How cities can foster demand for electric cars

Grist
December 28, 2009

• by Ben Holland

When Tesla Motors opened its new showroom in Boulder, it did so in style. Hosting an invitation-only party, the automaker brought out a lively group of local politicians, environmentalists and entrepreneurs for a night of martinis, music and test-drives of the Tesla Roadster.

A Tesla Roadster on display at the electric vehicle maker's new store in Boulder, Colorado.Eric Magnuson via FlickrThe much talked about, all-electric, luxury sports car has received as much attention for its price tag as anything else. At more than $100,000, few people are likely to buy a Roadster. But with a temporary Colorado tax-break reducing the price to $67,800, surely someone in affluent Boulder will snag one. So why not throw a blowout party, invite a bunch of friends, and put the car on display for all to see?

But the Roadster is more than just an expensive car. Its sleek contours and luxury styling are enough to turn anyone into a car fanatic. Well before the party started, invited guests and curious onlookers had gathered outside the building, taking photos with their cell phones as traffic slowed along the west end of Pearl Street. It is a beautiful car, yes, but its performance—demonstrated in an all too brief test-drive up Boulder Canyon—is even more impressive. (Check out a video from Grist's own Tesla ride.)

Inside the showroom, there was a certain zeal running through the conversations of the crowd. Like family members around a newborn's crib, guests hovered over this car, taking photos and clinking cocktail glasses. To be sure, this was a party. But it was also something else. It was a night for the optimist, an opportunity to be there at the beginning of something new and exciting-something world-changing.

Born to be wired

Still in its infancy, the electric car has a future that is both promising and uncertain. It is often cited as an antidote to U.S. dependence on foreign oil, and for good reason—a Pacific Northwest National Laboratory study claims that if 73 percent of the country's light-duty vehicle fleet were electrified, oil consumption would fall by 6.2 million barrels a day. That would eliminate nearly 53 percent of our current oil imports.

It's an alluring goal, but 73 percent is a big, distant number. President Obama has called for 1 million electric cars on the road by 2015, and that's only 0.5 percent of the entire U.S. fleet. The electric car has a ways to go.

But with consumer demand uncertain, automakers are treading lightly. Though most major companies plan to manufacture plug-ins during the next few years, with list prices substantially lower than the Tesla's, initial production rates will be meager. Chevrolet, for instance, has revised plans to release 60,000 units of the highly anticipated Volt, cutting back to a conservative 10,000 units.

Demand is nearly impossible to predict. A product or technology can stagnate for months-years even-and then take off, spreading out into the marketplace. With electric vehicles, there's legitimate concern over the likely demand. But, in the meantime, we can work on dismantling the obstacles most likely to plague this technology. Much of that work can be done on the ground, at the city level.

Home is where the start is

Electric vehicles aren't likely to pour into car lots next year. Our current economy will make sure of that. Nevertheless, many cities can position themselves to benefit from the technology. In doing so, they very well may play the most vital role in the success of these cars.

One such city, Denver, has already begun this work.

As one of several partner cities on Project Get Ready—a Rocky Mountain Institute initiative that convenes city leaders and plug-in champions nationwide—Denver has assembled working groups to facilitate the move to electrified cars. By targeting concerns and perceived inconveniences related to the electric vehicle, these groups may achieve more than any car commercial, marketing campaign, or glitzy cocktail party could ever hope for.

The City and County of Denver has selected nearly 100 sites around the city at which public charging units could be installed. This will offer the public the first tangible look at how electric cars will operate in the city while assuaging fears over their driving ranges.

There's a strong argument for this approach. Although electric vehicles have garnered considerable attention over the years, many people still lack an understanding of how the technology will work in the cities and on the highways. Charging units, placed in key locations, will serve as a visual reminder that the technology is real and the infrastructure is in place.

Smart Grid City

In nearby Boulder, one of the nation's largest electrical utilities, Xcel Energy, is busy installing new smart meters in selected homes and businesses throughout the city. The first project of its size, Smart Grid City will demonstrate the benefits of advanced energy software and real-time information.

If Xcel's recent request to the Colorado Public Utilities Commission for a peak-pricing program is approved, the company will offer consumers a financial incentive to draw energy at off-peak hours. An electric vehicle, for instance, could be plugged in at 9:00 pm, when peak power usage has leveled off, therefore promoting the use of night-time wind energy. The smart meters used in Xcel's program may end up playing an important enabling role in the use of electric cars since utility rates will play an intrinsic role in what time people decide to charge their vehicles.

A Bright Future

Boulder and Denver's civic and government leaders, research institutions, and entrepreneurs are building a home for the electric car. Rather than waiting for the car to arrive, these entities are plug-in-proofing their cities and demonstrating a belief in the potential for vehicle electrification.

With all the money and time going into this effort, the electric car will have a better chance of widespread adoption and we'll be one step closer to energy independence. If it takes a party to sell some cars and get the word out, so be it. That's a future that calls for celebration.

Eco-officers are moving into executive suites

Los Angeles TImes
December 30, 2009

ENVIRONMENT

At many companies, sustainability officers are placed in the upper echelons of companies, where they are highly visible. In some cases, the CEO has taken on the extra duty.

Workers install sedum on the roof of a Ford truck plant in Dearborn, Mich., where it will will provide insulation and save rainwater. Ford's sustainability staff works to make the company, as well as its vehicles, greener. (J. Kyle Keener / Detroit Free Press / October 3, 2002)

By Tiffany Hsu

During his more than three decades in real estate David Pogue played many roles, but environmental expert was never one of them.

That didn't stop his company, Los Angeles real estate brokerage CB Richard Ellis, from naming him the company guru of all things eco-friendly nearly two years ago. Pogue suddenly found himself in charge of making the firm and its projects more energy efficient and environmentally conscious, an abrupt switch from his previous property-management responsibilities.

"I'm an outsider, a real estate guy trying to become an environmentalist," said Pogue, the company's national director of sustainability. "But I believe in what I do, that it's something bigger than myself."

As companies grapple with climate change, try to attract eco-conscious customers and develop alternative energy agendas while complying with regulations, a new kind of administrator is moving into the executive suite to help out.

Sustainability officers and green supervisors, some say, are successors to the diversity managers and innovation specialists of the 1990s -- with their focus equal parts corporate responsibility, public relations and profit.

"Our clients expect this," Pogue said. "A company of our size doesn't have the luxury any longer of not participating."

After attending a rigorous series of conferences and cramming in hours of reading on the so-called green industry, Pogue settled into the position. His efforts include connecting CB Richard Ellis with programs such as Energy Star from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Department, and the U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design building code.

