Preventing an Energy Catastrophe: How California Prepares for Climate ChangeLindsey Parsons, UC Center Sacramento, UC Berkeley

Pol 195, Pol 192 A/B, Pol 193

California’s Status as Related to Climate Change:

As accepted by the scientific and political communities in the United States and

California, climate change is occurring at a rate faster than anticipated and preparing for climatic

shifts is a priority to the State of California. A diverse state - California is home to more than 39

million residents, grows the majority of specialty crops on the global market and has thriving

entertainment, technology and natural resource industries (CA Census, 2015). These

complexities drive the state to protect its various sources of revenue as well as the natural beauty

for which California is renowned. Not only is California an economic powerhouse and a

desirable place to live, the state is also one of the most focused and forward thinking states

regarding climate change.

Nevertheless, there are still many other policy issues California needs to address. Public

health is a main concern for urban areas where air quality, equitable housing, emergency

preparedness, access to healthcare, healthy food and clean water plague the minds of legislators

and residents alike. Poverty is still a problem in California where overall 40% of Californians are

living near or at the poverty level (PPIC, 2016). In 2014 child poverty stood at 21% where 48%

of children in the state were considered “poor”, dependent upon government assistance (PPIC,

2014). Justice and equality are challenges the State must prioritize as prison populations are

currently at 135% capacity. According to demographics, African Americans and Latinos are

disproportionately incarcerated in comparison to all other ethnic groups (PPIC, 2015). Education

is a topic of debate and frustration in California as limited economic resources and common core

1 Parsons

standards are problematic for school districts across the state. With cuts to developmental

programs such as arts and vocational classes it is students who are suffering these economic

decisions (Mehta, 2009).

Environmental advocates in California have many concerns aside from climate change,

yet climate change is exacerbating the impacts of general threats to biodiversity and increasing

the difficulty of implementing solutions. Specifically issues of drought are pressing in

California’s news headlines and will continue to be of concern for the coming decades.

California has a complex water system and this factor alone is by far one of the most pressing

issues in climate policy. With projected decreasing precipitation throughout the state, California

must prepare for shifting environments, habitats, and the methods in which we utilize the

resources available to us. Sea level rise is a major concern for our coastal cities and industries.

Throughout the state, there is evidence already of increasing sea level. This is dangerous for our

bay delta estuary, the ports of Los Angeles and Oakland and residential communities along the

coast. With rising seas brings increased erosion, a problem that could damage critical

infrastructure like roadways and power lines. Figure 1 is a graph overlaying the vulnerable

communities of California as defined by SB 535 and the Department of Water Resources 2015

year at a glance. These issues are inseparable since California is dependant upon natural

resources powering the economy, agriculture and public health.

2 Parsons

Figure 1. Disadvantaged communities and Water Year 2015. (Cal EPA, 2016 and DWR, 2015).

California’s geographic size and large population creates a difficult task in preparing for

climate change. In order to understand the complete possibility of social and physical impact, we

must consider the way in which we measure, project and regulate our current climate dependent

infrastructure. Climate mitigation and resiliency planning are the two ways in which the state

implements climate solutions. Climate mitigation refers to reduction and elimination of the use

of greenhouse gas emissions as well as strengthening the ability to sequester carbon from the

3 Parsons

atmosphere to reduce climatic impact. Resiliency planning is the act of planning to protect the

people, infrastructure and industries that are vulnerable to climatic impact (IEPR draft, 2016).

Both sides of the action coin are necessary to prevent long term climatic catastrophe and chaos

across the world. In the energy sector this means providing clean, reliable and safe energy using

innovative technology to enhance existing infrastructure and practices.

Climate Change Matters to Californians:

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projected climatic events are expected

to increase in frequency and severity throughout the 21st Century, potentially damaging critical

infrastructure, natural and other resources including potable water supply (IPCC, 2014). The

State notes there are many direct impacts expected including longer droughts, extended floods,

prolonged and more intense wildfires, heat waves, decreased snowpack, sea level rise, increased

pests and increased severity in winter storms (Cal EPA, 2015). According to Assembly Bill

1482, the Natural Resources Agency of California reported that a single climate change induced

extreme winter storm was modeled and reported losses on the scale of $725,000,000,000 dollars.

Half of this cost is attributed to damaged property, people and natural resources loss (Gordon,

2015). This is an enormous sum and considering that climate change has multiple impacts in

every sector of the state’s resources, the overall potential cost of climate change to California

alone could devastate our current way of life.

