SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) In the rush to reduce California’s pollution and rid the state of fossil fuels, the most intriguing confrontation hasn’t involved business leaders or the oil industry. Instead, its simmering tensions between the state’s staunch environmental advocacy wing and the progressive governor of California who considers himself one of them.
The modern environmental movement has its roots in California, including the founding of the Sierra Club. Gavin Newsom, who rose from local politics in liberal San Francisco to governor of the most populous state in the nation, sees himself as a descendant of that progress. proudly bringing the goals of the movement to the world stage.
However, in the early days of Newsom’s second term, some of his strongest criticisms came from inside the proverbial home. Newsom and the environmental groups mostly agree on the important things, like the rules ban the sale of new gas-powered cars and the goal of creating California with zero emissions. It’s how to get there that’s causing friction.
Maritime nations on Thursday finalized a plan to reduce shipping sector emissions to zero by 2050, but experts warn the deal falls short of what is needed to prevent the climate catastrophe.
Scientists say global heat that has moved into worrying new territory this week is a clear example of how pollutants released by humans are warming their environment.
New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy signed a bill giving Danish offshore wind developer Orsted a tax break for the first of two energy projects it plans to place in waters off the Jersey Shore.
Germany’s ruling coalition has postponed a vote on controversial legislation to encourage the replacement of heating systems to fossil fuels until September after the country’s supreme court rejected plans to pass it through parliament this week.
Those tensions have erupted last month during the California negotiations budget of more than 300 billion dollars. Newsom wanted major changes to the states’ permitting and construction process, saying it was taking too long to build the kind of projects needed to upgrade the state’s aging water delivery system and scale up clean energy to satisfy the states insatiable demand for electricity.
But some Democrats in the legislature and their environmental allies opposed the proposal, saying Newsom’s plan developed over the past year without their input did not include sufficient protections for the state’s fragile ecosystems, the threatened species that depend on them, and the low-income populations and the tribal communities that inhabit them.
The disagreement was so stark that Newsom threatened to veto the entire budget, but both sides came to a compromise. That compromise cleared the legislature on Wednesday, and Newsom is expected to sign it into law next week. But the battle lines have been drawn.
Anthony York, Newsom’s senior communications adviser, said the environmental movement was mostly focused on saying no to things to stop dirty projects that cause harmful pollution. Newsom, York said, wants to change that mindset.
Being an environmentalist means being able to say yes to clean energy projects and clean water projects that will get us off fossil fuels faster, York said. The struggle you’ve seen over infrastructure and streamlining is almost like an initial skirmish in some of the wars to come.
Some environmental leaders chafe at this characterization, including Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of the environmental advocacy group Restore the Delta. She said Newsom’s policies are aimed more at appealing to small-town America for her presidential ambitions.
His plans for the Delta and rivers are strictly for the benefit of the big payers of industrial agriculture, he said.
On Wednesday, tribal leaders and conservationists gathered at the state capitol to urge Newsom to change the state’s water rights system and adopt rules to keep more water in rivers to protect threatened fish species.
Alan Duran attended the rally, saying he finds 95% of what Newsom does as very positive. But he said he was disappointed with Newsom’s stewardship of water, including a long-delayed update of state standards on how much water should be left in major rivers and streams to protect fish.
The government has a responsibility to protect the environment and it’s not doing a good job, said Duran, who was holding up a sign that read No Trust Until Fish Are Safe.
In the Legislature, much of the friction has come from the process. Newsom often comes up with complex proposals and asks lawmakers to bypass their normal vetting process to pass them quickly to the frustration of lawmakers who like to put their own stamp on policy.
If we had started working together earlier this year, we probably could have reduced much of the tension and friction, said Democratic Assemblyman Gregg Hart. Perhaps this is a message to the governor’s team that we can get there if we follow the normal process.
Newsom says there’s no time to wait. California has a goal to reduce its emissions by 40% by 2030. To do so, it must reduce emissions by 4% each year. Instead, the state has cut emissions by 1 percent each year for the past decade, according to the nonpartisan Office of Legislative Analysts. Similarly, with California accelerating its embrace of electric cars, state officials say the state needs to add another 40 gigawatts of new power over the next 10 years. One gigawatt is enough to power around 750,000 homes.
The state must build. If you want to face the extremes and want to move to change the way we produce and consume energy, that means we have to be big on big things, Newsom said during a press conference last week.
That view may conflict with some of the California tribes. They say they have been largely excluded from the state’s complex system of determining who has the right to get water from rivers and streams. Gary Mulcahy, government liaison for the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, said Newsom’s plan to overhaul building and permitting codes will eventually weaken environmental protections.
He accused Newsom of trying to speed up pet projects, including building a tunnel to change how the state moves water from north to south.
Of course we know they will harm the environment, he said.
Newsom’s plan specifically exempts the tunnel project. The Newsom administration says his plan does not weaken existing state environmental protections. Instead, it reduces the time it takes to resolve environmental lawsuits filed to halt construction projects. Lauren Sanchez, Newsom’s senior climate adviser, noted that Newsom has pledged to spend more than $50 billion over the next few years on climate projects, an unprecedented amount.
It’s one of the reasons he said Democratic President Joe Biden came to California last month to talk about climate finance.
We are at the forefront of this crisis, he said. The state is dedicating more money to protecting communities suffering from today’s climate impacts and making sure we are able to fund our world-leading agenda in reducing carbon pollution.
___
This story was updated to correct the spelling of Barbara Barrigan-Parilla’s name
#California #Gov #Gavin #Newsoms #climate #agenda #highlights #tensions #environmental #groups
Image Source : apnews.com