Positions such as Pogue's often are placed in the upper echelons of companies, where they are highly visible and directly overseen by the chief executive. At Coca-Cola Co. and Mitsubishi Motors North America Inc., chief executives Muhtar Kent and Ryoichi Ueda, respectively, have adopted the sustainability officer title as well.

Other firms bundle in extra duties, such as dealing with the supply chain. At Levi Strauss & Co., Michael Kobori works on labor standards and general green issues as vice president for social and environmental sustainability.

"Ten years ago, the position I have didn't exist," Kobori said. "Now, we are seeing a new generation of business leaders who have grown up with sustainability. There is actually a career path in this field for someone at a corporation."

Last year, fewer than 200 positions dedicated to sustainability were spread among more than 1,200 companies, according to consulting firm Hudson Gain Corp. With a "very limited talent pool of experienced sustainability executives," many firms plucked internal candidates who were well-regarded in other fields for the role, the report said.

In higher education, about 80 positions existed last year, 82% of them full time, according to the Assn. for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education. Salaries ranged from less than $20,000 to nearly $160,000.

Green managers are also springing up in government. President Obama signed an executive order in October requiring federal agencies to each designate a senior sustainability officer.

Some companies, eager to cash in on the eco-enthusiasm, have been accused of hiring sustainability officers who are little more than figureheads. Instead of greening the business plan and inspiring the staff, critics contend, these executives end up isolated, ineffective or overburdened.

"There's a danger in creating a chief sustainability officer, because it places all the responsibility of that issue onto one person," said Kobori of Levi Strauss. "We're successful when sustainability gets embedded in all the roles in the company."

Kobori said he works with cotton farmers, fabric mills, factories, shipping lines, retail stores and consumers. His team's efforts have raised water quality standards so that the wastewater pumped out of partner factories in China and Mexico is sometimes cleaner than the water going in, he said.

Care tags on many jeans, some of which feature blended organic cotton and recycled denim, promote energy-saving cold water for washing and clotheslines for drying.

Wal-Mart Stores Inc. hopes to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from its current locations by 20% by 2012 and send no waste to U.S. landfills by 2025, said Matt Kistler, the retailer's senior vice president of sustainability. At a sustainability forum last month, he discussed plans to offer locally grown produce, use certified fisheries and track the diamonds, gold and silver used in the chain's jewelry.

Among other things, Wal-Mart is using energy saving light-emitting diodes in many of its refrigerated and frozen-food cases.

After Bank of America Corp. announced a $20-billion, 10-year commitment to sustainable operations, products and services in 2007, it took on several eco-officers. Among them: a manager certified in green building standards who works on environmental compliance for the company's 96 million square feet of space, an "electronification of paper" executive and several investment strategists focused on renewable energy.

"This is not just doing good; it presents compelling business opportunities for our clients," said Richard Cohen, managing director of environmental strategic investments at the banking giant.

As director of environmental affairs and sustainability at FedEx Corp., Mitch Jackson said he takes a "practical environmentalism" approach -- posting tangible goals and results on the company's citizenship blog.

"There used to be the perception of the environmental department being a cost center rather than as the potential for being a profit center," he said. "We haven't had that in quite some time."

Green officers come from a sprawling range of backgrounds, including engineering, research, finance, human resources, law and public relations, according to the Hudson Gain report.

Frank O'Brien-Bernini, vice president and chief sustainability officer for building-materials company Owens Corning, studied sustainable living in college and researched solar energy for his master's degree in mechanical engineering.

"It's been a career and a passion," he said. "I've been in this for a long time."

Most others, however, such as James J. Gowen at Verizon Communications Inc., are another sort of green -- as in inexperienced. But Gowen, who was already heading up supply chain operations when he was tapped in September to also serve as chief sustainability officer, said Verizon has a history of energy efficiency.

"We've been dealing with sustainability issues for a while, though maybe not calling them that," he said.

Gowen leads a team of eight employees at Verizon, while also pulling from a staff pool of hundreds for various projects.

At Ford Motor Co., Susan Cischke fights the green fight with a staff of nearly 300. The group makes Ford vehicles lighter to improve fuel efficiency, designs electric and hybrid cars and reduces the environmental effects of company factories, among other things. As group vice president of sustainability, environment and safety engineering, Cischke also deals with regulators and works closely with environmentalist and Executive Chairman William Clay Ford Jr.

"This isn't just a job on the side," she said. "It really influences everything we do. It goes beyond compliance and into long-range planning and preparing the company for a broader view."

But in a shaky economy, some sustainability officers are finding they must take "an incrementalist approach" and cherry-pick environmental investments, Pogue of CB Richard Ellis said.

"The past months have been about survivability, not about sustainability," he said. Still, Pogue said, even resistant markets will have to accommodate the demand for green products and practices, and for the people who can make that happen.

"Real estate is a conservative business, and we deal with a lot of people who believe there is no ecological problem," he said. "But they're practical. If enough others believe it's important, then it's important."

tiffany.hsu@latimes.com

Netherlands Advances Plan to Tax Miles Driven

ENN
December 24, 2009

The Netherlands is set to become the first country in Europe to replace road tax with a kilometer charge for all motorists, over 10 years since the idea was first put forward.

If the legislation is passed by parliament, motorists will start paying tax on every kilometer they drive, which the government hopes will reduce traffic jams and pollution.On Friday, ministers agreed that the tax will be three cents a kilometer when the charge is introduced in 2012, rising to 6.7 cents by 2018 - for the greenest cars . But if revenues generated by the tax are not in line with expectations, the tax can be adjusted, the transport ministry said.

Rush hour

The tax will be higher during the rush hour and for more polluting vehicles.

To make sure motorists are not worse off, road tax will be scrapped and the purchase tax on new cars will be reduced. Some 60% of drivers will be better off, the government claims.

The transport ministry said on Friday it expected fatal accidents will fall by 7% and carbon emissions would be down by 10%. Traffic jams will be halved and the amount of kilometres driven will go down by 15%.

Each car on the roads will be fitted with a GPS device which will use satellites to monitor where and when the car is driven and send the information to a central billing point.

San Francisco considering cellphone warnings

Los Angeles Times
December 23, 2009

Mayor Gavin Newsom plans to propose an ordinance that would require retailers to display radiation levels. Studies on the health risks are not conclusive, one environmental group acknowledges.

By Maria L. La Ganga

Reporting from San Francisco - San Francisco officials are debating whether to make this famously liberal city the first in the nation to require retailers to prominently post the amount of radiation emitted by cellphones.

