New Public Meeting scheduled for CARB's GHG Reporting and Financial Risk Disclosure Initial Regulation

As we noted in a previous post, due to certain court decisions, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) had to delay implementing some of the requirements of recently adopted California regulations that pertain to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and the reporting of the financial risks associated with them by certain corporations operating in California. 

Photo Credit: CARB website

To address that, CARB has scheduled a new public meeting to consider adopting final reporting regulations for February 26, 2026, at 9:00 A.M., with a continuation to the next day if needed.

The public comment period will begin on December 26, 2025. Written comments may be submitted on or after that date with a deadline of February 9, 2026, representing a 45-day public comment period. (CARB is providing extra time for the public to review everything because of the holidays.)

An agenda for the meeting has not yet been posted as of today, however, it will be available at this link at least 10 days before the meeting: Public Agenda

The proposed final regulations were submitted to the California Office of Administrative Law (OAL) today, December 9, 2025. These and all of the rulemaking documents are available for review on CARB's website at this link: Rulemaking Documents 

CARB postpones GHG Financial Risk report deadline due to court order.

As we noted in an earlier article, certain California businesses were required to submit a Climate-Related Financial Risk Report by January 1, 2026, as required by Senate Bill SB261 and the California Health and Safety Code. 

Photo Credit: AI image generated by Google Gemini, Fair Use

However, this requirement has been postponed until further notice as a result of a successful legal challenge by the California Chamber of Commerce. On November 18, 2025 - the same date as a CARB scheduled public workshop on this and related reports - the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted an injunction against enforcement of this requirement as a result of other appeal proceedings related to it. 

Those proceedings will not be held until January 9, 2026, after the January 1, 2026 deadline.

CARB will provide further information and a new reporting date once the appeal process is completed. Additionally, no enforcement action will be taken for failure to submit the report by the original date.

In the meantime, CARB has stated that they will accept voluntary reports as of today, Dec. 1, 2025

Smog, particulates, greenhouse gases, or hazardous wastes - what are your priorities?

Ok folks - many of us got into the environmental arena/profession because we were tired of seeing black smoke coming out of smokestacks. Others because we were tired of not being able to see the mountains we lived by because the smog was so thick. Some people were concerned about oil spills and hazardous wastes being dumped where they shouldn't be. Some of us are old enough to remember the Cuyahoga River catching fire in Ohio! And still others woke up when all of the alarm bells about global warming started ringing.

Photo credit: ©Frank J. Maccioli

How about you? What got you interested in the environment? Let us know by answering the questions below:

1. What first got you interested in the environmental field?

2. Is your focus of concern on one area over another or all of the above?

3. If it came down to economics, how would you prioritize spending? For example, would you favor a higher priority on reducing the pollutants that cause smog (which may only impact certain geographical areas) or focusing on controlling greenhouse gases because that's a world-wide problem? 

4. Do you have any other thoughts?

Please comment below. We are VERY interested in how you feel about this!

False alarm - Ventura lifts Do Not Use Water order

As we previously noted in an earlier post, residents and businesses in the Pierpont area of Ventura, CA, were notified by city officials earlier this week not to use or drink their water due to gasoline contamination.

Photo Credit: City of Ventura

However, that order has been officially lifted as of Wednesday, November 26, at 12:15 PM. City officials now say the water is safe to drink and that the original order was made due to a false positive for gasoline during routine testing.

Subsequent tests on several additional water samples have shown no such contamination. According to the city, the laboratory doing the testing, Eurofins Calscience, explained the false positives were caused by "carryover from unrelated high-concentration samples tested earlier in the batch. Reanalysis (and analysis of additional new samples) showed no detection of gasoline."

In short, Eurofins Calscience said the contamination of the Pierpont samples was due to contamination from samples from another, unrelated site that were done before the Pierpont samples were analysed. Retesting showed no contamination. 

Such an error does raise questions about quality control procedures during the analysis of samples from different sites.

