Dear CARB members and staff,
After participating in the meeting yesterday, I have a new
appreciation for the depth of your work and the diversity of
opinions and emotions that people bring to you.
As you make the decision about which plan to go with, I am
reminded of the powerful decison CARB made in the 1990s to require
that electric vehicles be sold in CA. You probably know that the
fossil fuel industry pressured CARB to eliminate that rule,
promising that hydrogen fuel cells would solve all our auto exhaust
problems. The board backed down and electric vehicles were
taken off our freeways for a couple decades. (and no, most of us
still don't have hydrogen fueled autos)
Can you imagine what a difference it would have made if the
board had stuck with their guns? If the demand for electric
vehicles had been allowed to grow naturally, starting in the 1990s,
as people noticed that their friends with electric cars didn't have
to worry about rising gas prices?
I suspect that carbon capture is another ploy by the fossil fuel
industry to avoid the necessity of stopping burning fossil
fuels. It's like those diet plans: eat want you what,
as much as you want, whenever you want, and lose weight! But
it doesn't work that way.
Plan 1 is the only plan that realistically approaches the
problems of climate change with the speed and the actions needed to
make the kind of difference that is needed.
You could add more - we can't afford to expand airports.
Air travel accounts for a higher percentage of emissions in CA
because many of us fly a lot. Yet during the pandemic we learned
that much of our air travel is optional.
AND, having seen the testimony yesterday, I realize that those
of us who understand the damages of climate change need to do a lot
more organizing and communicating.
Please act on what you know about how dirty air in California
results in devastating effects for people all over the globe,
choose plan 1.