Although there is no scientific consensus that the ubiquitous devices cause health problems, Mayor Gavin Newsom plans to call for an ordinance next month that would require the conspicuous display of radiation levels wherever the phones are sold.

Some hail the proposal as evidence of San Francisco's long tradition of environmental activism; this was the first city in America to ban plastic bags and prohibit a class of chemicals called phthalates from use in children's products. Others view the move as proof of the increasing nannification of government, or as one online critic said, "Thank Newsom we will be saved from our own dimwitted choices."

The city's Commission on the Environment has been drafting a series of recommendations, which include a call for the federal government to reevaluate its limits on cellphone radiation and require warning labels on cellphone packaging. The resolution passed its first hurdle last week.

The proposal credits France for inspiration, because that country's Senate "is considering legislation that would restrict the promotion and sale of cellphones for use by children and would require companies to offer headsets for each phone sold."

A few days after San Francisco's action, a state legislator in Maine introduced a bill to make the Pine Tree State the country's first to require that the phones themselves be labeled.

The bill calls for "a warning label that advises people that the device emits electromagnetic radiation and exposure could cause brain cancer," said Rep. Andrea Boland, a Democrat and the measure's author. "It goes on to say that users, especially children and pregnant women, should keep [cellphones] away from the head and body."

This bicoastal legislative targeting of mobile devices comes as policymakers and consumers await the results of Interphone, an international study of cellphone radiation and brain tumors.

Some components of the study -- the United States did not take part -- have been released, although full publication has been delayed.

"The short-term studies [in Interphone] generally did not find risk," said Olga Naidenko, a senior scientist with the Environmental Working Group, a research and advocacy organization. "The long-term studies did."

CTIA, the trade group representing cellphone makers, opposes the San Francisco plan. John Walls, the group's vice president for public affairs, said in a written statement that his industry has "always been guided by science and the views of impartial health organizations."

Walls, who would respond only via e-mail, said "the peer-reviewed scientific evidence has overwhelmingly indicated that wireless devices do not pose a public health risk. In addition, there is no known mechanism for microwave energy within the limits established by the FCC to cause any adverse health effects."

The Environmental Working Group, which launched an online guide to radiation and wireless devices and published its own cautionary report in September, acknowledged that the most recent science "is not conclusive."

But the Washington, D.C.-based group, which is consulting with San Francisco on the city's proposed ordinance, believes that recent components of the Interphone study "raise serious issues about the cancer risk of cellphone use that must be addressed through further research."

The National Cancer Institute takes a similar cautious approach. Although studies "have not shown any consistent link between cellular telephone use and cancer," according to a statement on its website, "scientists feel that additional research is needed."

The Federal Communications Commission, with the Food and Drug Administration's support, has set limits for safe exposure to so-called radiofrequency energy -- the radiation emitted by a mobile phone and absorbed by the body.

The unit of measurement is called the specific absorption rate, or SAR, and the FCC limit is an SAR level of 1.6 watts per kilogram of body tissue.

"Any cellphone at or below these SAR levels -- that is, any phone legally sold in the U.S. -- is a 'safe' phone, as measured by these standards," according to the FCC website. The FCC did not return phone calls for comment.

The Environmental Working Group's online guide to radiation by cellphone models lists the Samsung Impression as the lowest emission model, with 0.35 watts per kilogram when held up to the ear.

The Motorola VU204, the T-Mobile myTouch 3G and the Kyocera Jax S1300 top the organization's list of phones with the highest radiation, emitting 1.55 watts per kilogram when held to the ear.

That's the kind of information that San Francisco officials want consumers to see when they are shopping for a mobile phone.

Newsom "believes this is the next frontier in terms of consumer safety," said Brian Purchia, the mayor's spokesman. "San Franciscans should have access to the same information given to the federal authorities about radiation from cellphones."

The mayor has no plans, however, to give up his iPhone.

In fact, the last thing the city wants to do is tell people that "they should stop using their cellphones," said Debbie Raphael, toxics reduction program manager for the San Francisco Department of the Environment.

"If you are worried," she said, "there's a lot you can do to minimize your exposure: You can use a headset, you can text, use a speakerphone or a land line."

maria.laganga@latimes.com

Copyright © 2009, The Los Angeles Times

What You Might Not Know About Fake Christmas Trees

Christmas Tree Association December 22, 2009 * Where do they come from? * What are the factories like where they're made? * What are fake trees made of? * Why do some artificial trees carry a warning label? * Why did the USDA quarantine some artificial trees? * Who decided to make a fake Christmas tree? * Are fake trees really fireproof? * Are fake trees better for the environment? * Where do they come from? Most fake trees (85%) in the U.S. are imported from China. Almost 10 Million fake trees were sold worldwide in 2003. The U.S. Commerce Dept. tracks the Import of Fake Trees * What are the factories like where they're made? As noted in the Washington Post, "On the concrete floors of Zhang's Shuitou Company factory, migrant workers, most earning about $100 a month, squat in front of hissing machinery as they melt chips into moildable plastic..." Read the full article. * What are fake trees made of? Most artificial Christmas trees are made of metals and plastics. The plastic material, typically PVC, can be a potential source of hazardous lead. Read a warning about them from the Children's Health Environmental Coalition. * Why do some artificial trees carry a warning label? The potential for lead poisoning is great enough that fake trees made in China are required by California Prop 65 to have a warning label. Read more about the effects of lead poisoning. Learn more about lead in artificial trees. View a 2007 report from CNN on the dangers of lead in holiday decorations, such as fake trees and wreaths: * Why did the USDA quarantine some artificial trees? Some fake trees have a wooden center pole. In 2004, the U.S. Department of Agriculture placed a quarantine on fake trees from China, which had a potentially harmful beetle in the center pole. Learn more about the quarantine. * Who decided to make a fake Christmas tree? Actually fake trees were invented by a company who made toilet bowl brushes, the Addis Brush Company. Regardless of how far the technology has come, it's still interesting to know the first fake Christmas trees were really just big green toilet bowl brushes. Read the article. * Are fake trees really fireproof? Overloaded electrical outlets and faulty wires are the most common causes of holiday fires in residences - these are just as likely to affect artificial trees as Real Trees. See below for examples: Lights on Christmas Tree Spark KC House Fire Giving Tree Fire Damage $1 Million In 2004, the Farmington Hills Fire Department in metropolitan Detroit conducted a test of how real and artificial trees react in a house fire. The artificial tree, which was advertised as "flame retardant," did resist the flames for an amount of time, but then was engulfed in flames and projected significant heat and toxic smoke, containing hydrogen chloride gas and dioxin. Below are the before, during and after photos of the artificial tree. BEFORE DURING AFTER Compare the above photos to those of the well-cared-for Real Tree, which remained mostly intact, as seen below: BEFORE DURING AFTER . * Are fake trees better for the environment? As mentioned before, most artificial trees are manufactured in China and contain PVC (polyvinyl chloride). In fact, artifical Christmas Trees were recently added to the Center for Health, Environment & Justice's list of household products containing PVC. According to the Children's Health Environmental Coalition, the manufacture of PVC creates and disperses dioxins, which include the most toxic man-made chemical known. Released into air or water, dioxins enter the food chain, where they accumulate in fatty tissues of animals and humans, a potential risk for causing cancer, damaging immune functions and impairing children's development. This issue is especially concerning due to China's weak enforcement of environmental regulations. Delta Farm Press recently addressed China's environmental crisis in this article. Home | About | Contact | Tree Search | Site Search

