I'm glad Mayor Burt mentioned "social responsibilities".

The overhaul of the average Palo Altan's lifestyle from one based largely on fossil-fuel pollution to one based on renewable energy will cost money for the city and its residents. If those "responsibilities" are not articulated in a thoughtful manner however, most residents won't understand WHY that money should be spent.

The city, our utility, and the Palo Alto Weekly could join together to help connect the dots for people - from the causes (pollution from household gas, conventional cars, as well as purchases of cheeseburgers and airline tickets), to the horrible consequences (famines, resource wars, mass migration, petro-dictatorships, etc).

Without being given a careful explanation of the magnitude of the problem, and our role in creating it, I don't believe most residents will want too much effort taken to resolve the matter.

As evidence, look at the comments section following articles like this one. There seems to a lot of misunderstanding.

Protestors have been causing havoc in the UK.

Practically everything we use on a daily basis is made with oil (fossil fuel) by products.

The emissions do need to be reduced, but everything from the tires on our bikes to the plastic in our high tech devices, and the shoes on our feet and the clothes on our backs have them too.

The next generation should be thinking of alternative materials to replace plastic, nylon, etc. just as much as alternative energy sources.