1 Subject: FW: Comment on PWP Plan being discussed at the Municipal Services Committee
1.25.2022
From: carl selkin
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2022 3:58 PM
To: Acevedo, Gloria <[email protected]>
Cc: Flores, Valerie <[email protected]>
Subject: Comment on PWP Plan being discussed at the Municipal Services Committee 1.25.2022 CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more.... ------------------------
I am writing as a resident of Pasadena representing the Social Justice Committee Of Pasadena Jewish Temple and Center in response to the inadequate Plan of Pasadena Water and Power that you have been asked to improve.
The accelerating warming and its consequences for our area are severely underestimated in this plan, at a tim e when the responsibility for thoughtful action is more and more falling to localities. The 24‐year timeline is far too long and the net‐zero goals substantially inadequate to meet the emergent crises we face. The exponential climb in average daily temperatures and attendant reductions in rainfall and hu midity mean that we need to take more significant action more quickly than anticipated. Here are three ways in which the plan fails.
1. The end of the pandemic, increased economic activity and energy demands for additional air conditioning, the resources to fight drought and wildfires, plus the reduction of accessible hydro electric power, mean that we need to aim well beyond net zero to actually move away from our reliance on fossil fuels. Xeno’s paradox is a good way to envision the situation—we need to aim beyond our goal in order to actually meet it.
2. The 24 year window is a p lanning luxury we cannot afford. The average winter daily temperature in our area may rise by the * plus degrees F much faster than anticipated by current analog mapping models. We cannot hope to catch up with exponential change through incremental or catch‐up strategies.
3. The reliance on natural ga s fueling our resilience both at the peaker plant and through the market should be abandoned in favor of developing added solar capacity at the residential, commercial and public services levels.
Opposing the proposed NEM 3.0 regulation is imperative in moving quickly to local resilience. Solar energy through roof top reside ntial and commercial installations directly offsets increased energy demands for cooling just when that energy is in greatest demand—on hot days.
Pasadena needs to invest in public and public‐private development of solar energy on rooftops and at large asphalt heat islands—parking lots, for example. Utilizing the open lands in place s like Irwindale for regional solar power plants would be a benefit, as would be incentives to add more solar to a redesigned local grid.
Respectfully submitted,
Carl Selkin
Pasadena, CA
Sent from Mail for Windows