You can see Eurofin Calscience's explanation here: False Positive letter from Eurofin Calscience to Ventura 

Thanksgiving Environmental Disaster in Ventura - drinking water supply contaminated with gasoline

Ventura city officials warned residents of the Pierpont neighborhood today not to use their tap water because it may be contaminated with gasoline. The neighborhood (see map below) consists of several blocks of residential housing and other structures located between Ventura Harbor and the Ventura Pier.

Pierpont area affected by gasoline contamination.

Photo Credit: City of San Buenaventura, CA

Officials said traces of gasoline were found in the city's water supply between Monmouth Way and Harbor Boulevard. A "DO NOT USE" order was issued for residents in the area. The gasoline was detected by existing monitoring wells in the vicinity.

Until the order is lifted, those in the affected area were urged not to use tap water for drinking, cooking, washing hands, bathing, or irrigation. Boiling, freezing, filtering, or other disinfection methods will not make the water safe according to the city.

Approximately 900 water customers have been affected, mostly residential customers, however, about 16 commercial customers and the Pierpont elementary school were also affected.

Until the city notifies residents that the water is safe to drink, only bottled water should be used in the affected area. The city said 5 gallons per day of potable water per family will be made available at the city's maintenance yard at 336 Sanjon Road. Water may be picked up there 24 hours per day, 7 days per week.

New California Corporate GHG and Financial Risk Reporting Workshop

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) will be holding a virtual public workshop on California's new Greenhouse Gas and Financial Risk reporting programs on Tuesday, November 18, 2025, at 9:30 AM - 12:30 PM PST.

Photo credit: CARB

CARB will be providing updates on rule development for the new programs, which were authorized by state legislation in 2023 and 2024.

In short, certain companies that do business in California will be required to report their Scope 1, 2, and 3 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for the prior fiscal year. Additionally, companies will be required to publish biennial climate-related financial risk reports.

The GHG reports apply to companies with total annual revenues in excess of one billion dollars ($1,000,000,000). The financial risk reporting will apply to companies with annual revenues of at least $500 million.

Scope 1 and 2 reports are due on an as yet unspecified date in 2026. The first financial risk reports are due on January 1. 2026. The due date for Scope 3 emissions has not yet been specified.

The definitions of Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions are:

Stationary Combustion (Scope 1): Emissions from combustion of fuels in stationary sources for generation of electricity, heat, or steam, e.g., boilders, furnaces, turbines.

Mobile Combustion (Scope 1): Emissions from the combustion of fuels in company owned/controleed mobile combustion sources, e.g., trucks, ships, airplanes, and cars.

Process Emissions (Scope 1): Emissions from manufacture or processing of chemicals and materials, e.g., cement, aluminum, and waste processing.

Fugitive Emissions (Scope 1): Emissions from intentional or unintentional releases, e.g., equipment leaks from joints, seals, or packing; methane emissions from coal mines and venting.

Location-based Method (Scope 2): This method reflects the average emissions intensity of grids on which energy consumption occurs (using grid-average emission factor data).

Market-based Method (Scope 2): This method reflects emissions from electricity that companies have purposefully chosen (using emission factor derived from contractual instruments).

Business related emissions from non-company sources (Scope 3): These include all business related emissions that are not Scope 1 or 2. These are emissions from related business organizations that are not directly owned or controlled by the reporting company. They include supply chain, transportation, product usage, business travel, purchased goods, waste generated, and the use of sold products. Sometimes referred to as value chain emissions, they are very difficult to calculate and, perhaps even moreso, to reduce.

Anyone in the public may participate in this virtual workshop by registering at this link: CARB Workshop Registration

A frustrated California Governor Newsome at COP30: "What the hell is going on?"

There's a major, annual climate change conference going on in Belém, Brazil - COP30, the Conference of the Parties. Almost all of the world has sent governmental representatives there to address the biggest environmental problem the planet faces - Climate Change.

Photo credit: By United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change - https://cop30.br/en, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=177710910

But, where are the federal government representatives from the United States? Probably back home pushing President Trump's nonsense that climate change is a hoax.

However, Governor Gavin Newsome of California is there. Newsome, whose state represents the 4th largest economy in the world, is incredulous that no one from USEPA or any other branch of the federal government is attending. As Governor of California, he has overseen perhaps the strongest set of environmental regulations and policies of  ANY of the 50 U.S. states and has worked with other states and countries to address these problems for years now.

