Governor Schwarzenegger's Alternative Fuels Plan for California: Just Big Talk?

Eric Fredericks • Saturday January 20, 2007

This is pretty impressive news coming out of the Governor’s office. Of course, I am still a bit skeptical. California Governor Schwarzenegger signed an executive order yesterday for unprecedented standards for lowering emissions within the United States. However, the standards are set for the year 2020, and Arnold will be out of the office by then. Will the next Governor be so bold? Is Arnold banking on the next Governor to follow through while he gets out clean? Will this stand up to the political pressure from the oil industry? It remains to be seen. This is very good news to see a Governor with as much political influence as he has to make these bold statements. Hopefully the rest of the country is listening. Here is what Governor Schwarzenegger released yesterday:
California’s alternative fuels plan
Arnold Schwarzenegger
Thursday, January 18, 2007
The San Francisco Chronicle

The U.S. House of Representatives is scheduled to debate legislation today aimed at reducing our dependence on foreign oil, and I am glad to see Washington finally focus on this vital issue.

But in California, we’re not waiting for Washington to act. We are moving forward on our own because the issue is too important to wait for someone else to lead.

Under an executive order I am signing today, California will establish the world’s first carbon standard for transportation fuels. This is a follow-up to the historic global warming legislation I signed last September, and it has the benefit of being great for the environment and great for the economy and national security. Our global warming act set the most ambitious targets in the world for reducing the greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming. It commits California to reduce climate change emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 — a 25 percent reduction. By 2050, we will reduce emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels. The plan goes farther than the Kyoto Protocol, as those targets only extend to 2012. And the Kyoto target is to reduce green-house gas emissions 12.5 percent below 1990 levels by 2012. We will do this while creating jobs and raising incomes. But to achieve these goals, we must reduce our dependence on oil for meeting our enormous transportation needs. That’s where my new executive order comes in.

We have more than 24 million registered motor vehicles in California (and more registered drivers than anywhere else in the nation) and 96 percent of the fuel they use is high-carbon-content gasoline.

Because of that, transportation fuels are responsible for 41 percent of our greenhouse gas emissions. We can’t possibly meet our climate change goals if we keep burning high-polluting oil in our vehicles.

Being so dependent on oil also leaves our economy — and therefore our national security — dangerously vulnerable to price shocks caused by world events or actions by oil cartels outside our control. When oil prices jump, sales and wages fall. Money flows offshore instead of into our domestic economy. No business can afford to be hostage to a single supplier for its most critical raw materials. Nor can any state or any nation. To protect our jobs and wages — and clean our air — we must diversify our fuel sources and reduce our oil dependence. >>Continue Reading This Article>>

 

Category: Global Warming •• Region: California •• comments [2]

"Smart Growth" California Voters Guide Courtesy of WalkSacramento

Eric Fredericks • Monday November 6, 2006

Last week, WalkSacramento provided a very through analysis of how the California Ballot Initiatives will affect the bike/ped world. We thought it was a very good analysis and Walkable Neighborhoods also endorses the analysis they provided. Here is what they sent to their members:

WALKSacramento Summary of Major Provisions and Analysis of Key Propositions on the November 2006 Ballot (partial list)

Proposition 1A — Use of sales tax revenues from sales of gasoline

Key provisions: Increases restrictions upon the legislature’s and governor’s use for general fund purposes of sales tax dollars generated from sales of gasoline; Specifies process by which the governor, via proclamation, and the legislature, with a subsequent 2/3 vote in each house, can together suspend transfers of these revenues from the general fund to a transportation fund; Establishes that these transfers are loans that must be repaid in full within three years; Limits such transfers to two over any ten-year period; Requires payment from general fund to a transportation fund of a portion of previous transfers.

Analysis: By making it more difficult for the legislature and governor to prevent the continuing transfer of sales tax revenues from the general fund to transportation funding (80% roads, 20% transit, 0%walk-bike) that first started with the Transportation Congestion Relief Act and then proceeded with Proposition 42, Proposition 1A will worsen the state general fund’s structural deficit, threatening all programs funded via the general fund.

Proposition 1B — Transportation Bond — $19.925 billion

Key Provisions:

Walking and Bicycling Mobility or Safety: $0 billion
Zero, zip, nada >>Continue Reading This Article>>

 

Category: Legislation •• Region: California •• comments [1]

Progressive California Planning Evident in the Book of Lists

Eric Fredericks • Friday August 18, 2006

California is known for being on the cutting edge of progressive planning policies, and this is evident in the recently published 2006 California Planners’ Book of Lists. The Book of Lists is published annually by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. Hundreds of cities and counties were surveyed for the publication on a wide-range of planning issues. Some of the more interesting topics in the survey related to this site include form based codes, bicycle and pedestrian plans, healthy community policies, urban growth boundaries, and so on. There are some very interesting facts in this report. One example survey question was “Do you include provisions for walkable or PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY neighborhoods or development in your general plan?” The jurisdictions that responded “yes” are as follows (as you can see, there is a whole slew of them):

Agoura Hills
Alameda, City of
Anaheim
Arcata
Bellflower
Biggs
Blue Lake
Brawley
Brea
Brisbane
Buellton
Burlingame

 

Category: Smart Growth •• Region: California •• comments

www.flickr.com

Visit our Photo Gallery

Post a Job!
$25 for 45 days

Our Favorite Sites

Partners
Friends of Fremont Park
PedalGR
LAtino Urban Forum

Sacramento
LivinginUrbanSac
Central City Opinion

Planning-Related
CA Transportation Plan

Real Estate
4realz.net