Landfill concerns in Desert Valley and Recology

Silver Pinyon Journal
December 18, 2009

Written by Henry Kingman

WINNEMUCCA —Tuesday's City Council meeting featured a presentation from Jim French, a private citizen with concerns about the landfill Recology hopes to operate in Desert Valley. Recology Chief Operating Officer George McGrath and Chief Counsel John Frankovich were on hand to address French's concerns, and others, and update City officials on the company's plans and progress. Recology has been granted a conditional use permit by Humboldt County, but still lacks the state-level regulatory permits needed to operate a landfill. It hopes to operate a Class I facility on a site about 25 miles west-southwest of Winnemucca, on property near Jungo flats that was purchased by its wholly owned subsidiary, Jungo Land & Investments. Discussion of the proposed landfill has proven contentious in previous local government meetings. This time attendees were mostly well-behaved with Mayor Putnum having to play "adult-in-the-room" only a couple of times.   The presentation was given by Jim French, a retired wildlife biologist who worked 28 years in Winnemucca. He previously gave the presentation "six or seven times," he said, to groups such as the Humboldt Development Authority. French has no specific experience with landfill siting or permitting. However, he said that as "lead biologist" for the Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW), he was involved in permitting about 200 projects, including the Valmy power plant and "pretty much every gold mine currently in operation." French said he was not paid for his investigation but did so at the request of another local citizen, Stephen Dick. "I have no skin in this at all," French commented. French said he does not oppose a mega-landfill in Humboldt County. Instead, he thinks Recology's current site has significant problems, and that its permit application with the Nevada Department of Environmental Protection (NDEP) lacks scientific rigor in several areas. French said. "I honestly believe there's a solution in this, where we can place this thing that minimizes risks. But I believe the project's permit application is currently incomplete, based on the material I've looked at so far. I believe there's justification for [state officials] to say the project can't happen. [This presentation] is nothing more than a head's up." French's main stated concerns were three. Fugitive Dust French fears that human waste could be blown into Winnemucca as "fugitive dust." This could jeopardize Recology's permit, he said. To support this theory, French showed a wind direction map acquired from the local airport. The map (depicted below) showed wind direction to be highly unpredictable, but moving from the proposed site toward the general direction of Winnemucca about a third of the time. French then showed photos of several sky-blackening dust storms. To borrow a Plain States phrase, the photos showed "a lot of real estate changing hands." Such storms commonly originate at Jungo Flats, French argued, and often blow through Winnemucca. "We get a blow that funnels between the Eugenes and Blue Mountain right into town. In my view, the site as it is selected right now is going to be prone to fugitive transport, including dried human sludge." Groundwater Contamination Ordinarily, Class I landfills are required to sit 1000 feet or more from any open water, and 100 feet or more above any water table, French noted. In its landfill operation permit application to NDEP, Recology requested an exemption from this requirement, because exploratory drilling found water 55 to 60 feet below the surface. That means the dump's perimeter "leachate collection system" would come within "19 to 30 feet" from the water table, by French's estimatation, and could contain hazardous materials. French said that to support its exemption request, Recology has argued that water beneath its land constitutes a "perched aquifer" that does not connect to nearby water tables. The site appears to be about 15 miles from the Humboldt River, and a similar distance from Rye Patch Reservoir. In his presentation, French suggested that hydrogeologic data for the area is not complete enough to determine whether or not the water beneath the site constitutes a "perched" (isolated) aquifer. However, he said, "I believe the aquifer under section seven on Jungo Flat is an active aquifer, for a number of reasons." French next displayed a map of regional water table depths, which he said was made using GIS software and data from the Groundwater Atlas of Northern Nevada. The map showed similar water depths throughout a large region near the proposed site. Since water tends to "seek its own level," the implication seemed to be that the water under the dump could be part of a single large system, rather than a compartmentalized one as Recology has suggested. French also argued that "especially further north," the perched aquifers he has observed in the Desert Valley have high levels of "total dissolved solids," because the water is essentially stagnant. He said, "The water quality [found in Recology's wells] approximates what we see in Rye Patch, and even the groundwater in Winnemucca." French also expressed concern over Recology's ability to handle area floods. He said, "One of the requirements of the permit is that surface water can't leave the site. The engineered design [submitted to NDEP] is a series of ditches and some settling basins." French then showed a photo of adjacent land in a flooded state, commenting, "The notion that [ditches and basins] would be able to keep and capture that amount of water is disingenuous." French also questioned NDEP's ability to enforce water quality compliance effectively, due to understaffing and administrative furloughs created in response to the statewide budget crisis. Attractive nuisance to wildlife Finally, French expressed concern that the proposed dump's leachate collection system, collection basins, and even dust control watering could constitute an "attractive nuisance" to wildlife. Because Recology hopes to operate its landfill on private land, it was not obliged to apply for a permit from the Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW), French said. However, he noted that there is a "zero tolerance policy from Fish and Wildlife on that issue," and said Recology should have sought advice from NDOW early on about how to design its facility for compatibility with local wildlife. "I'm not saying it's a deal-breaker, but it's something that should have been addressed," he said. Recology's response After French concluded his presentation, McGrath and Frankovitch spoke with the Council and with the public. They responded to points made by French, and also answered additional questions from Mayor Di Ann Putnam, City Council members, and the audience. McGrath noted that  Recology's permit before NDEP is still pending, but has already been extensively reviewed. And, he said, "Almost without exception, their opinions are different than those of Mr. French." "If he's correct [about hydrogeologic issues]," McGrath added, "They won't issue these permits." McGrath continued, "NDEP has a standard that says you cannot degradate [sic] ground water. Most of this landfill is 60 feet above water level. Around the edges, where there's a collection system, it gets as close as 35 feet. We have submitted to NDEP a sophisticated liner system. NDEP has not approved it yet. We have numerous meetings with them. The [liner] we have is a 6-foot multi-material system." "In addition to that, you have to monitor, so that if there's any leakage, it's detected quickly and remediated quickly, or your permit is in jeopardy," McGrath continued. "The possibility of any significant amount of pollution is extremely remote," he concluded. Mayor Putnam asked, "Do you have monitors in there? Is it recorded on a monthy basis? Or, how is it reported to NDEP?" McGrath said Recology would contract an engineering firm, Golder Associations, to do leachate testing and submit the results "to us and the agencies." Frankovitch added that frequency would be one of the