But, as to the current administration's failure to acknowledge the problem by ignoring COP30, he had this to say:

"What the hell is going on?" 

"We're in Brazil, one of our great trading partners, one of the world's great democracies. I mean, hell, home to all the rare earth metals we need. This is the country we should be engaging with instead of giving the middle finger with 50% tariffs."

What do you think? How big of a problem is it that no federal representatives from the United States are there? How much longer can the U.S. continue to bury its head in the sand and ignore this problem?

Wood burning restrictions now in effect for the San Joaquin Valley

It's that time of year again. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (the District) has reminded everyone that as of November 1st, restrictions on residential wood burning are now in effect until the end of February 2026.

Although this is not a complete ban, residents are reminded that, depending upon air quality forecasts, residential wood burning will be either banned entirely (with specified exceptions), discouraged, or restricted to burning in registered devices only.

The reason for this policy is simple - to protect public health from the harmful emissions associated with wood burning, e.g., fine particulate air pollution referred to as PM2.5 (particulate matter with a particle size of 2.5 microns or less).

Daily burn forecasts can be found on the District's website, or by calling 1-800-SMOG INFO (1-800-766-4463), by downloading the free Valley Air app, or by signing up to receive daily burn status notifications by email.

According to Jaime Holt, the District's Chief Communications Officer, "Public health is at the heart of our mission. Every resident can make a real difference this winter by simply choosing not to burn wood. Limiting the use of fireplaces, woodstoves, and outdoor fire pits is one of the most effective ways to improve neighborhood air quality and protect community health."

Exempt from these restrictions are homes that have no other option than to burn wood for heat, burning natural gas, or burning propane gas. 

In addition, the District has a Fireplace and Woodstove Change-Out Program that provides up to $5000 for those who wish to convert their existing wood burning stoves or fireplaces with electric heat pumps or natural gas inserts.

Finally, if you own an EPA-certified wood and/or pellet-fueled device, you can use them on No Burning Unless Registered days by registering the devices with the District. 

No, reducing GHG emissions from asthma inhalers is not going to solve global warming

Sometimes, in an effort to attract viewers/hits/attention/whatever, professional journalists write headlines that make little problems seem big and ignore the bigger problems. 

Recently, CBS published a story online about GHG emissions from inhalers that people use to treat asthma and other respiratory problems. Referencing an article from the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), CBS' headline was, "Inhalers produce as much carbon emissions as over 500,000 cars per year, study finds"

Photo Credit: Cnordic Nordic

Wow! That's a lot! That's concerning!! Someone should do something about that!!! We should take away all of those inhalers from those sick people who are using them and give them something else to use so that we can save the environment!!!!!

Oh geez! Please stop!

This always comes up every couple of years and diverts attention away from controlling/reducing the major sources of CO2 equivalent by focusing on what, in reality, are trivial emissions on a worldwide scale.

According to the CBS/Jama report, inhalers in the USA produced about 24.9 MILLION metric tonnes of CO2e TOTAL over 10 years. That's an average of 2.49 million tonnes per year. 

HOWEVER, total CO2e emissions in the USA are around 4.8 BILLION metric tonnes per ONE year! (Ref: Statista )

If these numbers are correct, that means inhalers contribute only 0.05% of total CO2e emissions. In other words, less than 1 tenth of a percent comes from inhalers and they're worried about them and not all of the major sources of greenhouse gases (GHG)? 

Are you kidding me?

You could eliminate all of the inhalers in the world and it wouldn't make a dent in reducing global warming! 

It's nonsense like this that prevents progress from being made to reduce emissions from significant sources of GHG. 

NAS report rips to shreds Trump's EPA's claims that existing greenhouse gas regulations should be rescinded.

President Trump and his EPA appointees have proposed rescinding a 2009 regulation in which EPA had previously determined that greenhouse gas emissions were harmful and needed to be regulated more stringently. The Trump administration claims that the data was inaccurate and wrong based upon evidence since then that they claim shows otherwise.                             

