Comment Log Display

Dear CalEPA, Maureen Hand, and Jordan Ramalingam,

Thank you for your effort to moderate this important discussion. 
Our Ventura County agriculture involves very little meat
production, but lots of citrus, avocado, row crop, and berry
production. My comments are as follows:

1)I think meat production and the embodied energy in feed sources
used have very different green house gas generation profiles.  Can
you please consider differentiating more clearly between meat or
protein production versus other agriculture that may be less
GHG-emissive.

I would like to see California require all labeled foods produced
in our state to include a carbon or Greenhouse-gas footprint score
plus a formula based on distance between zip codes.  The score
would need to include direct emissions related to farm equipment
plus indirect emissions related to plowing, fertilizer production
emissions, fertilizer off-gassing of GHGs where applicable, and
pumping energy inputs.  To address farmers' extra work, I wonder if
providing a tax exemption for farmers who first begin to provide
this information could be a motivated pathway to achieve a critical
mass of farmers' participation.

Also relevant was the question of wildfire-related GreenHouse Gas
emissions.  I believe wildfire events change weather, ocean
fertilization, and future rainfall.  Can the state please fund
research to better understand how we may be able to break
drought-associated high pressure ridges, seed storm cloud formation
over the ocean with smoke particulates, and provide more rainfall
on regions that tend to import their water with infrastructure that
has significant operational and embeded Greenhouse Gas footprint. 
For example if Southern California farmers and cities receive rain
from wildfire-smoke-seeded storms that may have efficiencies on par
with pumps, concrete, dams, and aqueducts used to build and
maintain Oroville dam on Feather River and move water to Pyramid
Lake and southward.  Of course there is also the additional impact
of Salmon fisheries, which may arguably be a more efficient way to
produce healthy lipid-, protein-, and mineral-rich foods.

Embodied energy and positive/negative synergies are significant and
were recognized as important to achieving the 100% carbon neutral
conditions.  

Can CalEPA also do more to assess what companies like Harrison are
doing when they pick up our green waste, and either bury it in
landfill or deliver it to companies like Agromin, where it is
chipped up, composted, and sold as soil amendment.  How effective
is a combustion fuel transported greenwaste collection system that
landfills or recycles landscape and agricultural wastes ...largely
using fossil fuels to run machinery for transport and processing? 


Additionally, can you please require water districts to assess and
disclose a carbon footprint per unit of water delivered that
reflects their actual reliance on imported water and pumped water?
Encouraging them to also make an effort to help consumers figure
out what urban tree watering is cost effective to reduce urban heat
island effects and also carbon sequestration in biomass?
...or hire me to help you answer those questions?

Sincerely,

George Naugles, RCE, M.Ed., BRE, MBA, GISP
G@Balance2thrive.com