conditions of the permit. While yearly testing is not unusual, Frankovich said, "Because of the publicity, my guess is that they are going to be more often, at least at the beginning." The Mayor then asked about what kinds of materials would be stored at the Jungo facility, and whether there was the potential for on-site recycling, energy production, or the use of a system, such as those commonly used in Europe, that convert garbage into energy and inert materials. McGrath said, "Typically, the biggest component is fiber, such as paper products. There's a large percentage of textiles, such as clothing. There's plastic bags, kitchen bags, packaging, soda cans, and construction and demolition debris." McGrath then added, "I'd like to qualify the origin of the waste in the Bay Area. There seems to be a misunderstanding that there'd be the waste stream from San Francisco, which has 72 percent diversion [into recycling facilities]. What's left is the dregs. That waste stream will not go to Jungo. It is destined for another landfill we operate and own. The balance of the Bay Area are not as aggressive as San Francisco in terms of recycling." As for mining the garbage for materials or fuels, McGrath said, "In order to look at the future, and say, 'Can this landfill be a mechanism to look at recycling, or fuel a plasma-arc furnace?' you need high-BTU content. The City and County of San Francisco's waste is not high-BTU. When you do a plasma-arc furnace, you're looking at 5,000 degrees to maintain plasma temperature. In order to bring in 4,000 tones per day, and process and use a conversion technology, there's multiple companies that have the technology. However, we'd have to be able to position the company to acquire those waste streams. But you need a permit to bid on those waste streams." McGrath added, "Recology is a leader in recycling. We have met with numerous companies [that sell conversion technologies]. But until you put a facility in place that's marketable, you can't get to the next step." McGrath then responded to French's suggestion that Recology should have worked with NDOW to ensure compliance with Fish and Wildlife requirements. He said, "If NDOW wants to get involved, it's not too late to participate. We haven't got any permits yet, including the operating permit, and before that's issued, there'll be a period for public comment." He then downplayed the potential for fugitive dust bearing dried human waste. "The working area will be about an acre in size. All but that one acre will always be covered," he said. Addressing French's concerns about run-off containment, he said, "If there's a rainstorm, everything that touches the garbage must be treated as leachate. NDEP does require all storm runoff to be retained onsite. It goes into a lined basin, and is tested and then distributed to retention basins for absorbtion or use for dust control." Councilman Patty Herzog then asked what method would be used to keep animals out of the various water basins. McGrath replied that Recology has dealt with "unusual animal issues" from time to time. He said, "We have one landfill near Travis Air Force Base, and one near Beale Air Force Base. If there's an inordinate amount of seagulls, we could create risk for pilots. So, we use falconers to move the seagulls away. That's an environmentally sustainable way to do it, without shotguns, smoke, and other enviornmental hazards. That's not a permit condition; it's just something we do." McGrath added that Recology has experience handling animal issues at its other sites, and "should it have to deal with wildlife at Jungo," would build fences or install nets as needed to keep wildlife out. Why us? Herzog then asked, simply, why Recology wanted to move all this garbage here. McGrath replied, "We went through a [site-finding] process with a third party. Once you leave the vicinity of the Bay Area, trucks are expensive. The economies of rail displaced shorter truck hauling. We wanted to ensure the landfill was in a remote area. Our partner looked at various parcels of land, and said this one in Humboldt County works." Councilman Joyce Sheen then asked, "If you're such an environmental-friendly, good neighbor company, why did you look for a remote area?" McGrath replied, "Part of it is that land is reasonably priced. There aren't a lot of regional landfills in Northern California. The bulk [of landfills] service municipal areas. At one time, there were in excess of 2,000 landfills in California. Now, there are [fewer] than 700 or 800." Councilman Doug Cain asked specifically about the potential for electrical power generation at the proposed site. McGrath replied, "We've had discussions with [company's that do] electricity, ethanol, and even jet fuel production from waste. But none have commercially viable plants in the U.S." He added, "We do at one plant capture methane that powers about 1,500 homes in the area. [At the Jungo plant], we should achieve the ability to capture methane within five years, because of the volume." McGrath then said Recology would happily provide tours of other landfills, if that would help allay concerns over the proposed Jungo plant. He said, "At one of our facilities, aside from the operating area, you can't tell it's a landfill. That's the kind of facility we'd place in Humboldt County." He added, "I extend the offer to Mr. French, and the Council. We'd be happy to share in the cost of a chartered bus or other conveyance to make this work." Humboldt Development Authority Boardmember Pat Gray then asked specifically about the potential for recycling at the proposed Jungo facility. He said, "When you're talking about the wastestream, it sounds like there's some recyclables. Is there an opportunity once it gets here to recycle it here, and send it back to California?" McGrath replied, "The opportunity does exist. We are a partner in a "dirty MuRF" [material recovery facility] that accepts garbage without segregation. Some opportunity for that would exist here. The issue becomes where we're positioned, where we are with our permit process. And, it would be based on the economics of it." How much money's in it for the County? Former Councilman Don Stoker then asked, from the audience, "The money the County's going to get... Is that negotiable?" McGrath replied, "Our host fee [at our Class I/Class II facility in Lincoln County, Nevada] is $1.35/ton, or a percentage of the tip fee, whichever's greater. That's probably in the middle range; host fees depend where the landfill is located. In Lincoln County, some of that host fee is used for road mitigation in front of the landfill." McGrath then suggested a similar rate would net Humboldt County about $1,350,000 annually, considering the planned daily dump rate of 4,000 tons. And, finally, he answered, "But yes; everything's negotiable." Additional possible economic benefits were discussed in an earlier Silver Pinyon story. An unidentified audience member then asked about additional lands owned by Jungo Land Investments that abutt Recology's proposed landfill site. He said, "Conversations at the Desert Research Institute suggest that four square miles is the area needed [for Class I landfills] to stay economically feasible in this environment. Why have you refused to acknowledge responsibility for three additional square-mile sections currently lease-optioned? Is that designed to avoid BLM permitting processes?" McGrath replied, "We're not intending to do anything with them at this time." He added that the proposed site has volume "sufficient for 95 years" at the expected rates. In order to annex the adjacent lands, the company would have to go through a re-permitting process, he said. Audience member William Douglas then asked whether Recology had undertaken any studies of possible health threats resulting from landfills, and whether it would post bonds against the possibility of widespread cancer outbreaks, such as those elsewhere in Nevada near former military waste dump sites. McGrath replied that the only bonds Recology planned to post were those set aside for site closure, and post-closure maintainenace. The council then moved on to discuss other matters.

