California is a long ways away from the finish line in the fight against climate pollution

For nearly 30 years, as a mayor, legislator and educator, I’ve made the environment and clean energy my top priority.

While we’ve made critical progress in fighting climate pollution and cleaning up California’s air, we are still a long way off from achieving the goals needed to keep our communities healthy and safe.

Like all crises, the climate crisis requires bold leadership. California’s largest utility company, PG&E, and the Public Utility Commission (PUC), should be leading on this issue, and making our communities more resilient to the dire impacts of drought, wildfires and climate change. Which makes it incredibly frustrating and disappointing that earlier this month the PUC voted to allow PG&E to increase the use of diesel-powered generators when power is turned off during Public Safety Power Shutoffs (PSPS).

Not only did the PUC allow this dirty alternative to continue, the agreement does not include an enforceable deadline to transition to a cleaner, more sustainable option. This sends PG&E a clear message: there’s no urgency in investing in clean solutions.

The question is, why give PG&E a break? California’s climate goals and commitment to clean energy are clear and have been enshrined in a number of laws including AB32, SB350 and SB100. Businesses, healthcare advocates and community organizations all agree that using microgrids, clean energy, fuel cells, storage and other options can provide safe, clean, reliable and locally generated energy to keep the power on during emergencies.

But instead of requiring the many available and healthier alternatives, the PUC green-lit diesel-powered generators.

Currently our three major utility companies can potentially operate these dirty generators for more than 10-20 days a year – upwind of homes, schools, fire stations, hospitals, childcare centers and nursing homes. According to a California Air Resources Board (CARB) emissions report, the use of generators during October 2019 PSPS events emitted 166.4 tons of NOx, 19.4 tons of PM and 8.9 tons of Diesel PM. To put these numbers into context, nine tons of diesel PM is equivalent to emissions from almost 29,000 heavy duty diesel trucks driving on California roadways for the period of one month.

This is bad news for Californians and our health. There is growing evidence of the cumulative and long-term health impacts on young children, people with asthma and other at-risk populations. The California Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the American Lung Association of California warn us that diesel exhaust contains more than 40 toxic air contaminants; increases the risk of cancer; can cause frequent coughing and aggravated asthma; and contributes to smog and fine-particle pollution. It doesn’t take a health expert to know diesel particulates and smog aren’t good for anyone’s lungs.

There are better solutions. Many community-based local Clean Power Authorities (CCA’s) are committed to creating micro grids that rely on cleaner renewable energy or hydrogen, and not just bigger transmissions lines and diesel-powered generators. Local governments, CCA’s, Chambers of Commerce, Water and School Districts, local Air Districts and PG&E should be able to work together and implement a safer, and more resilient alternative.

In contrast to the PUC, on June 25th, CARB gave commercial diesel-truck manufacturers an absolute deadline of 2024 to begin transitioning to zero-emission vehicles only.

PG&E has also had access to low to zero emissions electricity technologies since the deadly fires of 2018, solutions such as micro grids, fuel cells, solar and storage. Similarly, truck manufacturers­ have been developing electric trucks powered by batteries and hydrogen fuel cells for years now, too. Two parallel scenarios. Two completely distinct decisions.

I applaud CARB for doing what’s right for Californians. They sent a very strong market signal to truck manufactures by setting a firm timeline for transition. The State will join them in efforts to put in more EV charging stations for trucks. Shouldn’t the PUC and PG&E follow their lead?

This story was originally published July 11, 2020 at 5:00 AM.