Archive for the ‘Delta & Environment’ Category

DeSaulnier denounces U.S. Dep’t of Transportation’s upending electric vehicle use as “reckless”

Friday, February 7th, 2025
Rep. Mark DeSaulnier. Official photo

Rescinds National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program Guidance dated June 11, 2024, and all prior versions of this guidance

Congressman issues statement saying it, “leaves American drivers and consumers in the lurch.”

On Friday, February 7, 2025, Congressman Mark DeSaulnier (D-CA10) issued the following statement after the Trump Administration suspended implementation of the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Formula Program.

“The transportation sector is the leading source of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. Electric vehicles (EVs) are crucial to reducing GHG emissions and curbing the existential threat of climate change while also having the potential to save drivers hundreds or even thousands of dollars in gas money annually. Given the obvious benefits of EVs, it is in everyone’s best interest to make it easier for Americans to drive them.

As a former member of the California Air Resources Board and Chairman of the transportation committees in both the California State Assembly and the California State Senate, I have seen firsthand how California’s forward-looking policies on climate change and greenhouse gas emissions drive innovation, economic growth, and job creation. That’s why I authored the Clean Corridors Act, which helped create and fund a $2.5 billion landmark new EV charging infrastructure program through the 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to make hydrogen fuel cell and electric battery powered cars more accessible and affordable for Americans.

The decision by the Federal High Administration of the Department of Transportation to suspend approvals of State Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Deployment Plans, which are required to receive NEVI funding, undoes the progress these two programs achieved, sets us back in the fight against climate change, and leaves American drivers and consumers in the lurch.

In 2024, China’s share of the global EV market grew to 76%, outpacing the U.S. in sales, and vastly surpassed the U.S. in number of public EV chargers with over 3.2 million public charge points. If the U.S. wants to be a leader in the transportation and energy sectors, we need a strong federal investment in electric vehicles and their charging infrastructure to meaningfully address climate change, help lower energy and transportation costs for Americans, and maintain global competitiveness. As a senior member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, I urge the Secretary of Transportation to reverse this myopic and reckless decision.”

In a Feb. 6, 2025, letter to State Department of Transportation Directors, Emily Biondi, Associate Administrator of the Office of Planning, Environment and Realty wrote:

“The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) administers several grant programs under which the applicable statutes require the Secretary to apportion grant funds to States under a prescribed statutory formula. The National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Formula Program is one such program. Most statutory formula programs require the Secretary to make the prescribed apportionments to the States on a specific date and then make the funds available for obligation. See, e.g., 23 U.S.C. 104. The NEVI Formula Program, however, is unique in that this Program requires the Secretary to approve a plan for each State describing how the State intends to use its NEVI funds.1 The State plans are to be developed in accordance with guidance the Secretary provides on how States are to strategically deploy the electric vehicle (EV) charging network.2 The NEVI Formula Program requires the Secretary to approve each State’s plan prior to the obligation of NEVI Formula Program funds for each fiscal year.3

“The new leadership of the Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) has decided to review the policies underlying the implementation of the NEVI Formula Program. Accordingly, the current NEVI Formula Program Guidance dated June 11, 2024, and all prior versions of this guidance are rescinded. The FHWA is updating the NEVI Formula Program Guidance to align with current U.S. DOT policy and priorities, including those set forth in DOT Order 2100.7, titled “Ensuring Reliance Upon Sound Economic Analysis in Department of Transportation Policies, Programs, and Activities.” The FHWA aims to have updated draft NEVI Formula Guidance published for public comment in the spring. After the public comment period has closed, FHWA will publish updated final NEVI Formula Guidance that responds to the comments received. As result of the rescission of the NEVI Formula Program Guidance, FHWA is also immediately suspending the approval of all State Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Deployment plans for all fiscal years.