                                Photo attribution: NASA

HOWEVER, today the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NAS) released a new study which reviewed that past determination and the scientific information since 2009 and concluded that not only was EPA correct in 2009, but also, the most recent peer reviewed data shows things are getting worse. (Please note that this NAS study itself was peer reviewed.)

The new report "... says the evidence for current and future harm to human health and welfare created by human-caused greenhouse gases is beyond scientific dispute."

The report says "EPA’s 2009 finding was accurate, has stood the test of time, and is now reinforced by even stronger evidence. Much of the understanding of climate change that was uncertain or tentative in 2009 has now been resolved by scientific research."

 

“This study was undertaken with the ultimate aim of informing the EPA, following its call for public comments, as it considers the status of the endangerment finding,” said Shirley Tilghman, professor of molecular biology and public affairs, emeritus, and former president, Princeton University, and chair of the committee that wrote the report. “We are hopeful that the evidence summarized here shows the strong base of scientific evidence available to inform sound decision-making.”

In short, NAS basically ripped to shreds Trump's EPA's claims that the regulation should be rescinded.

How will the Trump administration impact California's Environmental Regulations?

There's a new (well, an old actually) Sheriff in town. Love him or hate him, Donald Trump has never been a President that favors stringent environmental controls on business and industry.

President Donald Trump, Official Portrait  Ref: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fe/Donald_Trump_portrait_official_2025.jpg

On the opposite end of the environmental spectrum lies California, led by Governor Gavin Newsome, who clearly has a different view of these things than the current President of the United States.

Rather than write a detailed analysis of what we at California Environmental News /Environalysis think might happen, we pose the question to you, our readers:

What do you think Trump will try to do, what do you think he will succeed at doing, and what do you think he will never succeed at doing?

Please leave your comments below.

Historic reductions in San Joaquin Valley Ag emissions noted by air agencies

A proclamation applauding the efforts of San Joaquin Valley farmers in cooperation with the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (District), the National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to reduce agricultural air emissions throughout the Valley was issued today by representatives of all four agencies. 

Photo Credit: CARB

Through several different incentive programs, the Valley ag industry turned over and destroyed more than 12,800 pieces of older, high polluting agricultural equipment, including old tractors and other equipment, resulting in the reduction of over 11 tons per day of nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions. NOx emissions are a key component of photochemical smog formation.

The reductions achieved are the equivalent of removing 1.5 million cars off of California roads.

According to Martha Guzman, USEPA's Regional Administrator for Region 9, “Emissions from agricultural equipment are the largest source of nitrogen oxide in the Valley and will require continued innovation and strategies for reducing air pollution – including via the $10 million grant for a low-dust nut harvester that we are announcing today.”

“The District applauds the leadership of local and state legislators, as well as Valley farmers in recognizing the public health and climate benefits provided throughout California from clean air investments,” stated Samir Sheikh, Executive Director/Air Pollution Control Officer for the Valley Air District. “The San Joaquin Valley agricultural sector feeds the world and coordinated multi-agency efforts like this must continue to support farmers’ ongoing transition to sustainable and air-friendly practices.”

 

For more information: Valley Agricultural Leads Nation in efforts to Improve Air Quality

Is a California water agency racist? USEPA plans to investigate

California is known for leading the way in several respects regarding environmental protections for air, water, and other natural resources. But, has one of its major regulatory agencies been using racist policies to do its job? 

Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta

Photo Credit: California Water Resources Control Board

In response to allegations by indigenous groups and environmental activists that the California State Water Resources Board has discriminated against Native American tribes and people of color, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has informed the State Water Board that it is under investigation for violating the civil rights of those groups.

According to the State Water Board itself, the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta supplies freshwater to two-thirds of the state's population and millions of acres of farmland. Fresh water from the Sacramento, San Joaquin, and other rivers mix with salt water from the San Francisco Bay to form the largest estuary on the West Coast, home to a diverse range of fish and other wildlife.

However, the groups claim that the State Water Board has failed to properly review and update water quality control plans for the San Francisco Bay and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta every 3 years as required by law. According to those groups, the Bay-Delta plan has not been updated in almost 17 years.