Compounding these factors, some residents in California are currently unable to access

adequate resources to inform or protect themselves and their families from climate change

impacts. Vulnerable populations in California are at more immediate risk and should be

4 Parsons

considered a priority in decision making, planning and investing. Vulnerable populations to

climate change include the elderly, children, minority ethnic communities, low income and

disabled people, the undereducated, coastal, inland and desert communities and tribal nations

living in California. There are various ways the state measures vulnerable populations, one

efficient method used by the state as established in the CalEnviroScreen mapping tool locates

vulnerable populations by census tract demographics and pollution burden (CalEnviroscreen.org,

2016). A study on vulnerable populations and climate change found 3 variables that are

important for measuring the extent of vulnerability including: exposure, adaptive capacity and

population sensitivity (English, 2013) see figure 1. For example, Los Angeles is an area that is

considered home to vulnerable populations due to the fact that they live near the coast, in a desert

environment, deal with high levels of air and other pollution, and has many communities of color

as well as elderly and youth residents (Parmesan, 2003). Across the state, communities of color

are specifically more vulnerable to climate change impacts.

In the Central Valley where the population is mainly Latino, Latinos and African

Americans are 4-8 times more vulnerable to climate impacts than the white population (English,

2013). Heat in Sacramento is expected to dramatically increase throughout this century. As a

standalone variable, heat increase is a serious public health concern and can easily become a

crisis. Sacramento is surrounded by agriculture and the Sierra Nevada Foothills where extreme

heat can cause increased risk of wildfire, and destroy crops within hours. At night, minimum

temperature increase influences climate equally for different reasons. Agriculture depends on a

number of cold nights in order for high value specialty crops like almonds, grapes and cherries in

order to produce a valuable crop. Warm days and nights contribute to increased lifecycles of

pests like the pine bark beetle leading to tree mortality and loss of carbon sequestration in the

5 Parsons

Sierra Nevada mountain range (US EPA, 2016). Under different climate scenarios, the expected

increase is variable. Below are two graphs illustrating temperature increase in Sacramento. The

first graph shows the projected annual average temperature in Sacramento through 2100. The

second portrays the projected average number of extreme heat days per year in Sacramento. The

climate scenarios used are provided by the 2014 IPCC and represent a “business as usual” high

emissions scenario and is known as Representative Concentration Pathway or RCP 8.5 and an

intermediate emissions scenario, where governmental agencies act to reduce greenhouse gas

emissions, RCP 4.5 (IPCC, 2014).

Figure 2: Annual Average Temperature in Sacramento, California(1950-2100), adapted from (CEC, 2016).

6 Parsons

-

Figure 3. Extreme Heat Day Threshold in Sacramento, California (1950-2100), adapted from (CEC, 2016).

The above graph utilizes data with four climate scenarios similar to the 2014 IPCC scenarios and

represented in the two lines are the low and high emissions projections (more information

regarding data collection can be found online).

As shown, without swift action the amount of warming in Sacramento will reach

extremely warm temperatures by mid century. Therefore, scientists and policy makers must

gather as much accurate information as possible to protect people, resources, infrastructure and

the environment. Many of these variables have not been developed for state agencies meaning

that they cannot effectively plan to implement protective measures or place climatic impacts into

their planning and investment decisions. This paper will discuss the creation of climate

parameters for the use of state agencies, policymaking and analysis as well as addressing how the

State of California prepares for climate change.

7 Parsons

A Leader in Climate Policy, California Continues its Legacy Today:

Climate change is due to the release of carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH 4) gas into

the atmosphere mostly by anthropogenic sources like energy production, agriculture,

transportation, and manufacturing. All of these industries are stakeholders in this issue and play a

political role in the advancement or stagnancy of climate change solutions. An undesirable

byproduct of the economic success California has developed in industry; a large amount of

global greenhouse gas emissions stems from the state (Nunez, 2006). Current efforts are

ambitious in reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the state of California as well as

preventing leakage by transferring these emissions to other states or countries (Nunez, 2006).

California has been a leader in global climate change mitigation and adaptation and continues to

inspire changes through policy and action. Since the 1970’s when California became a leader in

air quality control, the State has been focused on public health and the environment.

