Sustainable? Puh-lease... What do they actually produce there? Food? Fuel? So a 30% reduction in carbon emmisions is sustainable? Greenwashing BS. Lets see them commit to a flat or declining budget for city tax revenues for the next 23 years. Thats what they are looking at to even attempt to level out. Maybe its California green (you know, just put all the nasty coal power plants in Nevada so we can all pat ourselves on the back)

-G

More smoke and mirrors.  Sounds good though eh?  Let's vote for him.  Sustainable? How is that even remotely possible?
Don't underestimate the efficiency of urban centers as a place for raw materials, goods, people, capital and markets converge.

It's by far the most energy efficient way of housing millions of people. It's much easier for a farmer to send one truck (or train) to NYC where they have a huge market, rather than sending trucks in every direction.

It used to also be where most of the nation's manufacturing occurred. And it can return if fuel prices continue to increase and transportation becomes more expensive.

And we may have a flat to declining budget in real dollars as inflation runs away. Just because the dollars are going up doesn't mean they are worth the same amount.

This is why I'm advocating for low cost community based solutions that simply require political will to implement. The cost of installing bike lanes, greenmarkets, separated Bus/HOV lanes, closing off streets and roads is fairly little compared to the Second Avenue Subway, but politically requires more trade-offs that politicians hate. They would rather just add than trade-off...

"CA green" means 6,732kWh used per capita (#50 in the list of all states) vs. an average of 11,997kWh for the US. New York City, on the other hand, seems to be half of CA... that is pretty green... in my books... :-)
I wouldn't be so hard on California. Didn't the Governator signe SB1368 so Californa cannot use dirty, out of state coal power?