Air Board Greenhouse Gas Plan Met by Economic Concerns

As the California Air Resources Board opened a public hearing on its master plan for carrying out the state’s climate protection law, AB 32, economic storm clouds raised doubts about whether the plan can fully achieve its promised greenhouse gas emissions reductions. “The scoping plan does not give me the confidence the goals will be met,” said Alan Lloyd, former chair of the Air Board under Governor Gray Davis. “It looks as though it’s very easy, a panacea. If that’s the case, why hasn’t it been done?” Lloyd, an atmospheric chemist who has worked to clean up California’s air pollution since the 1970s in numerous capacities, predicted that instead of being a panacea that will lead to a green economic revolution, the plan will be difficult to carry out and produce “winners and losers.” He also criticized the plan for what he called too much emphasis on market mechanisms, like a carbon cap-and-trade program, instead of direct regulation. His testimony contrasted starkly with the economic study done to support the plan, which projects that it will modestly boost economic growth in California. Air Board chair Mary Nichols acknowledged that in light of the “severe global economic downturn,” the board must weigh the plan “in a very careful and thorough way.” She said the board is likely to make several changes to the plan before adopting it at a subsequent meeting scheduled for December 11 and 12. Renewable energy and clean technology companies voiced support for the plan. California Wind Energy Association executive director Nancy Rader said the plan’s strategy to move to 33 percent renewable energy on the grid by 2020 can “return our economy to vibrancy.” The Air Board’s plan seeks to trim greenhouse gas emissions to their 1990 levels by 2020. To do that it outlines a series of regulations and programs--including a carbon cap- and-trade program--aimed at cutting emissions by 174 million metric tons a year by 2020, about a 30 percent reduction. Power companies and other industries under the cap-and-trade program could fulfill 49 percent of their emissions reductions through offset projects, such as reforesting denuded areas to sequester carbon from the atmosphere instead of cutting their own emissions. While the power industry emits 20 percent of the state’s greenhouse gases, it would be responsible for achieving about 40 percent of the cuts under the plan, noted Ryan. Editors’ note: For a more detailed version of this story, please see our sister publication E=MC2 – Energy Meets Climate Challenge. You can find it at www.energymeetsclimate.com.

Over 11K Stories!

| Independently Powered Energy News

Air Board Greenhouse Gas Plan Met by Economic Concerns

vdharadmin

Related Posts

Auld Lang Zine

Ensuring Overburdened Communities Benefit from Fossil Free Transportation Investments

Civil Rights Group Sues over CA’s Ban on Gas-Fueled Vehicle Sales

SMUD Chooses Major Microgrid Investment