First Name: | Jan |
---|---|
Last Name: | Dietrick |
Email Address: | jdietrick9@gmail.com |
Affiliation | 350 Ventura County Climate Hub |
Subject | Climate stabilization calls for strengthening of Alternative 1, NOT 3! |
Comment |
Alternative 3 is incredibly inadequate in an emergency to reach climate stabilization benchmarks by 2030. If you have an intention to help Californians do our part to stop runaway irreversible extinction, then you have to stop worrying about how much it will cost! Whatever is doable is affordable. Invest sooner to save more of what can be saved. You appear in the dark about what is at stake when you do this exercise with these scenarios. If the current prognosis for humanity is credible, you would just parse out the elements in Alternative 1 with more clarity, accelerate all timelines, balance the options among all opportunities based on most likely to succeed, effectively market a transparent and truthful plan to the people, and completely stop compromising and allowing vested interests to scam your programs. Alternative 1 is the only acceptable start for a viable plan. Scrap the rest. But it must needs work, including the following: 1. Count true costs and savings, especially social and health savings and environmental justice benefits from an accelerated timeline for phasing out fossil fuels. 2. Optimize every form of Distributed Energy Resources (and ensure affordability of electricity). 3. Fix the model assumptions about near term feasibility and effectiveness of all ECR, especially CCUS. 4. Explain clearly how in the world you are going to reduce VMT per capita by 25% by 2030! 5. Set ambitious goals for Natural and Working Lands and blue carbon measures for drawdown and do your best to make them happen and stop imagining unproven and conflicted CCUS schemes can fill the gap. 6. Achieve increase in organic acreage to 30% by 2030, NOT 2045. 7. Protect soil biology from artificial nitrogen and toxic pesticides to maximize carbon sequestration and water holding capacity focusing on whole systems and maximizing the enhanced carbon sequestration in diverse, multi-species cropping and afforestation. 8. Stop conflating wildfire emissions and forest management with agricultural strategies. There are independent forest scientists who profoundly disagree with your modeling assumptions. It neutralizes what could be extremely great potential of ambitious management of Natural and Working Lands. The assumptions regarding forest thinning in Alternative 4 are arguable, muddying the issues, and leading to an unhelpful diluting of what many experts are demonstrating is a much greater potential to sequester carbon by non forest management strategies than the models show. 9. Convene a group of experts whose funding has been clearly and totally free from biased industry and US Forest Service influence to conduct an analysis similar to what is done by the National Academy of Sciences. 10. Tell the truth about what is at stake clearly so that people can learn and understand the vast range of responsibilities we all have to drastically cut emissions and drastically expand soil, ocean and freshwater biology. |
Attachment |
Original File Name:
Date and Time Comment Was Submitted: 2022-05-03 07:10:30 |
If you have any questions or comments please contact Office of the Ombudsman at (916) 327-1266.