station on the Oregon coast 00:41:31.000 --> 00:41:35.000 and to move coal in open rail cars through our communities. 00:41:35.000 --> 00:41:38.000 Any update or status on where that's at 00:41:38.000 --> 00:41:43.000 or if there are measures to prevent that happening through the legislature? 00:41:43.000 --> 00:41:52.000 Yeah our concern actually right now is more with oil and gas export than coal. 00:41:52.000 --> 00:41:57.000 Washington is wrestling more with the coal piece of it. 00:41:59.000 --> 00:41:68.000 I have not heard that there are any serious plans to do coal export 00:42:08.000 --> 00:42:12.000 but oil export perhaps 00:42:12.000 --> 00:42:17.000 and definitely liquified natural gas export. 00:42:17.000 --> 00:42:22.000 I don't know if you'll be talking about the Jordan Cove Project in Coos Bay 00:42:22.000 --> 00:42:28.000 which is still very much under discussion. 00:42:28.000 --> 00:42:31.000 It looked as if it wasn't going to get its permits 00:42:31.000 --> 00:42:35.000 but now under the Trump administration 00:42:36.000 --> 00:42:42.000 climate if I can use that word, the climate has really improved for it. 00:42:42.000 --> 00:42:48.000 And so we may have to take action as a state. 00:42:48.000 --> 00:42:52.000 The interesting thing about that is that 00:42:52.000 --> 00:42:60.000 if Coos Bay becomes a liquid natural gas export area 00:43:00.000 --> 00:43:04.000 the process of liquifying the natural gas which is what you do 00:43:04.000 --> 00:43:10.000 you take the gas you liquify it and then you put it on a boat and send it over to Asia. 00:43:10.000 --> 00:43:16.000 Liquifying gas is a very energy-intensive process. 00:43:16.000 --> 00:43:20.000 And when they first proposed the project 00:43:20.000 --> 00:43:25.000 they were gonna do it with offshore wind power 00:43:25.000 --> 00:43:28.000 and so some of us got really intrigued by that. 00:43:28.000 --> 00:43:32.000 Wow we could have offshore wind and they would pay for it. 00:43:32.000 --> 00:43:40.000 And gas well maybe it's a good bridge kind of fuel. It's cleaner than coal. 00:43:40.000 --> 00:43:43.000 You know, so it was kind of attractive. 00:43:43.000 --> 00:43:47.000 But then it turned out that that would be too expensive. 00:43:47.000 --> 00:43:52.000 And so now what they're proposing is to burn gas to liquify gas. 00:43:52.000 --> 00:43:59.000 And in doing that the Jordan Cove Project would immediately become the largest emitter 00:43:59.000 --> 00:43:63.000 of greenhouse gases in the state. 00:44:03.000 --> 00:44:10.000 And so they are as you can imagine pushing to be exempt from the program. 00:44:10.000 --> 00:44:15.000 And that will be one of those sort of political battles that will happen. 00:44:15.000 --> 00:44:22.000 Their argument is that they need to be protected 00:44:22.000 --> 00:44:27.000 because if it's not done in Oregon they'll just go somewhere else. 00:44:27.000 --> 00:44:32.000 And this is a concept that we wrestle with. 00:44:32.000 --> 00:44:37.000 It's a concept known technically as leakage. 00:44:37.000 --> 00:44:42.000 If you have a business that's emitting here in Oregon 00:44:42.000 --> 00:44:47.000 it doesn't do us any good to have that business leave Oregon 00:44:47.000 --> 00:44:52.000 and go to Idaho or go to Washington or go somewhere else and emit there 00:44:52.000 --> 00:44:56.000 because global warming is a global problem, right? 00:44:56.000 --> 00:44:63.000 And so we have to figure out a way to get them so that they are committed to reductions 00:45:03.000 --> 00:45:06.000 in a kind of gradual way. 00:45:06.000 --> 00:45:12.000 Even though we might prefer to really get them to stop their practices overnight 00:45:12.000 --> 00:45:18.000 we have to figure out a way to do it in a way that won't just cause them to pick up and move somewhere else. 00:45:18.000 --> 00:45:23.000 The Jordan Cove people are making that same argument. 00:45:23.000 --> 00:45:25.000 Now there are two problems with that argument 00:45:25.000 --> 00:45:30.000 which is why I think we probably won't agree with them. 00:45:30.000 --> 00:45:34.000 One is that first of all they're not even here yet. 00:45:34.000 --> 00:45:37.000 So it's not like we're going to put them out of business. 00:45:37.000 --> 00:45:39.000 They have no business, right? 00:45:39.000 --> 00:45:42.000 But second of all 00:45:42.000 --> 00:45:45.000 where exactly are they gonna go to? 00:45:45.000 --> 00:45:48.000 California is pricing carbon. 