Decarbonization framework aims to eliminate greenhouse emissions in San Diego County

[ad_1]

San Diego –

San Diego County officials on Wednesday tabled a plan to eliminate carbon emissions before the middle of the century in what they described as the first such effort in California and perhaps across the country.

The San Diego Regional Decarbonization Framework, presented to county regulators, examines the choices the region is making in moving from fossil fuels to renewable energy and ways to coordinate efforts between the county and its 18 cities.

“It is separate from the ongoing planning efforts of local governments, but complements them,” said Murtaza Baxamusa, the district’s program manager for regional sustainability and climate protection.

The county has set a goal of zero net carbon emissions by 2035, but the report also cites the nationwide goal of eliminating carbon emissions by 2045.

Supervisors heard an update on the technical report from Gordon McCord, an assistant dean at the UC San Diego School of Global Policy and Strategy who coordinates analysis and research for the framework.

The report, McCord said, sets out “technically feasible options to achieve zero emissions” and focuses largely on efforts already in the making, including wind and solar power, electric vehicles and urban transport expansion and conversion of heating systems from natural gas on electro. For example, the county could approve more renewable energy projects, support electric vehicle charging infrastructure, and change building codes to encourage or require electric heating in new homes.

Other sources of renewable energy could emerge in the future, such as hydrogen or wave power, but the report calls for “planning around proven, scalable technologies,” said McCord.

Although solar power can be scaled to meet almost all of the region’s electricity needs, there are pros and cons of different approaches presented in different scenarios, McCord said.

Concentrating large solar farms in East County would be cost effective, but it poses environmental problems. The decision to avoid high conservation value areas would drive solar development west and bring with it more costly urban infills and rooftop solar panels, he said.

However, both large solar systems and rooftop solar extensions are preferred in all scenarios and form what McCord referred to as “no-regret actions”. These are steps that can be taken immediately and are likely to come in handy no matter what long-term strategy the county is pursuing.

“All of these help evaluate tradeoffs while system-wide arithmetic works,” said McCord.

The report also recommended swapping gas-water and space heating for electric heating at the end of their natural life. And she advised not to build on vacant land to reduce urban sprawl and vehicle emissions, and also to preserve the ability of natural ecosystems to absorb carbon.

Carbon cultivation techniques aimed at increasing the uptake of carbon in soils, wetland restoration, and urban forestry can also expand “carbon sinks” or natural systems for sequestering and storing carbon. But these are “less effective and more expensive than leaving natural land alone,” said McCord.

The report also calls for an institutional structure, represented by local governments, businesses and others, to coordinate climate protection.

More than 40 speakers addressed the issue, many calling on the county to take urgent action. However, others questioned some of the report’s proposals and assumptions.

“We are in a climate emergency and I find it very difficult to be optimistic about my children’s futures when I think how far behind we are in dealing with this crisis,” said Bee Mittermiller, an activist from 350 San Diego. “I was impressed by the urgency of calling for a coordinated response and the creation of an Intergovernmental Conference.”

Hannah Gbeh, executive director of the San Diego County Farm Bureau, said the report curtailed the potential contribution of farming communities to climate solutions and threatening farming communities by restricting the development of new homes and schools for farmers and farm workers.

“Your plans will destroy agriculture and cut off the only industry that fixes carbon for its very existence,” she said.

Supervisor Joel Anderson also expressed concern about rural residents, saying that improving local agriculture could reduce the carbon footprint of food imports.

“If we look at this globally, are we properly focusing on local (of) food sources rather than traveling around the world for food?” he asked.

Workers’ representatives also said the plan must take into account the impact of the transition to renewable energy on workers who could lose jobs and benefits during the transition. They also said that pressures on electric cars and building heating could put strain on the electricity grid and raise electricity prices, which could harm working families, seniors and disadvantaged communities.

“We understand that climate change is real and change is needed,” said Kelvin Barrios, director of government affairs at Laborers International Union of North America Local 89. “But we shouldn’t implement these guidelines at the expense of jobs for working people and above . “Ancillary costs for the average family.”

District officials said a follow-up report on staff changes and the transition to new energy sources will be released early next year and will address these issues.

“We can’t say we won’t worry about the climate and we won’t say we won’t worry about jobs,” said Chairman of the Board, Nathan Fletcher.

[ad_2]

Source link