Because of this failure, the groups claim that water quality has significantly worsened, leading to decreased fish populations, increased toxic algae blooms, and stagnant waterways, all of which negatively impact tribes who depend upon these resources for their living. 

For more information:

L.A. Times:  EPA to Investigate California State Water Board for alleged civil rights violations

Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta info

EPA sparks furor over approval of new Chevron boat fuel that could cause cancer to everyone exposed to it over a lifetime

Folks who aren't particularly fond of the oil and gas industry and oil companies in particular are causing quite a stir over EPA's recent approval of a new boat fuel by Chevron. The new fuel, derived from discarded plastic, is so toxic that everyone exposed to it over the course of a lifetime would be expected to get cancer - that's according to calculations made by investigative reporters from ProPublica from data in an EPA risk assessment. Their calculated risk was 1.3:1  - basically anyone exposed to it - a number ProPublica claims was confirmed by EPA.

Photo: © Frank J. Maccioli

EPA had earlier refused to provide the risk assessment to reporters from ProPublica and another news site, The Guardian. The document was not obtained until ProPublica made a formal request through the federal Freedom of Information Act.

EPA's risk assessment, which was also done to review some other new fuel additives, including jet fuel (which apparently would cause cancer in 1 of 4 people exposed), typically uses extreme exposure scenarios to arrive at a risk number. However, as noted in this article, EPA's Risk Assessment Guidelines for Carcinogens generally does not approve things that result in a risk of more than 1 cancer death in 1 million exposures, let alone a 1 in 4 risk, or, as it worked out for the boat fuel additive, a 1.3 in 1 risk!

So what do you think, is this much ado about nothing or a serious threat to the well being of folks who operate boats and/or live near marinas?

CARB Approves Unprecedented Climate Action Plan

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) just approved the unprecedented climate action plan that was described here in a previous article.

The next steps will require the adoption of specific rules and regulations to implement the plan, which aims to reduce fossil fuel emissions in the state to negligible levels by 2045.

Photo Credit: California Air Resources Board

So, what do you think? As I asked before, will it be successful or just a pipe dream? Ref: CARB approves unprecedented climate action plan to shift world’s 4th largest economy from fossil fuels to clean and renewable energy

More info at: Frank's Environment Space

Tired of arguing with climate change deniers? Try this instead.

Do you ever find yourself getting frustrated, tired, and angry trying to explain climate change science to deniers? Or maybe just fed up with arguing with them? Do what I do - just tell them they are wrong and refer them to this web-site (I am unaffiliated with it). it has rebuttals to every single “climate change is a hoax” argument that anyone makes.

Just refer the folks arguing with you to this site and tell them to argue with the experts:

Global Warming and Climate Change skepticism examined

Explaining climate change science & rebutting global warming misinformation Global warming is real and human-caused. It is leading to large-scale climate change. Under the guise of climate "skepticism", the public is bombarded with misinformation that casts doubt on the reality of human-caused global warming. This website gets skeptical about global warming "skepticism". Our mission is simple: debunk climate misinformation by presenting peer-reviewed science and explaining the techniques of science denial. Posted on 10 November 2022 by Doug Bostrom, Marc Kodack Catastrophic reverb Kemp et al. caused prolonged ripples with their paper Climate Endgame: Exploring catastrophic climate change scenario s . One can't help but think most of the heat is emotional, not intellectual; excited critics of the paper offer little more than "this sounds scary, don't harsh our vibe." Vague and even outlandish concerns over terminology aside, true perception of catastrophe is the province of those living the actual experience. Ask a pastoralist in South Africa or Pakistan who has just had their livelihood wiped out, with no means to rebuild: "Are you living an existential climate catastrophe?" Quite arguably the climate catastrophe train has already left the station, and abstract objections to the concept are coming from what a we might call "a place of privilege." Discussion continues via Bhowmick et al. in From Climate Endgame to Climate Long Game , with a reply from Kemp et al., Democratic climate action and studying extreme climate risks are not in tension . Other notables: ICCI has published its latest comprehensive magnum opus on Earth's ice, State of the Cryosphere 2022: Growing Losses, Global Impacts , included here in our government/NGO section. As the title page suggests and the entire work details, "We cannot negotiate with the melting point of ice." Indeed geophysics is aloof to us but we'd be foolish to reciprocate, unfair though this may be. Meanwhile, ICCI faces a Sisyphean task. Having just dusted their hands of this publication, the authors must carry straight on; our cascade of better information never ceases, as exemplified in a new and concerning paper by Khan et al. just published in PNAS: Extensive inland thinning and speed-up of Northeast Greenland Ice Stream . Tropical cyclones combine with climate change to begin sending enivronmental regimes beyond healthy tolerance, a form of compound event. Rajeev & Mishra investigate how this is unfolding as actual events as opposed to projections, in Observational evidence of increasing compound tropical cyclone-moist heat extremes in India . Busy rodent hydrologic engineers can be important allies in counteracting negative effects of warming and associated problems with surface water, and as a bonus have notable positive effects on nitrate loading. Dewey et al. explain, in Beaver dams overshadow climate extremes in controlling riparian hydrology and water quality . "Now we know better." We rushed into