However, due to the size and population of the state, California is still a large greenhouse

gas emitter, especially in use of petroleum based products. Gasoline/Methane accounts for 459

MMT of CO2 equivalent emitted into the atmosphere in California throughout various sectors of

industry; transportation and industrial use accounting for the largest percentage use. The below

graph does not account for the gasoline used in electrical generation and according the the US

EPA, power plants contribute 38% of the United States greenhouse gas emissions. Since this

paper does not focus on all emissions pathways, the example of natural gas and methane use is a

strong example of how deeply it has permeated into society.

8 Parsons

Figure 4. Greenhouse gas emissions from petroleum and methane sources in California, 2016. (CEC, 2016).

One national driver of climate change mitigation which is also relevant to the energy

sector is the US Clean Power Plan (CPP). The CPP aims to increase the momentum of clean

energy production across the nation in a flexible and fair way (EPA, 2015). The second

important event occurred in Paris at COP 21, the 21st United Nations Framework on Climate

Change Convention where the US pledged a goal of reducing GHG emissions by 26-28% of

2005 levels by 2025. The intended contribution was ratified on April 22, 2016 (CAIT, 2015).

These national efforts have implications for all states, however California is setting even more

stringent targets for the state.

9 Parsons

Due to the fact that California is a leader in innovative environmental practices and is

prioritizing the realization of climate mitigation and resilience, Governor Brown partnered with

other sub-national entities to create the Under 2 Memorandum of Understanding or the Under 2

MOU. This group of 128 sub-national entities have set a standard of under 2 tons of CO2

equivalent per capita or 80-95% below 1990 levels by 2050 (Under 2 MO2, 2015). This

Memorandum is a commitment to reduce emissions faster and more aggressively than national

standards. As stated above, there are 39 million residents in California and as a state under the

MOU Under 2 Californians would consume only 79MT of CO2 equivalent per capita, per year- a

significant reduction in fossil fuel consumption.

Encouraged by international efforts to reduce emissions, California is still in the process

of developing a comprehensive approach to solving the climate change puzzle. Since California

is now a strong player in innovation and emergence of technology aimed to reduce impact -

Governor Brown has commissioned the task that all state agencies must work together to

cohesively in order to address mitigation and climate resiliency among all sectors (EO B-30-15,

2015).

10 Parsons

Figure 5. Word cloud

Research Methods:

The goal of this research is to find metrics that state agencies can use to prepare for

climate change in the areas of investment, planning and development. There will be two ways of

finding this information. First, an analysis of several statutes is necessary to understand the goals

of the state. Second, a series of interviews must be conducted to find out which metrics are in

place and used by agencies currently. The people selected for interviewing are experts in their

respective state agencies, each with several years experience and insight into how the agency

operates. Working in collaboration with the California Energy Commission, Climate Action

11 Parsons

Team, along with recommendations from their colleagues in the utilities sector and in academia,

the findings of this report will also play a role in policy analysis and influence this research.

Overall, a combination of legislative review and interview results, as related to the energy sector,

will provide the information needed to complete this study.

In order to better understand the state legislation regarding climate change, laying out

each statute chronologically allows for insight into the progress and processes of climate change

preparation and mitigation. The state has taken a systematic approach to implementing targets

and reporting regulations among sectors of GHG emitters, and emphasizes the need for

innovation, technology and collaboration. The timeline below will reflect a long history of

climate legislation from 1998 - 2016.

Figure 6. Timeline. To view the complete policy timeline please follow: https://edu.hstry.co/timeline/copy-of-

climate-change-legislation-of-california

12 Parsons

Of these 26 statutes, I will analyze three recently signed bills and one Executive Order.

The foundation of these bills is AB 32, signed in 2006 (which will not be discussed at length in

this paper) but has enabled a policy pathway for the following legislative bills to be passed and

implemented. AB 32 is known as the Global Warming Solutions Act and sets an ambitious target

to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. The more recent statutes SB 246, SB

379, AB 1482 and Executive Order B-30-15, which were signed in 2015 help California focus in

on the targets previously set for the energy sector and implement climate change solutions for a

2020 goal and beyond.

