California Emissions, Carbon Neutral Plan Calls Criticism | Technology

KATHLEEN RONAYNE-The Associated Press

Sacramento, California (AP) β€” California aviation regulators may hear criticism on Thursday about plans to reduce fossil fuel use and reach carbon neutrality by 2045. Economy facing climate change.

This will be the first public debate of the California Department of Air Resources on this year’s draft. Coping plan, This is updated every five years and provides a roadmap for the state to reach its climate goals. The 2045 goal is one of the most ambitious in the country, but the proposal has many critics outside the oil industry. Widespread environmental advocates say the plan is too small to quickly reduce global warming emissions.

“California can do better than this,” Democrat Al Muratchi wrote about the proposal that his colleagues circulate to sign.

People are also reading …

Reaching carbon neutral means removing as much carbon as the state emits from the atmosphere. It is a combination of reducing fossil fuel usage and using technology to remove residual emissions from the air. Board staff estimate that by 2045, oil demand across the economy and the use of fossil natural gas in buildings will be reduced by 91%.

This will require 30 times more electric vehicles, 6 times more electrical appliances than homes, 4 times more wind and solar power, and 60 times more hydrogen.

Even with such a drastic transition, the plan predicts that California will emit at least 94 million metric tons of carbon dioxide (about 22% of current state emissions) by 2045. .. All of these also need to be removed from the atmosphere.

Criticism from environmental groups has focused on key themes: the plan does not require deep enough emission reductions, is overly dependent on unproven energy-intensive carbon removal techniques, and states Targets that are not focused on whether they are ready to reach the more urgent 2030 emissions.

The Aviation Commission has established the Environmental Justice Advisory Board, but many members of the Commission have stated that the plan is far inadequate.

Catherine Garoupa White, a member of the Commission and Executive Director of the Central Valley Air Quality Coalition, said air regulators are unable to answer important safety and feasibility questions. Carbon sequestration and removal suggestion. The plan allows oil refining to continue, but requires the introduction of carbon recovery technology.

“We are always in a position to respond to and respond to the plans they have already burned in the industry,” she said.

Liane Randolph, chairman of the Department of Air Resources, rejected criticism that the plan was overly dependent on carbon removal. She said it demanded a significant reduction in gas-fueled appliances and a shift to electric vehicles. Still, she said fossil fuel demand would never drop to zero.

“We somehow feel like we’re in favor of mechanical carbon removal, and it seems like we’re leaving a strategy on the table to make room for it, but it’s not,” she said. ..

The oil industry, as part of it, states that the plan imposes too many bans and obligations that would be infeasible and would raise prices. Catherine Reheis Boyd, chairman of the Western Petroleum Association, wrote in a letter to Congressman Anthony Lendon Wednesday that state energy policies, including the scoping program, have contributed significantly to higher fuel costs. rice field.

“Technology bans, mandates, and restrictions on affordable options for Californians are not leadership,” she writes.

Howard Herzog, senior research engineer at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Energy Initiative, said the airboard program would require significantly more clean energy for carbon removal levels. To achieve the goals of the plan, the state needs to significantly increase solar, wind and battery storage.

β€œOne of the biggest constraints is finding enough carbon-free energy to scale up to that level,” says Herzog.

Currently, carbon recovery is not widely used, Biden administration spends billions of dollars Lamp it up.

Other critics say the plan is too focused on the 2045 target at the expense of approaching the 2030 target. Airboard maintains that it is on the road to reducing emissions levels by 40% from 1990 levels by that year. But to meet that, the pace of reduction needs to be significantly increased. Mr Randolph, Chairman of the Board, said many of the state’s climate policies have become or will become even more stringent in the future.

The scoping program is the first to analyze the role of nature and work sites, such as forests and farms, in increasing or decreasing emissions. Modeling the plan relies on assuming that such land draws carbon from the air. However, the plan later discovered that it could contribute to emissions, primarily from wildfires or related forest management, until 2045. Airboards may require more for carbon dioxide removal to account for these extra emissions.

The Airboard has 14 members, most of whom are appointed by the Governor. They represent the local aviation district, the community of environmental justice, agriculture, and the transportation system. They plan to approve the final plan by the end of the year.

Copyright 2022 AP communication. all rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission.

California Emissions, Carbon Neutral Plan Calls Criticism | Technology

Source link California Emissions, Carbon Neutral Plan Calls Criticism | Technology

Back to top button