“Therefore, effective immediately, no new obligations may occur under the NEVI Formula Program until the updated final NEVI Formula Program Guidance is issued and new State plans are submitted and approved. Instructions for the submission of new State plans for all fiscal years will be included in the updated final NEVI Formula Program Guidance. Since FHWA is suspending the existing State plans, States will be held harmless for not implementing their existing plans. Until new guidance is issued, reimbursement of existing obligations will be allowed in order to not disrupt current financial commitments.”

The letter includes the following footnotes and references:

1 See National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program provisos 4-9 of paragraph (2) under the Highway Infrastructure Programs heading in Title VIII, Division J of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Pub. L. 117-58; November 15, 2021; 135 Stat.1422. See also Paragraph 5c of FHWA Notice N 4510.895 Apportionment of Fiscal Year 2025 Highway Infrastructure Program Funds for the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program Pursuant to the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act as well as Paragraph 5c of FHWA Notices N 4510.863, N 4510.873, and N 4510.883 for the apportionments for Fiscal Years 22, 23 and 24, respectively.
2 See National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program provisos 14-15 of paragraph (2) under the Highway Infrastructure Programs heading in Title VIII, Division J of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Pub. L. 117- 58; November 15, 2021; 135 Stat.1423.
3 See National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program provisos 4-9 of paragraph (2) under the Highway Infrastructure Programs heading in Title VIII, Division J of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Pub. L. 117-58; November 15, 2021; 135 Stat.1422. See also Paragraph 5c of FHWA Notice N 4510.895 Apportionment of Fiscal Year 2025 Highway Infrastructure Program Funds for the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program Pursuant to the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act as well as Paragraph 5c of FHWA Notices N 4510.863, N 4510.873, and N 4510.883 for the apportionments for Fiscal Years 22, 23 and 24, respectively.

DeSaulnier represents California’s 10th Congressional District in the U.S. House of Representatives which includes portions of Antioch.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

Antioch Police Dispatchers save boater’s life on Christmas Eve

Thursday, December 26th, 2024
Photo by Antioch PD

Coordinated with multiple agencies

By Antioch Police Department

On the night of December 24, 2024, Dispatcher Autumn Turnage received a 911 call from a man whose boat had sunk near Sherman Island, leaving him stranded in the water and fearing for his life. Over the course of an intense and emotional hour-long call, Turnage demonstrated exceptional skill, composure, and compassion in ensuring the man’s survival.

Despite challenges with communication lines, Turnage remained determined, coordinating between multiple agencies, including the Contra Costa County Sheriff’s Marine Patrol, Sacramento County, Solano County, and the Coast Guard. With the support of her partner, Dispatcher Taylor Hubbard, who worked tirelessly behind the scenes, Turnage provided critical information such as GPS coordinates and location pings from the Rapid Deploy system to aid the Coast Guard in their search efforts.

Throughout the call, Turnage acted as a lifeline for the man, offering constant reassurance during moments of despair and panic. She chose to stay on the line even after transferring him to the Coast Guard, encouraging him to hold on and reminding him he wasn’t alone. At 12:02 AM on Christmas morning, the Coast Guard successfully rescued the man and brought him to safety.

Hubbard’s behind-the-scenes efforts were equally vital, as she managed radio communications, fielded additional calls, and even calmed the man’s panicked friend, ensuring no further risks were taken.

Their dedication, professionalism, and teamwork saved a life and brought hope to a family this holiday season. Antioch is proud to have these extraordinary dispatchers as part of our police department. Please join us in celebrating their heroic efforts!

Millions in the U.S. may rely on groundwater contaminated with PFAS for drinking water supplies

Monday, October 28th, 2024
USGS national estimates of the probability for PFAS in groundwater at the depth of private drinking water supply. Source: USGS

Estimates according to a new USGS predictive model. Exposure to some PFAS may lead to adverse health risks.

Antioch has some of the highest levels

Approximately 71 to 95 million people in the Lower 48 states – more than 20% of the country’s population – may rely on groundwater that contains detectable concentrations of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, also known as PFAS, for their drinking water supplies. These findings are according to a U.S Geological Survey study published Oct. 24. The predictive model results can help members of the public, water suppliers and regulators understand the potential for PFAS contamination, guide future studies and inform strategic planning for water resources.

