Comment Log Display

The Scoping Plan is not ambitious enough. Given that climate change
is an existential threat that is already impacting frontline
communities, we must do everything we can to mitigate its effects
as soon as possible--such as net zero by 2030 or earlier.

This Scoping Plan perpetuates legacies of environmental injustice
and environmental racism because it allows frontline communities to
be "sacrifice zones" whose lives are shortened due to the proximity
to pollution in order to enrich corporations and maintain the
affluent lifestyles of the wealthy.

A lifestyle centered around personal vehicle transport is neither
healthy for adults and children, nor something we can or should be
promising people and saying is compatible with a decarbonized and
circular economy. We should be prioritizing strategies that
incentivize the construction and maintenance of clean, high-speed,
modern, and safe public transit. Additionally, with respect to
housing, if developers cannot provide housing at rates that folks
can actually afford, then this market failure should be rectified
through the construction of government or cooperative housing.

Adopt the recommendations of the EJAC instead of adopting
Alternative 3.

As the literature clearly illustrates, natural gas technologies are
not a meaningful climate solution. The fugitive emissions from
every aspect of the natural gas infrastructure will negate any
potential climate benefits it purports to offer.

Additionally, unproven, "black-box" technologies such as carbon
capture and sequestration (CCS) should not be utilized as a crutch
simply because Staff have not gone boldly enough in requiring
certain sectors reduce emissions adequately.

Listen to those whose lives are already profoundly impacted and
consider the impacts of your decisions on future generations.

Do not take the easy way out and side with the forces of capital at
the expense of the planet and communities.

As the agency leading the world's fifth largest economy, we might
as well go as boldly as possible, to show the world we can do it,
and with the understanding that the agency will likely face
litigation no matter how milquetoast of a strategy is adopted; in
that instance, the Board might as well go as hard as possible. We
demand that you "send it" as hard as possible--maximum emissions
reductions, while prioritizing frontline communities by engaging in
restorative justice, and drawing down fossil fuels to the maximum
extent feasible as soon as possible. Our lives depend on it!