California’s diesel rule gets renewed scrutiny

Capitol Weekly
December 17, 2009

By John Howard | 

A News Analysis
When Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger traveled to Copenhagen to tout his record battling global warming, at home a very different story developed. He told his top air-quality regulators to change – and, critics fear, potentially weaken -- a premier regulation curbing diesel soot.

The paradox was not apparent in Denmark: The governor, his popularity at a record low in California, didn't mention the setback involving a nationally watched regulation governing a million trucks and school buses.

But at home, the action marked a significant political and policy event. Gov. Schwarzenegger demanded that the diesel regulation be retooled by the Air Resources Board to "help small and mid-size companies meet these important air quality regulations." The governor appoints all the members of the 11-person board, including the chairwoman.

"It is clear," the governor said, that "clear responsible action is needed."

The ARB, accustomed to public pressure, frequently tweaks regulations, but rarely does so at the direct, public orders of the governor. But this regulation already was clouded by controversy. It was not formally delayed or rescinded as two commissioners wanted, but the fact that new provisions will be added under pressure from the governor reflects the political intensity surrounding the issue.  

It also shows the susceptibility of the governor, not for the first time, to bow to pressure.

The governor, in a carefully worded public statement, said that despite the new provisions he seeks, the "final 2014 implementation date" will not be affected. He did not mention the initial January 2011 date.

The ARB says the timetable of the regulation remains unchanged, although environmentalists who track the board's activities said a startup delay is likely. "There's no question," said Bill Magavern, director of Sierra Club California. "And there is a danger that by accommodating the truckers, the ARB will lose some of the early benefits of cleaning up the fleet."

The board itself says the regulation is going forward as planned, and is being altered to reflect the impact of the recession on the diesel vehicle industry – an impact that the industry itself repeatedly raised before the ARB voted on the rule.

The potential delay reflects a political victory of sorts for the diesel industry, which includes numerous small and mid-size companies that opposed the proposed regulation from the beginning. It also reflects an embarrassment for some newspapers that editorialized in favor of the original regulation a year ago, despite opposition from the industry, and now are editorializing in favor of the new provisions.

 "We're definitely disappointed at this delay. What this means is that a child living in the Central Valley will have to wait longer to breathe clean air," said Matt Vander Sluis, who handles global warming issues for the Planning and Conservation League.

The ARB acted after public criticism erupted over a key staffer's falsification of his academic credentials. The ARB staffer, Hien Tran, did not really have a Ph.D. from UC Davis as he claimed. That admission cast a cloud over the report he headed that served as a critical underpinning of the new regulation.

The scientific validity of Tran's study was not the issue – at least not initially. But as criticism grew from some in the scientific community, the health report was scuttled and a new one ordered in its place.  On the board, the lead critic of the report was Dr. John Telles, a Fresno cardiologist, who was angered that many on the board did not learn of the credential falsification before they voted on the regulation -- even though top ARB staffers and Chairwoman Mary Nichols were aware of the problem.

"We take the employee misconduct very seriously but it should not affect an extremely important public health measure that has been extensively reviewed throughout the scientific community. We have tightened up our procedures to ensure anincident like this never happens again," Nichols said.
The new regulation will prevent thousands of premature deaths every year in the state and save billions of dollars in health care costs, the administration says. The ARB estimated the financial impact of the regulation at $4.5 billion to $5.5 billion, which includes the cost of fitting vehicles with anti-pollution devices.

According to an ARB analysis, the new standards are projected to prevent 4,000 premature deaths, 110,000 asthma-related cases, 9,200 cases of acute bronchitis and 680,000 lost work days over 20 years. The requirements also would save up to $26 billion in health care cost by 2030, according to air board projections. The rule requires truck owners to install diesel exhaust filters on their rigs by Jan. 1, 2011, with nearly all vehicles upgraded by 2014.

The new regulations do not apply to snow-removal equipment and other such vehicles that run less than 100 hours per year. Emergency vehicles, agricultural equipment and vehicles that run on less than 25 horsepower also would be exempt.

"There is going to be a series of workshops and an update to the board in April with some new provisions and a new health report," said ARB spokeswoman Mary Salas Fricke.
The ARB, heeding the governor, ordered its staff  "to return to the Board next April with a new provision that would provide truck fleets more flexibility in cleaning up their diesel emissions under the state's Truck and Bus Rule that was adopted in December of last year, in light of the recession's effect on the industry."

The ARB said "the down economy has reduced the amount of time trucks have operated, thus reducing harmful diesel emissions that would have occurred during normal economic times."

Many in the Capitol in both parties believe Schwarzenegger is not deeply engaged on key issues. But that clearly is not true on global warming policies, which he sees as his administration's legacy. He has not hesitated to wield clout over the ARB, up to and including the firing of the chairman.

"They (board members) are all appointed and at any point he could take off one of those members and replace him with any other member.  The board has prized its independence, but they are going to listen to what the governor wants," Magavern said.

PlantSF turns pavement into a garden spot

San Francisco Chronicle
December 13, 2009

Joe Eaton,Ron Sullivan

---

If you've converted a piece of your San Francisco sidewalk into a garden strip lately - or admired someone's plantings as you walked by - you can thank Jane Martin for making the process easier and cheaper. An architect and landscape designer who runs Shift Design, she's the godmother of the city's new Sidewalk Landscaping Permit.

---

Images

View More Images

---

---

Martin, founding director of PlantSF (Permeable Landscape as Neighborhood Treasure in San Francisco), got into the depaving act six years ago when she lived on Shotwell Street in the Mission.

Shotwell's sidewalk was wider than its driving lane, an invitation to drive or park on the sidewalk. "I was looking for more space to garden in," she recalled. She realized that turning part of the sidewalk into green space would help keep vehicles off it. However, getting a permit for the work required an onerous process and an $800 fee.

What she wanted to do was considered an encroachment on public space for private benefit, something city policy attempts to limit.

