Sooooo NOT Green
courtesy of www.letsgreenwashthiscity.org
I've mentioned here and elsewhere the PG&E "Let's green this city" broadsides that have been dousing San Francisco's public spaces with a sickly lime green unfit for a Gap t-shirt. We've also provided proof of how bogus they are, which today's Chronicle business page finally noticed.
To further substantiate that PG&E's commitment is more greenwashing than green, check out their opposition to Senate Bill 411, which would have advanced the Renewable Portfolio Standard for investor-owned utilities in California from 20 percent to 33 percent by 2020.
Southern California Edison supports the bill. So why not PG&E, which says it's seeking to become the "greenest utility in America?"
"Then why do they have all these advertisings?" Jim Metropulos, the Sierra Club's legislative representative in Sacramento, asked us, citing their front page ads in the Chronicle. This Sunday, strolling around my Mission neighborhood, I also noticed them on the front page of El Mensajero, which must be part of PG&E's new Latin flair.
Why don't they put all that advertising money toward purchasing green power instead?
digg •
del.icio.us •
sphere •
google
•
Comments (1)
OOPS. We just found out that SoCal Edison actually now OPPOSES the bill. They started out supporting it, but now they're against it until the California Energy Commission releases its November study on the feasibility of a 33 percent RPS.
Posted by Amanda![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.sfbg.com/blogs/politics/nav-commenters.gif)
|
September 28, 2007 02:48 PM