Think local

For oceanic countries, it’s rising sea levels and dying coral reefs. In the tropics, it’s rain forest destruction and crop failure. In California, weather swings and wildfires are the front-window reminders of climate change.

There are jarring and vivid perils that can’t be avoided. But in this region, there should be another worry. Where we live is just as dangerous as how we live. Long commutes obliged by high housing costs generate the atmosphere-clogging emissions that add to a global problem. Also, those homes in the distant suburbs tend to consume more energy because of their size and dependence on air conditioning.

It may sound hard to connect a 10-story apartment building near a BART station to climate change, but the link is there. Until there is more housing near transit arteries and job centers, there will be no way to gain ground. Transportation accounts for 40 percent of California’s greenhouse gas emissions, pouring carbon dioxide and other gases directly into the sky, where the emissions coat the air and bring on baking temperatures.

This state is putting out a string of worthwhile options to curb the problem: cleaner-burning fuels, more electric vehicles and higher gas mileage, which means less pollution. A new law pledges the state to produce all its electricity without emissions by 2045. But now it’s coming up against another test just as important.

Land use needs to be planned more forcefully and directly. In this past session, the Legislature took on a challenging issue brought by state Sen. Scott Wiener, a San Francisco Democrat. His idea: Localities need to accept higher housing density near major transit lines. The proposal was intended to bring people closer to work and make use of billions in transit infrastructure.

But the plan fell short, a victim of NIMBY fears of giant skyscrapers in old neighborhoods. Local lawmakers didn’t appreciate the Sacramento directive to get moving. A prime way to get at a root cause of climate change was stalled.

Wiener acknowledges “the politics are hard” but chalks up his loss to the hesitancy that goes with a new idea. During this week’s endless round of panel discussions at the Global Climate Action Summit, he pushed his plans for denser housing repeatedly “and it got a lot of applause.” He’ll need votes next time.