"But it's really a public use for public space," Martin said. "It shouldn't be lumped in with the other things they try to discourage. I became inspired to make that easier for people because of the positive response I got from people in the neighborhood." She floated the idea with her neighborhood parks council but got nowhere, in part because of maintenance concerns: "How do you maintain a linear park that involves all these individual people?"

The catalyst turned out to be a sewer backup after a heavy rain in 2004. "With San Francisco's combined sewer system," Martin said, "it all goes to a wastewater treatment plant, which is terrific if it doesn't exceed the volume the system can handle. In most of the city, storm water has no place to go naturally. My home/office was in a place where the storm water backed up, blew a manhole cover off, came overland and flooded. I woke up with a river of black water in my home." Her sidewalk garden had absorbed the runoff like a sponge. "I now had a connection to a sustainability aspect," she said, "and that's what gained traction for PlantSF. We needed a way to remove obstacles so we could start depaving access areas."

Long active in neighborhood advocacy work, Martin took her concerns to City Hall contacts she had made and got the attention of newly elected Mayor Gavin Newsom. Newsom and the heads of the Public Utilities Commission and Department of Public Works gathered at her office, where she showed them charts, graphs and video footage of the flood. "The mayor really took ownership of the issue," she said. "He turned to the department heads in the room and said, 'What are we going to do to solve this problem?' "

The result, in 2006, was a law creating a special permit that requires a sliding-scale fee of $160 to $215 and allows neighbors to collaborate. Martin sees depaving as "something simple that people can do, either piecemeal or systematically. I really feel that people want to do it themselves." To that end, she created a PlantSF Web site and has developed how-to information for translation into Chinese and Spanish. She's also partnered with the mayor's office, Recreation and Park, DPW, the PUC and the San Francisco Parks Trust (her fiscal sponsor) on neighborhood makeovers. So far there have been about 500 applications for the new permit, and tens of thousands of square feet have been transformed.

"You can do it almost everywhere," Martin said. "The PUC will tell you that nearly anywhere you can open up the sidewalk, water is perfectly appropriate to go into the ground. In addition to homeowners, schools and businesses can do this." She worked with Flora Grubb Gardens, which was facing a DPW order to replace 3,000 square feet of sidewalk. "This is a perfect instance of using the sidewalk landscaping permit," she said. In the end, 1,600 square feet went from pavement to garden. With help from PlantSF, sidewalk conversions have blossomed in the Mission, Haight-Ashbury, Bayview and Marina districts.

The benefits have been tangible. "The mayor and the board have a strong desire to green the city, not just for esthetic reasons but for the storm water management benefit," said Department of Public Works director Ed Reiskin. "What Jane is doing almost single-handedly is being a catalyst in support of these efforts to turn hardscape into softscape."

Martin has noticed other benefits: "Not only do you have more eyes on the street, but people are out more talking to each other because they have occasion to stop and look at the plants. They become magnets for social interaction - you don't even have to speak the same language to appreciate the plants." Renters and others with no space to garden have bought into the conversion projects. Sidewalk gardens can even be food sources, as long as gardeners are careful about soil conditions and avoid plants that store toxins.

Martin is particularly excited about a new direction for PlantSF. The group has a grant to take its sidewalk landscaping model to the Sunset District, where the PUC is looking at a low-impact-design strategy - depaving and rainwater harvesting - to keep storm water out of the combined sewer system and to recharge the aquifer.

Learn more

PlantSF: plantsf.org. Visit the site for Sidewalk Landscaping Permit application form and guidelines, and a gallery of projects.

Shift Design: shiftdesignstudio.com. See Planting page for more of Jane Martin's projects.

Joe Eaton and Ron Sullivan are naturalists and freelance garden writers in Berkeley. Check out their Web site at www.selbornesurveys.com or e-mail them at home@sfchronicle.com.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/columns/thedirt/#ixzz0ZsqNGf9n

New York City Axes Green Buildings Plan

ENN
December 8, 2009

RELATED ARTICLES

• New York City Plans to Make Older Buildings Refit to Save Energy
  April 23, 2009 03:07 PM
• NYC green building program launches
  September 29, 2009 10:04 AM
• Bloomberg vs. Newsom: The Debate Over Green Building
  June 11, 2009 10:17 AM
• Sixteen Cities To Go Green Under Clinton Plan
  May 16, 2007 12:00 AM

In theory, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg's landmark plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by retrofitting leaky old buildings was a good idea. In the face of a global recession, and with a mandate for building owners to foot much of the bill, the owners didn't agree.  After fierce criticism, the city is dropping a plan that would have required older buildings — those measuring 50,000 square feet or more —to perform energy audits and subsequent efficiency upgrades.

If passed, the mandate would have applied to roughly 22,000 buildings, or nearly half the city's square footage, requiring owners to upgrade light bulbs, old boilers and leaky windows. The legislation also would have represented a big push in the green building movement, since most cities impose efficiency standards on new construction only. In the city, buildings contribute 80 percent of the city's total carbon emissions, and Mayor Bloomberg is trying to lower emissions by 30 percent by 2030.

A major sticking point was cost, with owners required to pay for most of the upgrades. Officials estimated private investors would need to kick in $2.5 billion for building improvements since the city only had $16 million in federal stimulus funds to pay for such changes.

Article continues: http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/climate-change/stories/nyc-nixes-green-buildings-plan

World's mayors tackle climate change on their own

AP
December 14, 2009

By CHARLES J. HANLEY and JAN M. OLSEN, Associated Press Writers Charles J. Hanley And Jan M. Olsen, Associated Press Writers – Mon Dec 14, 4:36 am ET

COPENHAGEN – It isn't easy getting Italy's city dwellers out of their Fiats, off their Vespa scooters and onto bicycles to ride to work, "like here in Copenhagen," says an Italian environmental official.

"It isn't a matter of painting a right lane and saying, 'This is a bike lane,'" explained Emanuele Burgin, a Bologna provincial councilor. "We realize we're far away from this."

But Copenhagen's lord mayor has her problems, too. Finding enough parking space for all those bikes is just the beginning.

"First, we must get rid of our coal plants, and we need to get that subway expansion built," Ritt Bjerregaard told The Associated Press. She also wants even more Copenhageners cycling than the one-third who pedal each day to the office or school.

Bjerregaard and some 80 other mayors and local officials, including New York's Michael Bloomberg and representatives of Tokyo, Jakarta, Toronto and Hong Kong, have converged on the Danish capital in their own climate and energy summit. They'll compare notes on how cities can combat climate change and save money on energy and other costs.