https://skepticalscience.com/

California Proposes Drastic Fossil Fuel Reduction Climate Change Plan - Visionary or Naive Pipe Dream?

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) today released its 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality. The unprecedented plan, if enacted into law, presents the most drastic climate change proposal in the entire world. 

Photo Credit: California Air Resources Board

The major thrust of the plan is to nearly eliminate the use of fossil fuels anywhere in the state by 2045. This would assume a massive movement to electrify the transportation sector - cars, buses, trains, and trucks - which together are the largest single source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the state. It would also require the phasing out of how Californians heat their homes, elimination of certain chemicals and refrigerants, the expansion of power sources derived from wind, solar, hydrogen, and biomethane, and increased usage of Carbon Dioxide Capture and Sequestration (CCS). 

If successful, the plan would reduce total fossil fuel usage in the state by 86% and a reduction in petroleum liquids by 94%. In addition to reductions of GHGs, the proposal would also reduce total air pollutants by 71%.

CARB claims that its economic modeling for the proposal shows a net economic benefit to the state, resulting in an expansion of California's economy (currently the 5th largest economy in the world and soon to be the 4th largest) to $5.1 trillion by 2045 (from $3.2 trillion today) and an increase of at least 4 million new jobs. 

It will also save Californians $200 million in health care costs related to air pollution.

“California is drastically cutting our dependence on fossil fuels and cleaning our air – this plan is a comprehensive roadmap to achieve a pollution-free future,” said Governor Gavin Newsom. “It’s the most ambitious set of climate goals of any jurisdiction in the world, and if adopted, it’ll spur an economic transformation akin to the industrial revolution. While big polluters focus on increasing their profits at our expense, California is protecting communities, creating jobs and accelerating our transition to clean energy.”

Added CARB Chair Liane Randolph, "This plan delivers a massive reduction of climate-warming pollution, cutting it down to a fraction of what it is today. And by rapidly shifting away from all fossil fuels and then reaching carbon neutrality, the plan delivers public health benefits to everyone in California, most importantly to the communities suffering from persistent air pollution. This plan clearly and unequivocally presents challenging and ambitious goals, but we simply have no other choice but to meet them – and do it in less than a quarter century. We all have experienced firsthand the impacts of climate change, whether wildfires, drought, record-breaking heat waves and more. Failure is not an option. There is too much at stake and we need to move as fast and as far as we can to lessen the worst impacts of climate change and leave future generations a livable and healthy California.”

CARB's Board will vote on the new proposal at its December 15-16 meeting. The initial draft was reviewed by the Board in June and discussed with the Environmental Justice Advisory Committee (EJAC) in September. Changes requested by the Board, Governor Newsome, and the EJAC are included in the final proposal as well as requirements from new state laws passed by the state Legislature this year.

What do you think, is this proposal realistic given the proliferation of fossil fuel powered systems throughout the state and the world or is it a pipe dream based on a naive belief that other states and countries will do the same thing, particularly in those parts of the world whose governments are, shall we say, not as progressive as California?