Starting with Executive Order (E.O.) B-30-15 which, mandates the expansion of the role

of climate change adaptation in state agencies with a goal of incorporating climate change

impacts into regular decision making. The order directs state agencies to:

1. Incorporate climate change into the state’s Five-Year Infrastructure Plan

2. Factor climate change into every state agencies planning and investment decisions with

full cost life-cycle accounting

3. Regularly update the Safeguarding California Plan (the adaptation plan) to identify ways

in which California can reduce climate change risk and impact

4. Utilize the most cost efficient method to reduce emissions and mitigate greenhouse gases

5. Further reduce emissions by 80% below 1990 levels by 2050 with an interim date of

2030 to guide California’s investment and regulatory decisions.

In order to successfully implement these directives, Governor Brown’s Office of Planning and

Research will organize a technical advisory group that will help agencies guide and prepare for

these measures. The first deadline for reporting to the Natural Resource Agency was September,

2015 and again in June, 2016 (E.O. B-30-15).

13 Parsons

In coordination with the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, SB 246 establishes

the Climate Adaptation and Resiliency Program. This program will also hold an advisory

council, the Climate Action Team, which will meet at least three times per year with experts in

the areas of public health, environmental quality, environmental justice, agriculture,

transportation and housing, energy, planning, natural resources and water, local government,

tribal issues, recycling and waste management. SB 246 mandates creation of a collection of

climate information that should be available to all agencies in a centralized location containing

information specific to vulnerable communities, projections, scenarios, models and downscaled

data (SB 246, 2015). SB 379 mandates that Cal-Adapt.org be the official website for assessing

vulnerability. Downscaled data is important because localized information is critical for proper

planning. SB 379 mandates all cities and counties to create a Climate Action Plan which will

address specific impacts related to the region, vulnerabilities, and planning for adaptation and

resilience by January 1, 2017. This plan must also include an element of conservation focusing

on restoring land and water, preventing and controlling pollution of waterways, regulating the

use of land in stream channels, prevention and control of erosion, protection of watersheds, and

the location of rock resources as well as protecting riparian habitats and corridors for animal

movement. Supporting SB 379, AB 1482 mandates that state agencies consider using natural

infrastructure and ecological systems in their adaptation efforts, meaning the preservation and

restoration of natural systems such as flood plains, wetlands etc. will be used in reducing risks.

Drought resiliency is also mandated in AB 1482, establishing drought preparation and immediate

response programs which will reduce water demand and increase supply within one to five years.

AB 1482 mandates Safeguarding California be updated every three years and the Strategic

Growth Council will foster implementation of adaptation measures. Most importantly AB 1482

14 Parsons

requires all state agencies to integrate climate change adaptation and resilience measures into all

planning and investment decisions. Along with this, the Strategic Growth Council is mandated to

develop financial assistance for development of sustainable communities, fund research and

adaptation programs. In order to communicate these statutes to the interviewees, the below

infographic was created (See next page). During each interview, experts will be asked the

following questions:

1. What climatic parameters are currently being used to measure important variables

relevant to your agency?

2. What climatic conditions impact your sector not currently measured?

3. Which geographic sector does this apply to and at what time frame? Annually, monthly,

daily?

4. To what end is the parameter measured?

5. Is there data or information available for these measurements?

15 Parsons

Figure 7. Infographic

At the end of each interview, a white page is created for that parameter containing answers to

each question. An online survey with similar questions was also conducted for agency experts

16 Parsons

who could not meet in person or over the phone. The most important parameters will encompass

the entirety of the state as well as multiple sectors. They will be measured against the modeling

programming currently in use for compatibility and downscaling capability. Each parameter will

be used in guiding the decision making processes and reports that are outlined in the legislature.

Discussion:

The resulting information gathered from these interviews is being compiled into an

ongoing table of parameters that will be disbursed through the Climate Action Team. This

research has proven valuable already as each interviewee has expressed the desire to implement

climate policy, yet they do not have the tools to make accurate or prudent decisions regarding

projected climatic circumstances. Some agencies have already received information regarding

the parameter most important to them. As part of this ongoing work, this table has been created

to show which parameters we have encountered and proven valuable. Parameters that will later

be added into this grouping will include precipitation and sea level rise. In total, 64 climate

parameters have been listed and of these 4 to 10 will be listed in recommendations for

policymaking. Using 20 meteorological stations throughout the state and downscaled

information to the census tract level has brought significant progress to future projections. See

the climate parameter table below, which will be expanded and is ongoing.