This five-day "cities summit," opening Monday, will parallel the second week of the U.N. climate conference, intended to boost international efforts to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases blamed for global warming. President Barack Obama and more than 100 other national leaders will attend that U.N. conference in its final days.

Today's cities and towns consume two-thirds of the world's total primary energy and produce more than 70 percent of its energy-related carbon dioxide emissions, the International Energy Agency reports. That will grow to 76 percent by 2030, the agency says. Most comes from electrifying and heating private, commercial and municipal buildings.

In a report last week, the IEA's executive director, Nabuo Tanaka, said local authorities "have significant potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions" through renewable energy and other means. "Yet relatively few are taking up the challenge," he said.

Cities face many obstacles to becoming more "climate-friendly" — from extensive old infrastructure that would be cost too much replace, to political interests that resist City Hall's plans. The New York example is illustrative.

New York City last week approved legislation requiring owners of larger buildings to conduct energy audits and replace insulation and take other steps toward energy efficiency. But under pressure from developers and real-estate interests, the measures were stripped of requirements for more costly improvements, such as total overhauls of heating systems and replacing windows.

Similarly, Bloomberg's efforts to cut traffic in Manhattan by charging fees to drive cars in certain neighborhoods was blocked by New York State politicians.

London succeeded where New York failed. In 2003, then-Mayor Ken Livingstone introduced a daily "congestion charge" — the equivalent of $16 — on cars and trucks entering the central city during business hours.

Other big cities are also trying to lead on climate. Sao Paulo, Brazil, for example, a sprawl of 11 million people, has by law set as a goal a 30 percent reduction in emissions by 2013. It has already achieved 20 percent since 2005, chiefly through its new system of generating biogas for energy at landfills, instead of allowing waste methane, a greenhouse gas, to rise into the skies.

Here in this city of 1.2 million, Bjerregaard also has set ambitious goals.

Copenhagen reduced its CO2 emissions by 20 percent from 1995 to 2005. The lord mayor plans to reduce it by another 20 percent by 2015, and then to become "carbon-neutral," free of fossil fuel for core needs, by 2025.

Wind turbines off this port city's shores and on land now supply at least 13 percent of Copenhagen's electricity, and at least 14 percent more comes from biofuels and waste incineration. Copenhagen has 190 miles (307 kilometers) of heavily used bicycle paths, and an excellent public transport system. It even offers urbanites "home visits" by climate consultants to help families become more energy-efficient.

Rows of scores of bicycles outside buildings are a common sight in this clean, modern city. Foreigners "laugh when they hear that bicycle parking also is a problem" Bjerregaard said.

To reach its ultimate goal, the city plans to switch power and heat generation fully from coal to biomass — specifically, wood chips, which are less than 2 percent as polluting as coal. Copenhagen's unique "district heating system" — 97 percent of the city is linked to the waste heat generated by electricity plants — will make it easier to convert.

"In the United States, heating is seen as a private matter that's up to individual citizens to decide," Bjerregaard said. "Here in Denmark we operate with a common approach, a strong community mentality."

She also is pushing completion of an important new line on Copenhagen's elevated-and-underground Metro train system, opened only in 2002, and improvements in the convenient bus system.

"We are far behind when it comes to the Metro," she said. As for the buses, "If we create these lines where they drive fast, and people can see how fast they drive, we can have more people take public transportation."

Although Italians may not be filling up bicycle lanes, their municipal leaders sound intent on rolling back CO2 emissions, even if they're starting late: Italy's emissions have grown since it accepted the 1997 Kyoto Protocol climate deal, rather than declined as required.

Burgin, at a weekend briefing at the climate conference, said energy savings and conversion in the city of Milan alone could have met one-seventh of Kyoto's demands on Italy. And he said Italian cities are fast catching up on controlling emissions.

"Climate change allows you to interpret your plans in terms of emissions. Until now everything we planned was planned in terms of money," he said.

The city of Rome's environmental chief, Paolo Giuntarelli, said his city intends to be the "first capital in Europe with an ambitious plan for energy self-sustainability." Although Copenhagen may beat them to that distinction, the Romans have a serious motivation.

"We are bidding to host the 2020 Olympics," Giuntarelli said, and Rome believes only a "green" city can snare that prize.

New model outlines climate change peril

Sacramento Bee
December 3, 2009

By Kevin Yamamura
kyamamura@sacbee.com

Published: Thursday, Dec. 3, 2009 - 12:00 am | Page 3A

In 2100, Fisherman's Wharf would become Fisherman's Bay, the baseball diamond at AT&T Park would flood and two major Bay Area airports would better serve seaplanes under a climate change model unveiled Wednesday by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Google.

The governor released a new report determining that global warming, left unabated, would lead to higher sea levels, greater wildfire risks and less water supply over the next century, based on research compiled by the California Energy Commission.

Schwarzenegger also convened a panel of 23 experts from various sectors to review the 200-page report and draft final policy recommendations for the governor and Legislature by July.

The governor and legislative Democrats in 2006 approved a new law requiring California to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions 25 percent by 2020. But the governor said Wednesday that "we must also be prepared if climate change continues to worsen."

The California Energy Commission spent $150,000 in partnership with Google to develop a new Google Earth application that shows sea level changes in the Bay Area, as well as increased wildfire risks and snowpack reductions throughout the state. The energy commission also maintains a climate change research unit on which it spent $2.4 million in 2007.

Schwarzenegger called the latest efforts a "Plan B" in case global warming continues. He said the state faces as much as $2.5 trillion in costs related to risks from climate change.

In its report, the California Natural Resources Agency makes a dozen recommendations, including one suggesting that governments may wish to restrict new development in areas vulnerable to flood, fire or erosion. Among those areas is the manmade Treasure Island, where Schwarzenegger held his news conference.

"It's about considering those impacts," said Tony Brunello, the agency's deputy secretary for climate change and energy. "We're not saying the sky is falling. We're giving people real information so they don't lose millions of dollars."

Assemblyman Chuck DeVore, R-Irvine, questioned the science. He pointed to an incident last month in which hackers obtained hundreds of e-mails from a British university server, some of which included statements from climate-change researchers that raised questions about their findings. Scientists said the e-mails showed the researchers were only human and made inappropriate casual remarks. But skeptics seized upon the documents as proof that global warming projections are flawed.

"Combined with the $21 billion deficit we're facing in the coming year, this shows we ought to be focusing our attention on more mundane things like living within our means," DeVore said. "To use this all-encompassing rubric of climate change as a power grab to usurp property rights is something we shouldn't be doing."

Brunello said, however, that the new state report largely serves an advisory purpose and that local governments would have to decide for themselves whether to pursue land-use changes.