USGS scientists are the first to report national estimates of PFAS occurrence in untreated groundwater that supplies water to public and private wells. This research also provides the first estimate of the number of people across the country who are potentially affected by PFAS-contaminated groundwater.

Along with a scientific report, the USGS published an interactive, online map so users can see probability estimates of PFAS occurrence. Note that predictive results are intended to be evaluated at state, regional and national scales rather than at individual household levels. Probability estimates are for the presence of PFAS in groundwater and do not account for any subsequent actions taken by states, municipalities or individuals to treat drinking water. The model does not include estimates of PFAS concentrations; testing is the only way to confirm the presence of contaminants.

Antioch area groundwater map. Source: USGS PFAS in US Groundwater Interactive Dashboard

Exposure to certain PFAS may lead to adverse health risks in people, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. PFAS are a group of synthetic chemicals used in a wide variety of common applications, from the linings of fast-food boxes and non-stick cookware to fire-fighting foams and other purposes. PFAS are commonly called “forever chemicals” because many of them do not easily break down and can build up over time, making them a concern for drinking water quality.

“This study’s findings indicate widespread PFAS contamination in groundwater that is used for public and private drinking water supplies in the U.S.,” said Andrea Tokranov, USGS research hydrologist and lead author of this study. “This new predictive model can help prioritize areas for future sampling to help ensure people aren’t unknowingly drinking contaminated water. This is especially important for private well users, who may not have information on water quality in their region and may not have the same access to testing and treatment that public water suppliers do.”

The EPA has established legally enforceable levels, called maximum contaminant levels, for six types of PFAS in drinking water. The EPA regulates public water supplies, and some states have additional regulations for drinking water. Some homes use private water supplies, where residents are responsible for the maintenance, testing and treatment of their drinking water. Those interested in treatment processes and testing options can read EPA’s guidance or contact their state officials or water supplier.

The states with the largest populations relying on public water supplies with potentially contaminated groundwater sources are Florida and California. Regarding private wells, Michigan, Florida, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, New York and Ohio have the largest populations relying on potentially contaminated groundwater.

The study also presents data according to population percentage. In Massachusetts, for example, the source water for 86 to 98% of people who rely on groundwater from public water supplies could be contaminated with PFAS. In Connecticut, the source water for 67 to 87% of the people who rely on groundwater from private wells could be affected. Details by state can be seen in the report’s tables S6 through S8.

“To derive these estimates, the team analyzed 1,238 groundwater samples collected by USGS scientists and determined how factors such as urban development and well depth can impact PFAS occurrence,” continued Tokranov. “With that information, a detailed machine learning model was developed and used to identify which geographic areas have a higher likelihood for contamination. That information was combined with existing USGS research on the number of people in a given area who rely on groundwater for drinking water to establish population estimates.”

Scientists present separate estimates for public and private wells because they typically receive water from different groundwater depths. Public wells using groundwater as the primary water source are usually deeper than private wells.

There are more than 12,000 types of PFAS, not all of which can be detected with current tests; the USGS study tested for the presence of 24 common types. The USGS estimates consider the presence of at least one of those 24 types of PFAS. The most frequently detected compounds were perfluorobutane sulfonate known as PFBS, perfluorooctane sulfonate known as PFOS and perfluorooctanoate known as PFOA.
This research provides a broad outlook for the Lower 48 states and presents state-level estimates. Scientists did not look in detail at specific cities or provide estimates for the types of PFAS present or PFAS concentrations.

The new USGS study was published in Science.

Learn more about USGS research on PFAS by reading the USGS strategy for the study of PFAS in the environment and visiting the USGS PFAS Integrated Science Team’s website.

For more information about PFAS regulations, visit the EPA’s website on addressing PFAS.

Coulter Pines and Their Neighbors Hike and Bioblitz on CA Biodiversity Day Sept. 7

Monday, August 26th, 2024

More events statewide Sept. 7-15

Join the “Find 30 Species for CA 30×30” Biodiversity Week Challenge!

