First Name: | Bill |
---|---|
Last Name: | Tippets |
Email Address: | billtippets@gmail.com |
Affiliation | |
Subject | Comments to renewablesympsium-ws |
Comment |
The ideas and approaches presented in the symposium slides set out a reasonable set of expectations and opportunities for the State of CA to substantially reduce carbon/GHG emissions that would put the state on a trajectory to meet the long-term goal of 80% reduction below the 1990 GHG emission level by 2050. The State must provide policies, guidance, and financial support/incentives to promote - and have regulatory authority to enforce - its GHG emission reduction goals/targets/requirements. Absent that set of State-based factors, it is highly doubtful that the various regoins of the state will consistently enact their own policies, guidance, financial commitments/incentives and requirements that would put them on the necessary GHG emission reduction paths. For example, based on past experience and current efforts in the San Diego Region, the regional Municipal Planning Organization has proposed to comply with only regulatory required targets, not to present a plan to achieve the State's long-term target(but not specifically a regulatory-requirement) to reduce GHG emissions by 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. The San Diego MPO (SANDAG) voted several years ago to combine the currently proposed 2015 update of its Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy with the update of the non-regulatory Regional Comprehensive Plan - the RCP is supposed to serve as the regional policy blueprint to achieve sustainable urban form, transportation, housing, healthy environment, economic prosperity, etc. The RTP/SCS update fails to present a plan that would put this region on a course to complement the state's 2050 GHG target. The proposed plan does not commit the region to do its "share" of GHG reductions, and puts greater onus on the individual cities and county governments if the region is to have any possibility to contribute substantively to the state's long-term goal. It is essential that the State of CA create the strategy, priorities, approaches, etc. to achieve the 2050 goal - which should be made a mandate, along with an interim 2030 mandate for a 40% reduction below 1990 GHG levels. As noted in the symposium slides, CA should help lead a "western states" effort to coordinate electric energy production and use, including facility siting, and emphasizing distributed generation, community choice aggregation, research to improve storage and transmission, etc.) storage. Improved building energy use standards/requirements should be developed (with some allowance for phasing these in), but including mandated energy audits for all commercial/industrial buildings and residences at point of construction/occupancy or sale - and a requirement to meet new standards (again, with some allowance for phasing in those improvements). At the State/interstate level, the more that the State of CA can do to establish better energy policies across the western states, and provide for measures that take some of the pressure off individual regional entities and local governments, the higher the possibility those local entities will be willing to undertake their own GHG reduction actions. However, there must be both incentives to induce effective regional actions, as well as repercussions if effective actions are not undertaken. It is essential that each region of the State (e.g., the MPOs) develops its GHG reduction plans such that it presents an effective blueprint that both assumes some responsibility to reduce GHGs that the MPO has authority to enact as well as provides a systematic, integrated plan into which the local governments's climate action/adaptation plans fit and can add to the GHG emission reductions. It must provide guidance for long-term "smart growth" even if that does not currently comport with local general plans: since MPOs are comprised of those individual governments, the individual cities are in the best position to develop a transition plan so that there is equitable sharing of the costs and benefits of that smart growth. In addition, because water production, transportation and treatment (particularly when it is treated for reuse) are currently, and will be increasingly, large energy users, the state and MPOs must be heavily involved in developing policies, guidance (targets) and regulations to reduce per capita consumption and ensure equitable access to and reasonable costs for disadvantaged communities (urban and rural/farm). |
Attachment |
Original File Name:
Date and Time Comment Was Submitted: 2015-07-22 15:00:49 |
If you have any questions or comments please contact Office of the Ombudsman at (916) 327-1266.