Good morning. Here’s what you need to know to start your day.
Is the Aliso Canyon gas storage field closure on schedule? It’s complicated
The largest natural gas leak in U.S. history spewed over 100,000 tons of heat-trapping methane into the air over L.A.’s Porter Ranch neighborhood for more than 100 days, sickening thousands of people and forcing residents to flee.
The Aliso Canyon gas leak was an environmental disaster that continues to haunt communities in the northwest San Fernando Valley as research continues into the long-term health effects.
In 2017, facing pressure from community members, environmental activists and some state lawmakers, former Gov. Jerry Brown called for the facility’s permanent closure by 2027. Gov. Gavin Newsom later announced his administration’s goal to speed up that 10-year timeline.
So where do things stand now? Newsom would rather not talk about it. The California Public Utilities Commission completed a long-awaited study last month that outlines a “concrete path to consider reducing and eliminating reliance on” the Southern California Gas Co. facility.
That’s bureaucratese for not committing to close Aliso Canyon, which has been met with fury from climate and public health activists who have long been critical of the decision to keep the facility open.
Times climate columnist Sammy Roth explored the saga last week, writing that Newsom has since “abandoned his ambitious rhetoric” and “avoided acknowledging that pledge to Porter Ranch residents — even as his appointees prepare to vote [this] week on a plan that could keep Aliso Canyon operating into the 2030s.”
Sammy said the long-simmering controversy has an underlying theme that’s been a staple in his writing on the climate crisis and the mixed efforts to reduce reliance on fossil fuels.
Environmental activists and San Fernando Valley residents urge Gov. Gavin Newsom to close the Aliso Canyon gas storage field at an August 2023 rally. (Francine Orr / Los Angeles Times)
“There are a lot of people who [consider it] a high priority in theory, until it means something inconvenient … and then climate can come later,” he told me this week. “If we’re really going to get this thing under control — or at least slowed down in a way that it doesn’t become even more catastrophic than it already is — it needs to start coming first and we have to just be willing to deal with things that are inconvenient a lot more often than we are now.”
Sammy also noted that the national environmental group Food & Water Watch announced a new six-figure ad campaign in key Democratic primary battleground states, with a video that calls out Newsom for the lack of progress in closing Aliso Canyon and questions his environmental record.
Here’s more from my conversation with Sammy (edited for clarity).
Politicians making promises and then failing to deliver on them is nothing new. Why should Californians care about this particular instance?
Sammy Roth: This is just an example of the kind of problem we’re going to have to figure out how to deal with if we want to move on from fossil fuels to clean energy. It’s a big piece of fossil fuel infrastructure that Los Angeles, unfortunately, is super dependent on right now; we use a lot of natural gas for heating and for cooking and for electricity generation.
Gov. Newsom and Gov. Brown before him made a big show of saying they were going to figure out how to get this thing shut down. A lot of years have gone by and it seems like we’ve made very little progress. And for a state and a city that are really determined to move beyond fossil fuels, that’s really unfortunate and shows you how hard this is going to be and why it’s important to hold politicians accountable.
What would it take to truly shake that dependence on fossil fuels — and how realistic is that, based on where we are right now?
SR: The fundamental reality is more money is needed, more education for contractors and for manufacturers and the people doing the installations. It’s just kind of this really big societal overhaul.
The technology is there. The costs are coming down. It needs to get to where electric vehicles are now — they’re making up (nearly) 25% of the market [in California]. We’re just not there yet with electric appliances and that needs to be scaled up really rapidly. Ultimately, [it will take] more willingness on the part of people to take the leap and accept the money and make these changes.
Issam Najm, founder and president of Water Quality & Treatment Solutions Inc., speaks during a rally on Aug. 22, 2023, in Los Angeles. (Francine Orr / Los Angeles Times)
There’s no shortage of reporting on Newsom’s political aspirations. Do you think that’s factoring into his action or inaction — and if so, how so?
SR: It’s hard not to think it’s factored in. He wants to maintain his reputation as a champion for climate action and clean energy — and he’s done plenty for climate and clean energy. He’s also taken other actions that have fallen short of the really dramatic and aggressive action that scientists and activists rightfully say is needed.
No comments:
Post a Comment