I for one drive an EV that’s charged by solar panels at my place of work, and my energy is sourced from a mix of hydro / solar / and wind.
This is probably true for a significant portion of people in the Valley. Certainly more so than say people in Midwest US and Canada.
https://www.iowafarmbureau.com/Article/Iowa-is-a-Leader-in-t...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territ...
Shows Iowa as 14th on emissions per capita and California is 6th from the bottom. So what are you trying to prove?
Aside: Iowa Farm Bureau is an insurance company that pretends to be the voice of farmers and “grass roots org”, it is also big a lobbying spender. Which makes me doubt both your intent and sources.
The fact is, Iowa produces more energy by wind that many other states, including California. Is that in dispute? Citation please.
That was in dispute. California gets a tiny fraction of its power from wind, the total state less than Iowa produces (where did you get the 'dwarfed' notion?) while the Midwest gets up to 50%. In Iowa another large fraction is from the Palo nuclear plant. So, very little coal etc.
Please fact check your claims next time.
California produces 28000 MW of renewables total which is way more than Iowa. California Coal power mix was about 3%, and lower in my community
It's unseemly to keep changing the subject to one that you can 'win'.
1. Food makes up only 20% of an average person's greenhouse emissions, and probably less if you're living a jetsetting Silicon Valley lifestyle of air-conditioned spaces and lengthy commutes.
2. The original calculation assumes you'll go 100% vegan, not just vegetarian, which for most people is a step too far.
Even excluding the third argument, Lomborg notes that you're looking at a 4.3% reduction at best.