By Mt. Diablo State Park staff

Did you know over 600 species of plants grow on Mount Diablo? We are part of what makes California a #biodiversity hotspot with 32% of all #nativeplants found in the U.S.!

Join us on California Biodiversity Day, Saturday, September 7th, for a guided hike to celebrate California and Mount Diablo’s biodiversity. We’ll visit the park’s Coulter pines, discover why they are also called big-cone pine, and learn about the challenges they are facing. Our acting Natural Resources Manager for the District will be on hand to share how we are trying to both help the trees and enhance biodiversity in the area with methods including prescribed fire.

You can be part of the effort too by participating in the day’s bioblitz to record what is living in the area now so we can see what changes later. If you’d like to do this, no special knowledge is required, just bring a phone or camera and download the iNaturalist app.

From 9am-noon on Saturday, September 7. Meets at the Mitchell Canyon Visitor Center located in Mount Diablo State Park at the south end of Mitchell Canyon Road in Clayton. Fee: $6 per vehicle, $5 for seniors. Pay with check or exact change or pay digitally by scanning the QR code by the entrance sign. Bring your curiosity, plenty of water, and wear sturdy shoes.

California Biodiversity Day Events

From September 7–15, join in one or more of the many California Biodiversity Day events being held across the state! Get outside and explore the nature around you—in your backyard, neighborhood, local parks, and open spaces—and share your findings on iNaturalist. No matter where you are in California, you can discover and celebrate nature and contribute to our understanding of where plants and animals are found!

As a global biodiversity hotspot, California has an immense array of nature to explore. We’ve compiled a few resources to guide folks in learning more about the nature around them, while contributing valuable data that can be used to answer important local conservation questions. 

Help celebrate California’s biodiversity and help inform the state’s 30×30 initiative by taking a closer look at nearby nature and documenting your finds on iNaturalist! Explore the nature around you however you choose, whether that’s visiting the coast, enjoying a long hike, walking to a nearby park, observing the birds outside your window, or looking for spiders under your couch.

Join the “Find 30 Species for CA 30×30” Biodiversity Week Challenge!

September 7 – 15, the California Natural Resources Agency is putting forth a challenge for California Biodiversity Week: can you find and document 30 species in California?  

Participating is easy!

  1. Download the iNaturalist app & make an account.
  2. Join the “Find 30 Species Challenge” project(look in the upper right corner of the “About” section for the Join button).
  3. September 7- 15, find and photograph 30 (or more!) wild plants, animals and fungus anywhere in California.
  4. Learn more as your observations are identified.

By joining the project, any observations you make in California from September 7 to 15 will automatically be added to the project and will help inform the California 30×30 initiative.

Make observations in your neighborhood, in your local park, while out hiking… or join in one of the many events being held throughout California during California Biodiversity Week.

Spread the word! Use the hashtag on social media #CABiodiversityDay. For more information visit Find 30 Species Project.

Other ways to explore California’s Biodiversity

  • There are events and activities being held around the state for California Biodiversity Week! Check out the California Biodiversity Day website to find a bioblitz to participate in, a talk to attend, or a nature walk to join!
  • Try to get bingo with these California Biodiversity Bingo sheets you can download and play with your family, friends, and community! 

Background

Established in 2018, California Biodiversity Dayis part of California’s first  Biodiversity Initiative  to safeguard the state’s natural heritage in response to the growing loss of biodiversity across the state. In 2020, a groundbreaking Executive Order was signed to protect 30% of California’s lands and waters by 2030, known as  California 30×30 . Together, these initiatives protect biodiversity, build resilience to climate change, and ensure equitable access to nature for all Californians. By participating in California Biodiversity Day, you can connect with the nature around you while also contributing to these important conservation goals.

For more information visit California Biodiversity Day | California Academy of Sciences and for list of events visit California Biodiversity Day.

