Comment Log Display

As a resident of Stockton, CA - I listened with interest during the
scoping workshop about the various view points represented by
scientists, industry representatives, environmental justice
advocates, workforce advocates, and CARB staff. 

Going forward, I'd hope that EJAC members feel that they are given
enough time to prepare or offer their perspectives on each panel.
In particular, I am concerned that the Central Valley communities
who stand to be most affected by engineered carbon removal (CCS,
DAC, etc) have very little technical understanding of the
implications (including benefits and drawbacks) of these
technologies. That in itself is a significant impediment to a
public conversation on this topic, and both can/should be
rectified. 

Without being a technical expert in this area, it seems that while
engineered carbon removal is an important tool in the
decarbonization toolkit, it should not be used to justify the
extended life of carbon emitting activities. To that end, the
proposed implementation of these technologies should not be done at
the expense of frontline communities. How then, should we think
about that?

If the environmental justice communities (across the Central
Valley) are in a meaningful dialogue on this topic, I imagine that
CARB would glean useful insights on a range of topics - including
how to think about enabling policy to drive dramatic
decarbonization through both technology and natural means,
alongside renewables adoption -- as well as the relationship
between the financing of new technologies and community benefits
agreements. 

Finally, we all know that climate and workforce and jobs have to
work in tandem to really accelerate towards aggressive
decarbonization goals. Frontline or 'disadvantaged communities'
know their community's needs best, and these conversations on
technology - whatever that technology is - have to center the
community's voice in determining how to create workforce pathways
that bring to life what a 'just transition' should look like for
incumbent workers across the state. 

Every serious climate projection keeping temps below 2 degrees
incorporates some amount of engineered carbon removal. These
technologies, while a necessary means of advancing climate goals,
must be approached with the due diligence that their affected
communities deserve. CARB should actively seek to educate those who
will be most impacted by carbon removal technologies, so that they
may make accurate and informed comments on their design,
implementation, and regulation.