1 / 17

CEQA and Climate Change

CEQA and Climate Change. Evaluating & Addressing GHG Emissions from Projects Barbara Lee, CAPCOA. Air Districts were approached by local governments for help on CEQA & GHG California Air Pollution Control Officers Association coordinated district’s efforts

fionan
Download Presentation

CEQA and Climate Change

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CEQA and Climate Change Evaluating & Addressing GHG Emissions from Projects Barbara Lee, CAPCOA

  2. Air Districts were approached by local governments for help on CEQA & GHG California Air Pollution Control Officers Association coordinated district’s efforts Resource guide released in January ’08 Intended to provide support for lead agencies incorporating GHG analysis into CEQA programs Not intended to dictate policy decisions Plan to provide addendum in 9 - 12 months with thresholds set, new mitigations, etc. CAPCOA’s Resource Paper

  3. Overview • Consideration of Fundamental Issues • What to do about Thresholds • Analytical Methods & Tools • Mitigation

  4. Fundamental Issues • CEQA Requirement: • Public agencies should refrain from approving projects that have significant adverse environmental impacts if there are feasible alternatives or mitigations that can substantially avoid those impacts • Fair Argument Standard: • An EIR must be prepared if it can be fairly argued (based on substantial evidence in the record) that the project may have a significant environmental impact

  5. More Fundamental Issues • Defensible Analyses • Sufficient analysis of environmental consequences to support informed decision • Conclusions supported by substantial evidence • Good faith effort at full disclosure • Statewide Thresholds • OPR to develop GHG mitigation guidance by July ’09, and Resource Agency to adopt by January ’10 • ARB could establish statewide approach under AB 32 scoping plan • Interim Approach

  6. Three Paths Through CEQA • What is Significant? • Implementing CEQA with No GHG Threshold • Implementing CEQA with GHG Threshold set at Zero • Implementing CEQA with a Non-zero Threshold

  7. CEQA with no GHG Threshold • CEQA does not require a lead agency to set a significance threshold • In the absence of a threshold, significance is determined on a case-by-case basis • Agency can presume significance (rebutable) • Agency can presume insignificance (rebutable) • Agency can review each project with no presumption • May create uncertainty for project proponents • May create workload and resource issues for agency

  8. CEQA with GHG Threshold of Zero • Considers ALL emissions of GHG to be significant • All projects must have EIR or MND • All emissions must be mitigated to zero or receive a Statement of Overriding Considerations • Greater degree of certainty for project proponents • Could place substantial workload and resource burdens on agency and proponents

  9. CEQA with Non-zero Threshold • CAPCOA evaluated two approaches to setting a non-zero threshold: • Approach 1- Thresholds based on emission reduction targets of Statutes and Executive Orders • Approach 2- Tiered thresholds • Other approaches can be used but were not examined in this report • Goal is to maximize environmental benefit while minimizing burden on agencies & proponents

  10. Non-Zero Threshold Approach #1 • The Statute & Executive Order Approach would require each project to meet the emission reduction targets of AB 32 and the Governor’s Executive Order. • Uniform Percentage for all projects • Greater Percentage for New Development • Percentages by Economic Sector • Percentages by Region • Establishing “business as usual” baseline • Determining appropriate percentages

  11. Non-zero Threshold Approach #2 • The Tiered Approach would “bin” projects based on established characteristics, with increasing requirements for each bin, or tier

  12. Stepping Through the Analysis • General Plans • Consistency with AB 32, or other established reduction plans • Projects • Statutory Exemptions • Green List • Consistency with Plan • Tiered Analysis

  13. Analytical Methods & Tools • URBEMIS • Direct Emissions • Indirect Emissions • CCAR Protocols • General Reporting Protocol • Specific Protocols (eg., Forestry, Local Government) • Specific Sectors and Source Categories • Stationary Sources • Wastewater and Solid Waste • Construction

  14. Analytic Scenarios • Existing conditions • AB 32 Baseline = 1990 emissions • Buildout of the Existing General Plan • Buildout of the Updated General Plan • Increment between Buildout of the Existing and Updated General Plans

  15. GHG Mitigation Strategies • Forward Planning: Incorporate GHG reduction strategies into the General Plan • Land Use Design- Prioritize Smarter Growth, Connectivity, Compactness, Diversity, Transportation Facilities, Redevelopment, Jobs-Housing-Balance, and Shipping Mode Shift • Project Level Mitigation: Provide a “toolbox” of strategies to mitigate projects • Project Design- Transit, Bike, & Pedestrian support, Alternative Fuel & Electric Vehicles, Energy & Water Efficiency, Green Building, Landscaping, Low Emission Technologies, and Offsets • GHG Reduction Plan: Implement a specific plan to reduce GHG emissions • Establish jurisdictional baseline, reduction targets, deadlines, and specific mitigation strategies and measures

  16. Mitigation Priorities & Issues • Systemic Design to Avoid Emissions • Project Design to Avoid Emissions • Project Elements that Control Emissions • Concurrent Onsite Actions to Offset Emissions • Concurrent Offsite Actions to Offset Emissions • Use Mitigation Fees • Use of Banked Offsets: Real, Permanent, Quantifiable, Enforceable, Additional

More Related