Legislative Panel Refocuses on Flammable Fuels Reduction

Following three hearings on utility wildfire liability risks from strict liability, a fourth legislative conference committee hearing on wildfires focused on the huge amount of highly flammable fuels in forested areas, including 129 million dead and dying trees.

“It is critical to reduce wildfire fuels,” said Assemblymember Chris Holden (D-Pasadena), co-chair of the legislative conference committee, Aug. 14.

Lawmakers heard from fire experts about the need for wildfire mitigation measures, including ongoing controlled burns and vegetation clearance. They also recommended fire-proofing existing homes with heat resistant double-paned windows, fire resistant roofs, screened attic vents, defensible spaces, and irrigation systems, though they noted that a lack of funds is a significant constraint.

Florida was cited as the state with the most successful fuels management program in the nation, by Scott Stephens, University of California at Berkeley professor of fire science. He insisted California could follow Florida’s example and greatly reduce wildfire risks and protect forest ecology with regular prescribed burns and clearing of dangerous vegetation near structures.

He took issue with the oft repeated description of the massive wildfires that have swept the state as the “new normal” due to a warmer and drier climate causing a more intense and longer wildfire season.

He warned that the description should not become an excuse for “giving up.” Stephens added, “I am very hopeful for fire management in this state.”

He pointed to a promising state programmatic environmental impact report on controlled burning and other fire mitigation measures. But, he noted the document has been stuck at the California’s Board of Forestry for years.

Progress in the area of interagency collaboration was noted by others.

One example is CalFire’s Memorandum of Understanding with the California Public Utilities Commission for working together on utility fire safety management plans.

Craig Thomas, Sierra Forest Legacy conservation director, also stressed the importance of fire prevention planning and forest health plans. He insisted that the Office of Planning & Regulation guidelines for fire prevention and reduction should be adopted by the state, and incorporated into all county general land use plans to make sure local land use agencies decrease building in high fire zones.

Thomas pointed out that the advantages of wise fire prevention planning include “carbon stability, reduced emissions and ecological and community protection.”

He lamented the failure to maintain resilience through vegetation management as “causing an ecological and social tragedy.”

Other witnesses noted that the more that’s spent fighting wildfires, the less that is spent on fuels reduction and other mitigation measures.

“When you spend most of the resources on fighting fires, there is not much left for restoration,” pointed out CalFire Director Ken Pimlott.

He and others said that continuous long-term funding for fire prevention and forestry management was critical to ameliorating wildfires.

Sources of current funding include the cap-and-trade auction funds and other public funds.

“We need long-term commitments, not just public funds to prime the pump, to ensure general plans have fire safety elements in them,” said Jim Branham with the Sierra Nevada Conservancy.

Sen. Hannah Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara) called for using private loan programs, known as Property Assessed Clean Energy, to finance home fire resistance. PACE programs now provide upfront financing for energy efficiency and clean energy retrofits that are paid off through property tax assessments. Jackson wants the program to include funds for vegetation clearance and home fire resistance measures.

On yet another topic covered during the hearing, there were diametrically opposed views about whether to use dead and dying trees and vegetation to fuel biomass plants.

Rich Gordon, California Forestry Association president and former legislator, called for increasing biomass electricity in the state. Although the power is pricey, he said it is far less than the cost of deaths and devastation from wildfires, plus far less polluting.

On the other side, Sierra Club representatives raised the inability or high expense of reaching dead trees and vegetation in remote areas, as well as high levels of emissions from biomass plants.

Many lawmakers took issue with the Sierra Club representatives, noting that breathing in smoke from wildfires was far more harmful to a far larger number of people than biomass emissions.

Biomass is “a muzzle on wildfires,” said Assemblymember Brian Dahle (R-Redding).

CPUC director Ed Randolph gave little support to the idea of increasing the mandate for biomass contracts with private utilities because of the cost.

Jackson took issue with the lack of women witnesses on the three panels testifying on Tuesday.

A long list of live legislation to help address wildfire threats was presented, including bills to: Extend cap-and-trade funds for forestry grants; Allow CalFire to create an insurance pool to lower fire insurance rates; Mandate compatible vegetation below utility power lines, such as scrubs that don’t grow high enough to interfere with power lines; and Dedicate CalFire staff to ongoing fire prevention and education. — Elizabeth McCarthy

Over 11K Stories!

| Independently Powered Energy News

Legislative Panel Refocuses on Flammable Fuels Reduction

William J. Kelly

Related Posts

Op-Ed: Before and After Net Energy Metering 3, A Thought Experiment

Auld Lang Zine

Air Regulators 2022 Scoping Plan to Slash Emissions is a Go

CPUC Delves Into Reducing Utility Disconnections