CAPs, not the twill kind!

Among the many facets of AB32 (passed back in 2006!!) is a requirement that municipalities formulate and approve a Climate Action Plan to reduce green house gas emissions (GHG). The formulation part goes easier and cheaper if you use a template plan, plug in some local statistics and get someone else to pay for the whole package by giving you a grant.

Many cities and counties did just that. There are several templates out there in various stages of approval. The one we ended up in SLO County doesn't seem to be one of the better off the shelf plans, but that isn't going to change at this point.

Few people have read the whole document and fewer still have checked numbers and assumptions. I listened to some of the Planning Commission's first swing at review on the 29th. Predictably, County staff is discouraging making "major" changes. That means there should be an opportunity to slide it through the review process and stay in the running for federal and state funds.

The climate? It's changing anyhow, not to worry! The economy? Planning decisions seldom consider their economic implications and this consideration will probably follow that trend. It's someone else's job to worry about the economy--hey they take the same approach in DC!!

The problem with templates prepared by others (thinking in one size fits all mode) using numbers dropped in from local jurisdictions, is that the reviewers, i.e. county staff, planning commission and board of supervisors didn't write it, may not understand it and certainly aren't comfortable making major changes, even it they are needed. With the CAP process the actually implementation is down the road, so there's plenty of incentive to move the process forward and hope that the down the road part isn't THAT bad or that no one remembers who approved the CAP next time an election rolls around.

The devil is in the details part is that housing stock is different in every community and the provisions contained in the CAP make some very general assumptions about potential energy savings possible with retrofits and apply those assumptions indiscriminately. In fairness, the assumptions are valid in some neighborhoods of some communities, but there are all those other neighborhoods where they just don't work.

The big question is whether AB 32 and the CAP requirements are intended to satisfy the terms of the legislation, thereby keeping the municipality eligible for funding, or whether the is a sincere intent to make a positive difference in the future of the planet. No answer to that question is expected anytime soon, but it is worth remembering that mother nature (AKA the planet) is the final judge of CAPs, AB32, intent and political motivation.

There will be a reckoning. Individuals, neighborhoods, communities, states and nations will possibly ponder whether they did everything reasonably in their power to extend the ability of the planet to support human life.

That sort of soul searching will not enter the arena of CAP review.