Your comments are welcomed below.

Photo Credit: California Air Resources Board

Photo Credit: California Air Resources Board

Photo Credit: California Air Resources Board

San Joaquin Valley APCD Wood Smoke Reduction Program Begins November 1

 

The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (the District) reminds residents that on November 1, 2022, its residential wood smoke reduction program begins. Before lighting your wood burning fireplace, please be sure to check with the District to see if ambient conditions allow for it to occur. Otherwise, you may be surprised by a knock on your door by a friendly District air pollution control enforcement inspector.

Photo Credit: San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District

The annual program is in effect from November 1 until the end of the following February every year. Its purpose is to reduce the amount of harmful PM 2.5 particulate matter into the atmosphere from residential wood smoke. (PM 2.5 is particulate less than 2.5 microns in diameter.) Such particles are so small that they can reach deep into one's lungs and are difficult if not impossible for the lung's mucociliary system to remove.

The program does not apply to natural gas burning, propane, or in areas where natural gas isn't available and wood burning is the only source available for heat.

For more information, please call 1-800-SMOGINFO (1-800-766-4463) or click this link:

Residential Wood Smoke Reduction Program

USEPA fines Grimmway $214,103 for release of anhydrous ammonia and other violations

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced today that Grimmway Enterprises, Inc., has agreed to settlement penalties of $214,103 for violations of the Clean Air Act and the emergency notification requirements of two other federal laws at its Arvin, CA, facility in August 2019.

Photo: Grimmway.com, Fair use

A little over a ton (2,335 pounds) of anhydrous ammonia, an Extremely Hazardous Substance according to federal law, was released into the atmosphere. EPA later determined during a facility inspection that Grimmway failed to immediately notify state emergency authorities and the National Response Center of the release as required by law.

Additionally, EPA found that the facility did not have the required safety equipment and operating procedures, such as pressure relief valves, chlorine sensors or alarms, operating procedures for its ammonia refrigeration equipment, and failed to have procedures in place to notify the proper authorities if and when  a chemical release occurred.

EPA's Pacific Southwest Regional Administrator Martha Guzman said, "It is paramount that facilities properly manage hazardous substances to prevent dangerous incidents or face significant Clean Air Act Penalties. When these incidents occur, first responders need to be notified immediately to ensure authorities are able to respond swiftly."

As part of the settlement, Grimmway returned to compliance and agreed to the civil penalty above.

The violations involved the Clean Air Act's Risk Management Program and the reporting requirements of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA).

For more information: EPA fines Grimmway Enterprises

Climate change protestor disrupts Men's French Open semi-final tennis match

In the middle of a tense and tight Men's French Open tennis semi-final today between Marin Cilic and Caspar Ruud, a climate change protestor ran out onto the court and attached herself to the tennis net and net post.

Although the tv broadcast crew cut away from the on court display, initial reports were that the woman had glued herself to the net post and also chained herself to the net, then sat down in silence. 

Photo Source: DerniereRenovation.fr

She was wearing a white t-shirt emblazoned with the words "We have 1028 days left." In smaller print at the bottom of the shirt was a website, derniererenovation.fr. 

Security swiftly moved onto the court to remove the woman while the players eventually returned to the locker room until it was determined safe to resume play.

Clicking on the link above reveals a French activist organization, Derniere Renovation (The Last Renovation), with a picture of the young woman on the court on the home page, apparently with her neck zip-tied to the net. The group appears to be focused on addressing climate change and fair housing opportunities in France.

The 22 yr old woman, named Alizee, was quoted as saying "We are in 2022 and it is time to face reality, the world to which politicians are sending us is a world to which Roland Garros will no longer be able to exist. Today, I entered the field because I can no longer take the risk of doing nothing in the face of the climate emergency."

According to the website, the 1028 days left refers to an ultimatum the group issued to the French government on March 28, marking the initial date that citizens entered into civil resistance against the French government to do something about climate change.

At this time, no further information is available as to what charges, if any, will be made against the protestor.