Proposed Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Reduction Strategy

Recommendations

Info

development of this Proposed Strategy. 28 The paper described initial ideas to be explored as the Strategy was developed, and sought to elicit new ideas and refinement of current measures to reduce emissions of SLCPs throughout the State. The Concept Paper was presented at a public meeting later in May, to solicit public input. After consideration of comments received, staff developed a Draft SLCP Reduction Strategy, 29 which was released for public comment on September 30, 2015. Comments received on the Draft Strategy are posted at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/lispub/comm2/bccommlog.php?listname=slcpdraftstrategy-ws ARB held workshops in October 2015 to solicit comments on the Draft Strategy, including comments related to the development of a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) document. After consideration of public comments received, ARB developed this Proposed Strategy and an accompanying draft Environmental Analysis (Appendix C). Additional workshops will be held to solicit comments on this Proposed Strategy, before it is presented to the Board in May 2016. Staff will present the final proposed SLCP Reduction Strategy, the final EA, and written responses to comments received on the EA to the Board for consideration at a public hearing in fall 2016. 28 http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/shortlived/concept_paper.pdf 29 http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/shortlived/2015draft.pdf 22 April 11, 2016
II. California’s Approach to Reducing SLCP Emissions The 2014 Scoping Plan Update described California’s approach to climate change as one reliant on science and foundational research. The Update focused on: preserving natural resources that provide for our economy and define our lifestyle in California, fostering resilient economic growth throughout the State, improving public health, and supporting economic, social and environmental justice. The State’s commitment to addressing climate change and public health is born of necessity, but provides tremendous opportunity to build competitiveness and resilience into our communities, resources, and economy. We understand that steps we take to reduce emissions and strengthen our State against the impacts of climate change provide economic opportunities today, and untether our future potential from limits imposed by resource constraints and pollution. This approach continues to guide us as we focus on reducing emissions of SLCPs to meet science-based targets in this Proposed Strategy. Additionally, California’s approach to reducing SLCP emissions is framed by the principles described below. A. Prioritize Actions with Diverse Benefits The direct benefits of cutting SLCP emissions will be immediately tangible, and can be substantial. As part of an integrated strategy to not only reduce emissions of SLCPs, but also to develop renewable sources of energy and strengthen the competitiveness and resiliency of our agricultural, waste, and other sectors, they can deliver even greater benefits, including: Reduced asthma risk, hospitalization, premature death, and associated medical costs from air pollution, especially in disadvantaged communities; Reduced global and localized climate change impacts, including sea level rise and disrupted precipitation patterns, and associated costs; Reduced crop losses from air pollution; Healthier forests, wildlife habitats, and watersheds; Healthy soils that are more sustainable and resilient to climate change, sequester GHGs, require less synthetic amendments, and improve water retention; The creation of a new industry, mostly in rural parts of the State and the Central Valley, around utilizing organic waste streams to generate renewable energy, fuels, and compost—bringing billions in investment; and Stronger agricultural and freight sectors that are well positioned to continue competing globally and growing as a source of jobs and economic development in California. Clearly, there are a number of drivers and benefits to reducing SLCP emissions that extend beyond mitigating the impacts of climate change. The measures identified in this Proposed Strategy are intended to provide a wide array of climate, health, and economic benefits throughout the State. As they are further developed and implemented, a key focus will be to provide and maximize multiple benefits. 23 April 11, 2016
Page 1 and 2: Proposed Short-Lived Climate Pollut
Page 3 and 4: Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Page 5 and 6: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Eureka! Synonymou
Page 7 and 8: electrical generation, transportati
Page 9 and 10: anthropogenic (non-forest) black ca
Page 11 and 12: these plans complement one another.
Page 13 and 14: eliminate fugitive methane emission
Page 15 and 16: Cost-Effective Measures with Signif
Page 17 and 18: I. Introduction: Showing the Way to
Page 19 and 20: Significant reductions in SLCP emis
Page 21 and 22: often highest, and where further ec
Page 23 and 24: ARB developed this proposed SLCP Re
Page 25: To support these efforts, the CATRW
Page 29 and 30: and nutrient management issues on f
Page 31 and 32: D. Invest in SLCP Emission Reductio
Page 33 and 34: While improving data access and qua
Page 35 and 36: III. Latest Understanding of Scienc
Page 37 and 38: y the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Pa
Page 39 and 40: adiative forcing published by Bond
Page 41 and 42: B. Methane Methane is the principal
Page 43 and 44: they continue to replace ozone depl
Page 45 and 46: Figure 1: California 2013 Anthropog
Page 47 and 48: apply to approximately 150,000 off-
Page 49 and 50: include winter burning curtailment,
Page 51 and 52: Figure 3: California’s 2030 Anthr
Page 53 and 54: While we must act to reduce wildfir
Page 55 and 56: comprehensive planning and strategi
Page 57 and 58: Forest and Watershed Health: Thinni
Page 59 and 60: continue working with Federal agenc
Page 61 and 62: enefits into programs and cost/bene
Page 63 and 64: emissions from these sources, captu
Page 65 and 66: producers' costs of connecting to u
Page 67 and 68: elow 2 o C—including meeting the
Page 69 and 70: California has the most dairy cows
Page 71 and 72: The 2020 and 2025 targets could be
Page 73 and 74: consideration of available financia
Page 75 and 76: Research Mitigation Strategies for
Page 77 and 78:
average of collection efficiencies
Page 79 and 80:
nitrogen budgets in the Irrigated L
Page 81 and 82:
California also has about 215,000 m
Page 83 and 84:
not recur. 114 ARB and DOGGR will c
Page 85 and 86:
VI. Reducing HFC Emissions Hydroflu
Page 87 and 88:
through the Montreal Protocol to ph
Page 89 and 90:
Figure 10: California’s 2030 HFC
Page 91 and 92:
Although lower-GWP options are curr
Page 93 and 94:
more than 75 percent compared to bu
Page 95 and 96:
For agricultural commodity fumigati
Page 97 and 98:
Plan will augment the strategies pr
Page 99 and 100:
Local efforts to reduce diesel part
Page 101 and 102:
Truck Loan Assistance Program for s
Page 103 and 104:
of commitments and planning efforts
Page 105 and 106:
Standard (RFS) incentivize the use
Page 107 and 108:
effective. However, rural districts
Page 109 and 110:
Table 9: Range of Costs (Million Do
Page 111 and 112:
ARB conducted a Geographic Informat
Page 113 and 114:
Cellulosic RIN Credit Price Table 1
Page 115 and 116:
Table 13: Mix of Strategies in Scen
Page 117 and 118:
some higher cost strategies, includ
Page 119 and 120:
A principal difference in outcomes
Page 121 and 122:
Cellulosic RIN credit prices Table
Page 123 and 124:
Table 18: Costs and Emissions for O
Page 125 and 126:
electricity from the Cap and Trade
Page 127 and 128:
diesel equipment. 165 (NO X emissio
Page 129 and 130:
Food rescue and recovery could deli
Page 131 and 132:
freight corridors in the East Bay,
Page 133:
IX. Next Steps This Proposed Strate
show all

Proposed Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Reduction Strategy

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?