Comment Log Display

Comment Log Display

Below is the comment you selected to display.
Comment 3 for CPUC/CEC/ARB/CalISO Renewables Symposium (renewablesympsium-ws) - 1st Workshop.


First Name: Bill
Last Name: Tippets
Email Address: billtippets@gmail.com
Affiliation:

Subject: Comments to renewablesympsium-ws
Comment:
The ideas and approaches presented in the symposium slides set out
a reasonable set of expectations and opportunities for the State of
CA to substantially reduce carbon/GHG emissions that would put the
state on a trajectory to meet the long-term goal of 80% reduction
below the 1990 GHG emission level by 2050.  The State must provide
policies, guidance, and financial support/incentives to promote -
and have regulatory authority to enforce - its GHG emission
reduction goals/targets/requirements. 

Absent that set of State-based factors, it is highly doubtful that
the various regoins of the state will consistently enact their own
policies, guidance, financial commitments/incentives and
requirements that would put them on the necessary GHG emission
reduction paths.  For example, based on past experience and current
efforts in the San Diego Region, the regional Municipal Planning
Organization has proposed to comply with only regulatory required
targets, not to present a plan to achieve the State's long-term
target(but not specifically a regulatory-requirement) to reduce GHG
emissions by 80% below 1990 levels by 2050.    

The San Diego MPO (SANDAG) voted several years ago to combine the
currently proposed 2015 update of its Regional Transportation
Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy with the update of the
non-regulatory Regional Comprehensive Plan - the RCP is supposed to
serve as the regional policy blueprint to achieve sustainable urban
form, transportation, housing, healthy environment, economic
prosperity, etc.

The RTP/SCS update fails to present a plan that would put this
region on a course to complement the state's 2050 GHG target.  The
proposed plan does not commit the region to do its "share" of GHG
reductions, and puts greater onus on the individual cities and
county governments if the region is to have any possibility to
contribute substantively to the state's long-term goal. 

It is essential that the State of CA create the strategy,
priorities, approaches, etc. to achieve the 2050 goal - which
should be made a mandate, along with an interim 2030 mandate for a
40% reduction below 1990 GHG levels.  As noted in the symposium
slides, CA should help lead a "western states" effort to coordinate
electric energy production and use, including facility siting, and
emphasizing distributed generation, community choice aggregation,
research to improve storage and transmission, etc.) storage. 
Improved building energy use standards/requirements should be
developed (with some allowance for phasing these in), but including
mandated energy audits for all commercial/industrial buildings and
residences at point of construction/occupancy or sale - and a
requirement to meet new standards (again, with some allowance for
phasing in those improvements).  At the State/interstate level, the
more that the State of CA can do to establish better energy
policies across the western states, and provide for measures that
take some of the pressure off individual regional entities and
local governments, the higher the possibility those local entities
will be willing to undertake their own GHG reduction actions.

However, there must be both incentives to induce effective regional
actions, as well as repercussions if effective actions are not
undertaken.  It is essential that each region of the State (e.g.,
the MPOs) develops its GHG reduction plans such that it presents an
effective blueprint that both assumes some responsibility to reduce
GHGs that the MPO has authority to enact as well as provides a
systematic, integrated plan into which the local governments's
climate action/adaptation plans fit and can add to the GHG emission
reductions.  It must provide guidance for long-term "smart growth"
even if that does not currently comport with local general plans: 
since MPOs are comprised of those individual governments, the
individual cities are in the best position to develop a transition
plan so that there is equitable sharing of the costs and benefits
of that smart growth.

In addition, because water production, transportation and treatment
(particularly when it is treated for reuse) are currently, and will
be increasingly, large energy users, the state and MPOs must be
heavily involved in developing policies, guidance (targets) and
regulations to reduce per capita consumption and ensure equitable
access to and reasonable costs for disadvantaged communities (urban
and rural/farm). 

      

Attachment:

Original File Name:

Date and Time Comment Was Submitted: 2015-07-22 15:00:49



If you have any questions or comments please contact Office of the Ombudsman at (916) 327-1266.


Board Comments Home

preload