Currently, some state agencies are using no climatic data in planning and investment

decisions. In the energy sector, there has been a focus on efficiency in electrical devices and

improving building codes to be more protective in air quality and temperature. Sea level rise and

decreasing snowpack are concerning the the energy sector, which was not an obvious direct

17 Parsons

connection, due to the impact on hydroelectric power plants and coastal oil and natural gas plants

of which there are 578 combined (CEC, 2016).

Figure 8. Parameters table.

The resulting information gathered from these interviews was passed forward to UC Irvine’s

Center for Hydrology and Remote Sensing has created projections that will guide experts in

decision making and planning. This graph shows the increase in Cooling Degree Days which has

implications for extra natural gas usage due to cool weather and indoor heating, cold snaps and

agricultural productivity. This graph will be shared with all agencies who can utilize this data for

18 Parsons

investment planning. For example, the California Building Code is currently using historical data

for developing standard practices in building design such as insulation.

Figure 9. Shift in CA annual heating and cooling degree days, (2010-2055) (UCI, Amir AghaKouchak, 2016).

In terms of policy recommendation, it is important to consider the links between state agencies.

All state agencies must continue collaboration and advocate for coordinating experts in order to

adequately plan and achieve the same goal. Agencies must agree to adopt future projections that will span

the lifecycle of the physical development, policy or infrastructure being created, as historical data is no

longer relevant nor prudent to use. Proxies for measurement, especially in the energy sector, need to move

toward aggregate conservation of resources instead of efficiency. Information should be available and

created in a manner that is understandable and relatable to all Californians regarding climate change. This

information should be dispersed through all media outlets including social media, television, mail and

19 Parsons

radio outlets. Dispersal of information should include adaptation measures that can be presented to each

community with pertinent information. Meaning, coastal communities need to be aware of the impacts of

sea level rise, inland communities must consider extreme heat, mountain communities must understand

the impact of wildfire and so on. Vulnerable communities must continue to be prioritized through this

process as another direct burden would be overwhelming and ensure devastation. Overall, climate change

is an urgent threat to California and a combination of policies, collaboration among state agencies, public

information and downscaled data are critical to predicting and preventing risk. Greenhouse gas abatement

is the most important part of reducing climate change impacts and the more swiftly the world addresses

fossil fuel consumption, the better off we will all be.

References

California Assembly Bill 1482, Gordon. 2015. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB1482

California Assembly Bill 32, Nunez, 2006. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB1482

20 Parsons

California Census, 2015. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/06

California Code of Regulations, Building Energy Code, 2013. http://www.bsc.ca.gov/Home/Current2013Codes.aspx

California’s Changing Prison Population, 2015. Public Policy Institute California. http://www.ppic.org/main/publication_show.asp?i=702

California Department of Water Resources, Hydroclimate Report. 2015. http://www.energy.ca.gov/2013publications/CEC-200-2013-004/CEC-200-2013-004-V1-CMF.pdf

CalFresh Food Assistance Program, 2016. Public Policy Institute California.http://www.ppic.org/main/publication_show.asp?i=870

California Executive Order B-15-30. Brown, 2015. https://www.gov.ca.gov/news.php?id=18938

California Senate Bill 379, Jackson, 2015. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB379

California Senate Bill 246, Weickowski, 2015. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB246

English, Paul, et al. “Climate Change: Impacts and Responses. Racial and Income Disparities in Relation to a Proposed Climate Change Vulnerability Screening Method for California” Common Groung Journal. 2013. 1835-7156

Hayhoe, Katharine, et al. "Emissions pathways, climate change, and impacts on California." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 101.34 2004. 12422-12427.

Integrated Energy Policy Report, draft. California Energy Commission, 2016.

IPCC, 2014: Summary for policymakers. In: climate change 2014: Impacts,Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on climate change [Field, C.B., V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken, K.J. Mach, M.D. Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L.White (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 1-32.

21 Parsons

Magill, B. “Texas, California Lead Nation in Carbon Emissions” 2015. Climatecentral.orghttp://www.climatecentral.org/news/carbon-emissions-spike-in-some-states-19615

Mehta, Seema. “California’s Schools Struggling with Budget Cuts”. Los Angeles Times. (2009). http://articles.latimes.com/2009/feb/23/local/me-schools-budget-cuts23]

Parmesan, Camille, and Gary Yohe. "A globally coherent fingerprint of climate change impacts across natural systems." Nature 421.6918 (2003): 37-42.

United States Environmental Protection Agency, website, 2016.https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/

22 Parsons