Comment Log Display
Below is the comment you selected to display.
Comment 1 for Public Workshop: 2022 Scoping Plan Update – Natural and Working Lands Technical Workshop (nwl-2021-tech-ws) - 1st Workshop.
First Name: Andrew
Last Name: Mutziger
Email Address: amutziger@co.slo.ca.us
Affiliation: SLO Co. Air Pollution Control District
Subject: Policy Changes for Disposal of Ag Woody Waste & Dead & Dying Trees that Sequester Carbon
Comment:
During today's NWL Workshop presentation, CARB asked whether it is clear what they need for policy objectives. My comment is relevant to the dead, above ground biomass in the NWL inventory and policy changes that will result in carbon sequestration and co-benefits. Although we know San Joaquin Valley will phase out agricultural burning, growers in the rest of the state will continue to burn woody ag waste. Dead and dying trees in forests may also be managed through burning. If these ag and forest woody materials are not burned, they will often lose their carbon over time through natural degradation. However, there are disposal methods of these woody wastes that preserve carbon. Changes to California policies for managing these materials can drive on the ground, implementable actions to help NWL meet its target. For example, there are better ways to burn than traditional methods (top lit conservation & kiln burns, carbonizers, and pyrolysis systems) that sequester carbon in the form of biochar and have co-benefits of criteria pollutant emission reductions. Further, the produced biochar has beneficial uses (e.g. biochar can be integrated into CDFA's Healthy Soils program with co-benefits such as improved water holding capacity). While your current focus on existing research to inform the NWL target setting is important, also important is for CARB to infuse pending and future research that improves the portfolio of NWL carbon sink strategies. There are observations and sound theory that the biochar producing alternative burning methods provide GHG and criteria pollutant emission reductions and carbon sequestration. What are the quantified benefits is the question and CAPCAO is part of a near shovel ready proposal (see attached file entitled "LowEmissionBurnProposalToCARBresearchConceptCall.msg") to help answer that question. Would you please weigh in on how CARB intends to integrate pending or future knowledge to help drive California policy changes that improve NWL's contribution to the State's carbon neutrality goal? Also, are alternative burn methods like I have outlined in this comment on CARB's current NWL list of strategies and if not, what is the prospect of them being added to the NWL portfolio of solutions? Sincerely, Andy Mutziger Division Manager Planning, Monitoring & Grants SLO County Air Pollution Control District
Attachment: www.arb.ca.gov/lists/com-attach/1-nwl-2021-tech-ws-AGxQOQN1VmAKYQdu.msg
Original File Name: LowEmissionBurnProposalToCARBresearchConceptCall.msg
Date and Time Comment Was Submitted: 2021-07-20 16:58:15
If you have any questions or comments please contact Office of the Ombudsman at (916) 327-1266.