#CABiodiversityDay #bioblitz 

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

BART’s 2023 Sustainability Report highlights agency’s innovation and improvements to rider experience

Monday, July 15th, 2024
Source: BART

BART continued in 2023 to pioneer sustainability initiatives aimed at enhancing rider experience while prioritizing environmental stewardship. With a legacy rooted in forward-thinking transportation solutions, BART reaffirmed its commitment to reducing carbon footprints and advancing sustainable transit practices. The accomplishments of 2023 are detailed in the annual Sustainability Report, officially presented to the Board of Directors on July 11, 2024. 

Source: BART

“BART’s sustainability efforts were all about innovation in 2023,” said BART Board President Bevan Dufty. “We are dedicated to integrating creative solutions that not only improve the rider experience, our immediate priority, but also emphasize long-term sustainability.”

Established over fifty years ago with a vision to alleviate regional traffic congestion through eco-friendly transit options, BART has continually evolved its practices to reflect contemporary environmental standards. Notably, engineers initially opted to power trains with electricity rather than fuel, a decision that laid the foundation for ongoing sustainability achievements. 

In a poignant farewell to its legacy fleet, BART hosted a memorable “retirement party” in February 2024, marking the culmination of efforts to retire older vehicles. Thousands of attendees gathered to bid farewell to the trains that had served millions of passengers over the years. The decommissioned cars are being repurposed for various projects, including a BART car short-term rental in the Sierra Nevada and a youth bike shop and clubhouse in East Oakland, demonstrating BART’s commitment to sustainability beyond transit operations. 

Source: BART

The introduction of new, energy-efficient train cars has furthered BART’s sustainability goals, boasting a 7% reduction in energy consumption compared to previous train car models. By running shorter trains during off-peak hours, BART has achieved significant energy savings. 88% of BART’s electricity comes from greenhouse gas-free sources like solar, wind, and hydropower. 

“Our shorter trains not only save energy and reduce costs but also enhance safety and efficiency in maintenance,” BART General Manager Bob Powers added. “These innovations underscore our holistic approach to sustainability across all facets of our operations.”

In addition to transit improvements, BART expanded its Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) program, constructing 531 new housing units near BART stations. Projects like the Gateway at Millbrae Station and the Upper Yard at Balboa Park Station not only address regional housing needs but also promote sustainable urban development and economic revitalization. 

Highlighting unique environmental initiatives, BART’s Sheep and Goat Fire Mitigation program has grown substantially, utilizing over 500 grazers to mitigate fire risks across its properties. Meanwhile, the Falconry-Based Nuisance Bird Control program, now implemented at 12 stations, effectively manages pigeon populations through pesticide-free methods. 

For more information on BART’s sustainability initiatives and ongoing projects, visit bart.gov/sustainability

Draft Plan Bay Area 2050+ Blueprint includes 840,000 more affordable homes, guaranteed monthly income

Monday, July 8th, 2024
Graphics source: MTC & ABAG

“Demonstrates continued progress toward key plan goals” of housing, transportation, economy and environment in the nine counties including “a gradual shift away from the use of single-occupancy cars and trucks.”

Includes over $1.2 trillion to maintain existing transportation system, build and buy affordable housing, “Provide an income-based monthly payment to all Bay Area households” and to “Adapt to Sea Level Rise.”

Also working on parallel Transit 2050+ plan

Public input opportunities

By MTC & ABAG staff

The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)’s and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)’s newly released Plan Bay Area 2050+ Draft Blueprint analysis outlines how the nine-county region can advance an affordable, connected, diverse, healthy and vibrant Bay Area for all residents by the year 2050. 

The Blueprint is essentially a draft version of the plan. It is a foundational framework for a future vision of the Bay Area that includes: 

  • Forecasts and Assumptions about the Bay Area’s future (population, jobs, financial needs and revenues, sea level rise, etc.);
  • Strategies for public investment and policy reform; and
  • Geographies where future housing and/or job growth can be focused under the plan’s Strategies.

The Blueprint is then analyzed through computer-generated models and simulations to measure how successful the strategies are in achieving shared goals for the future, such as housing affordability, reduced greenhouse gas emissions and much more.

