| Independently Powered Energy News

California’s Ocean Protection Council Nov. 29 released a draft resolution aimed at guiding the state’s response to projected sea level rise due to climate change. Council chair and state secretary for natural resources Lester Snow called the resolution an “important step forward in keeping people and property safe.” The resolution seeks assessments aimed at managing risks under low, medium, or high sea-level rise projections. Council-funded research shows that a 55-inch sea-level rise could occur during a 100-year storm event along the California coast. That could cause nearly $100 billion in property damage and place nearly 480,000 people at risk. The draft resolution follows the state’s climate change adaptation strategy released a year ago. It identifies expected ranges for sea-level rise in 20-year increments between 2030 and 2070 and also for 2100. When using 2000 as a baseline, the average projected sea-level rise is five to eight inches in 2030 then ranges up to 43-69 inches in 2100. The state’s adaptation strategy calls for project timeframes to be identified so that sea-level rise assessments can be made. The council is taking public comment for 45 days before finalizing the resolution. * * * * * California officials are descending on Cancun, Mexico, talking up Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s sub-national “R-20” group. It is a coalition of 20 states and other sub-national divisions announced at the governor’s climate change conference last month in Davis. Next week, California Environmental Protection Agency secretary Linda Adams and California Air Resources Board chair Mary Nichols are slated to address the Cancun international climate change talks about California’s efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions. Other state officials are slated to attend the so-called “side event” too, which is sponsored by the Los Angeles-based Climate Action Reserve. * * * * * Carbon offset provisions in the California Air Resources Board’s proposed cap-and-trade program would increase emissions and encourage forest clear cutting, critics warn. Forests sequester atmospheric carbon--with the amount dependent on geography, tree types and health of the forest. The Air Board’s proposed trading scheme protocols would allow offsets from so- called “even aged” forests--considered forest “plantations,” according to forestry advocates. “Even-aged management or clear cutting is not carbon neutral,” Alison Freelund with the Mattole Restoration Council, wrote in comments submitted on Nov. 22. “The only forest practices that are carbon neutral are ones that promote the growth of standing forests by thinning from below and thereby reduce the threat of catastrophic fire,” which she called “sustainable uneven-aged management.” When forests are clear cut, the next generation of trees is all the same age--unlike natural forests. And, unlike a multi-generational forest, it is weaker in fending off parasites and has less ability to hold the soil in watersheds. An even-aged forest, thus, offsets fewer greenhouse gases. Also seen as problematic is excluding forestry biomass from a carbon cap. It would run counter to the climate protection law’s carbon reduction goal, according to some stakeholders. “[B]iomass energy and fuels, depending on the land use and management impacts upstream, can result in increased biological [greenhouse gas] emissions from the landscape as well as additional indirect emissions from energy use,” according to The Nature Conservancy’s Michelle Passero. The conservancy also called for verifying the forestry tracts counting as carbon offsets at 30-year intervals. * * * * * The Electric Power Research Institute released a handy one-page chart summarizing the strengths and weaknesses of various forms of power generation, including carbon dioxide emissions and other environmental effects. Not surprisingly, solar and wind rank highest on environmental performance, except when it comes to land-use impacts. One somewhat surprising finding is that nearly greenhouse gas-free geothermal plants--in which California and Nevada lead other states--outshine coal power plants in operational availability, running an average of 274 days a year compared to 270 days a year for coal plants. Biomass plants, which beat out natural gas plants on greenhouse gas emissions, run an average of 263 days annually, almost as often as coal plants. Nuclear plants top the list for availability, operating an average of 336 days a year.

No Result