00:45:49.000 --> 00:45:55.000 Washington is on track as we are to price carbon. 00:45:55.000 --> 00:45:58.000 They actually have a measure on the ballot this November 00:45:58.000 --> 00:45:61.000 that has a very good chance of passing 00:46:01.000 --> 00:46:05.000 that would start pricing carbon. So Washington's out. 00:46:05.000 --> 00:46:08.000 British Columbia is already pricing carbon. 00:46:08.000 --> 00:46:13.000 So where exactly are they gonna go to? 00:46:13.000 --> 00:46:17.000 And that too is the real benefit of acting regionally. 00:46:17.000 --> 00:46:23.000 Right? Because then this kind of thing becomes much more difficult. 00:46:23.000 --> 00:46:32.000 I do hear that British Columbia is still talking about maybe a coal or oil export facility 00:46:32.000 --> 00:46:36.000 but I'm not quite sure where they are. 00:46:36.000 --> 00:46:42.000 And my other one is next week we'll also start diving a little bit more deeply into hydraulic fracturing 00:46:42.000 --> 00:46:44.000 and they'll be watching Gasland II 00:46:44.000 --> 00:46:49.000 I know that on and off there's been talk about particularly the central and eastern parts of Oregon 00:46:49.000 --> 00:46:55.000 potentially having some good resources for fracking as an energy source. 00:46:55.000 --> 00:46:58.000 Is that likely to be in the mix when we look at this legislation in 2019? 00:46:58.000 --> 00:46:64.000 Maybe. It's actually more southwestern Oregon actually. 00:47:04.000 --> 00:47:08.000 Again actually ironically in the Coos Bay area. 00:47:08.000 --> 00:47:14.000 They used to mine coal in that area and there is gas there. 00:47:14.000 --> 00:47:18.000 And there is some exploration that's happening now 00:47:18.000 --> 00:47:24.000 that is not hydraulic but they are looking at it. 00:47:24.000 --> 00:47:29.000 And nothing is in the works for anytime soon 00:47:29.000 --> 00:47:32.000 but you never know. 00:47:32.000 --> 00:47:40.000 And so you will see legislation I'm sure prohibiting fracking in Oregon 00:47:40.000 --> 00:47:42.000 just in case. 00:47:42.000 --> 00:47:48.000 You will also see legislation I think around offshore oil drilling. 00:47:48.000 --> 00:47:54.000 Which we actually have a moratorium on it, on offshore drilling 00:47:54.000 --> 00:47:59.000 within Oregon's territorial sea which is three miles out. 00:47:59.000 --> 00:47:64.000 But the Trump administration is talking about 00:48:04.000 --> 00:48:09.000 opening up our offshore waters to drilling. 00:48:09.000 --> 00:48:16.000 I don't know that they're gonna want to do it off Oregon's shore 00:48:16.000 --> 00:48:20.000 but something that we're looking at that is kind of a new way of thinking about this 00:48:20.000 --> 00:48:24.000 among the states, environmentalists at the states, 00:48:24.000 --> 00:48:32.000 that OK, once it's beyond three miles we really don't have jurisdiction there 00:48:32.000 --> 00:48:35.000 other than to complain as a state 00:48:35.000 --> 00:48:38.000 but on the other hand 00:48:38.000 --> 00:48:46.000 that oil that may be extracted three miles out it's got to go somewhere. 00:48:46.000 --> 00:48:54.000 And what we can prohibit is that it be then piped onto the mainland. 00:48:54.000 --> 00:48:59.000 Because then it will have to go through Oregon territory so we can control that. 00:48:59.000 --> 00:48:66.000 And we can also prohibit it from coming by boat to Oregon ports. 00:49:06.000 --> 00:49:08.000 So we're looking at, 00:49:08.000 --> 00:49:13.000 our moratorium is due to expire in 2020. 00:49:13.000 --> 00:49:16.000 So we would have to renew it 00:49:16.000 --> 00:49:22.000 and we were kind of thinking that we would just make it a permanent ban at that point. 00:49:22.000 --> 00:49:25.000 But now we may also add this other component 00:49:25.000 --> 00:49:34.000 of also just prohibiting any kind of fossil fuel that's extracted beyond the three mile limit 00:49:34.000 --> 00:49:36.000 from traveling through Oregon. 00:49:36.000 --> 00:49:40.000 Not permitting that infrastructure. 00:49:40.000 --> 00:49:44.000 So something more for you to think about. 00:49:44.000 --> 00:49:49.000 The other thing we're going to be working on next year I will say that will be a big priority is diesel. 00:49:49.000 --> 00:49:52.000 Diesel engines. 00:49:52.000 --> 00:49:55.000 And it's something that we have worked on in the past 00:49:55.000 --> 00:49:57.000 and we will continue to work on it. 00:49:57.000 --> 00:49:61.000 applause