As the first draft of the Bay Area’s next long-range plan, the Draft Blueprint demonstrates significant progress toward reaching key goals for housing affordability, post-pandemic economic recovery and environmental health and sustainability. This includes the addition of 840,000 affordable homes, with a total of nearly 1 million permanently affordable homes regionwide by 2050; a 17 percent increase in the number of lower-income households living within a half-mile of transit service; and a gradual shift away from the use of single-occupancy cars and trucks. MTC and ABAG planning staff stress that the expected progress would only come about if all the strategies to be detailed in Plan Bay Area 2050+ are implemented.

Source: MTC & ABAG

The full range of performance and equity outcomes from the Plan Bay Area 2050+ Draft Blueprint analysis may be found in the Draft Blueprint Compendium, which also demonstrates how the Bay Area can accommodate some 1.3 million additional jobs and nearly 1 million new households by the year 2050.

The Compendium shows the following proposed budget highlights for three of the Plan’s categories:

Transportation Strategies

$382 billion for T1 – Operate and Maintain the Existing System. Commit to operate and maintain the Bay Area’s roads and transit infrastructure while transitioning to zero-emission transit vehicles.

Housing Strategies

$250 billion for H2 – Preserve Existing Affordable Housing. Acquire homes currently affordable to low- and middle-income residents for preservation as permanently deed-restricted affordable housing, including opportunities for resident ownership.

$302 billion for H4 – Build Adequate Affordable Housing to Ensure Homes for All. Construct enough deed-restricted affordable homes to fill the existing gap in housing for the unhoused community and to meet the needs of low-income households.

Economic Strategies

$205 billion for EC1 – Implement a Statewide Guaranteed Income. Provide an income-based monthly payment to all Bay Area households to improve family stability, promote economic mobility and increase consumer spending.

Environment Strategies

$94 billion for EN1 – Adapt to Sea Level Rise. Adapt shoreline communities, infrastructure and ecosystems affected by sea level rise.

These outcomes were first presented at the May meeting of MTC’s Policy Advisory Council, and then at the June 14 joint meeting of the MTC Planning Committee and the ABAG Administrative Committee.  

The Draft Blueprint also identifies challenges that will have to be addressed as part of the Final Blueprint process over the coming months. More work is needed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as well as to identify transportation investment priorities for the plan’s fiscally constrained transportation project list. The Draft Blueprint does not include significant transportation expansion or enhancement investments, as these will be identified through Transit 2050+ and the Final Blueprint process. 

hoto source: MTC. Credit: Joey Kotfica

What’s Next?

In light of the pandemic’s lasting impact to public transportation, MTC is collaborating with the region’s transit operators on Transit 2050+ , a parallel planning effort to re-envision the future of public transit in the nine-county Bay Area. Two key updates in this process will be released in July: the Draft Project Performance Assessment and the Transit 2050+ Draft Network. It will be a comprehensive overhaul of the six transit-related strategies included in Plan Bay Area 2050.

The Draft Project Performance Assessment will analyze the costs and benefits of major capacity-increasing projects being considered for inclusion in Plan Bay Area 2050+, the vast majority of which are transit projects. These investments, including those adopted in Plan Bay Area 2050, now face a significantly reduced projected revenue stream. This is due largely to slow post-pandemic transit ridership recovery and other economic changes.

The Transit 2050+ Draft Network will identify strategies and investments (capital and operating) envisioned through 2035 and over the long term through 2050. Development of the Draft Network has been guided in part by public engagement conducted in summer 2023, when nearly 3,000 Bay Area residents provided input on the future of Bay Area transit. The Draft Network also is being informed by an existing needs and gaps assessment conducted in partnership with local transit agencies, the Draft Project Performance Assessment, local priorities and improvements to transit network connectivity and customer experience.

