First Name | Michelle |
---|---|
Last Name | Mascarenhas |
Email Address | michellems3@gmail.com |
Affiliation | |
Subject | No Offsets |
Comment | Dear ARB, I strongly object to the proposal to adopt market-based compliance mechanisms to meet a cap on GHG emissions. And I vehemently oppose the use of offsets to comply. Living in a region with high levels of air pollution due to the same stacks that are emitting GHGs, I want all of that pollution cut. It does not make sense to keep polluting or spewing out GHG emissions anywhere and especially in communities that have felt the impact of pollution for decades if not generations. Cut GHG emissions at the source for the full benefit of all Californians! Secondly, I object to the forest offset concept as they are generally not based in the Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) of the communities who live in the affected forests. In many countries, benefits from offsets projects will flow to the government, or to the private project developer, instead of to the communities who have managed the land for generations. This leads to inherent violations of FPIC and other human rights safeguards guaranteed through the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. It is a sham to say that forest offset programs will protect forest communities and because of that, the Indigenous Environmental Network stands in opposition to these programs. At a minimum, the board should not vote on this proposal tomorrow as communities have not had sufficient notification. As a member of one of the coalitions that helped to stop Proposition 23 from killing AB32, I call on the board to hold off and give more time for California's communities to weigh in on the issue of market mechanisms and offsets. Thank you, Michelle |
Attachment | |
Original File Name | |
Date and Time Comment Was Submitted | 2010-12-15 11:36:50 |
If you have any questions or comments please contact Clerk of the Board at (916) 322-5594.