Source: MTC & ABAG

Summer 2024 Public Engagement

Beginning in August, MTC staff will conduct a second round of public engagement for Plan Bay Area 2050+, the content of which will focus on:

  • Sharing both the Draft Blueprint outcomes and the Transit 2050+ Draft Network
  • Gathering feedback to inform the development of the Final Blueprint and address identified Draft Blueprint challenges
  • Identifying early priorities for implementing Plan Bay Area 2050+

There will be a variety of in-person and virtual opportunities for the public to participate. Stay up-to-date on upcoming engagement activities in your community by subscribing to the Plan Bay Area 2050+ mailing list. There also will be dedicated engagement opportunities for technical partners and stakeholders, which will be publicized on the Plan Bay Area website’s Partner Engagement page.

Following an analysis of public input, the Commission and the ABAG Executive Board are expected to consider approval of the Final Blueprint in late 2024.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

Opinion: Antioch’s Path to Prosperity – Embracing hydroelectric power from the Delta

Friday, June 28th, 2024

By Brandon Lawson

As Antioch searches for ways to rejuvenate its economy and community, it’s crucial to remember our rich heritage of leveraging local resources for growth and prosperity. Historically, from the coal mines to the steel mills, our city thrived by tapping into what was readily available. Today, we face a similar opportunity, not by following the trend of tech industry acquisitions, but by returning to our roots and using our natural assets—specifically, the abundant water of the Delta.

Creating hydroelectric power plants along the Delta can be Antioch’s modern-day coal mine. This initiative will not only provide sustainable energy but also generate a surge in job opportunities, echoing the industrial boom of our past. It’s a chance to align with global movements toward renewable resources while addressing local employment and energy needs.

Such a project would do more than just power our homes; it could stimulate local businesses, attract investments, and provide the city with a stable economic foundation. Furthermore, hydroelectric power is clean, reducing our environmental footprint and offering our community a leadership role in the sustainable practices that are increasingly valued worldwide.

We must also consider the broader implications of this shift. By focusing on sustainable energy, Antioch can set an example for cities across the nation that economic growth and environmental responsibility can go hand in hand. This is not just about energy; it’s about cultivating a resilient community ready to face the challenges of the future with innovative solutions derived from our historical identity.

As we ponder Antioch’s path forward, let’s choose to harness the natural strength of the Delta. This approach not only respects our past but also paves the way for a future where Antioch stands as a beacon of sustainable innovation and economic independence.

Lawson is an educator and sci-fi author from Antioch who writes under the pen name Will Scifi.

Antioch Council majority vote shutting down natural gas pipeline increased greenhouse gas emissions

Thursday, June 27th, 2024
(Left) Maps of western Canada natural gas pipelines; Source: Canadian Energy Pipeline Association – defunct – and (center) TC Gas Transmission Northwest pipeline from Canada to California. Source: TC Energy provided by CRPC – see red circles for connecting point at national border crossing and (right) PG&E natural gas pipelines in California. Source: PG&E – see yellow circles for connecting point at Oregon-California state line and the pipelines to northern, central and western Contra Costa County.

50% of gas now supplied to owner’s customers in Contra Costa originates in Canada as much as 3,500 miles away instead of 35, about 80% from fracking

“The farther that natural gas must travel to its destination, the greater the carbon emissions” – California Resources Production Corporation

They’re “just doing it for political reasons. That only benefits them, not us on climate change.” – local oil producer Bob Nunn

By Allen D. Payton

After following the lead of the Brentwood City Council, in September 2021, the Antioch City Council voted 2-3 against renewing the franchise agreement for the low-pressure, natural gas pipeline that runs beneath the two communities. That resulted in it being closed and the City foregoing the annual franchise fee of $16,871.90. Pipeline franchise agrmt extension ACC092821

Proposed by District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson, Mayor Lamar Hernandez-Thorpe and District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker joined her in opposing the 35-mile long, 12-inch pipe which carried 1.8 million cubic feet of natural gas daily which is enough to supply about 9,000 homes. District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica and District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock supported the motion to renew the agreement. The result has been an increase in the emission of greenhouse gases and a much dirtier product being used by the refineries, from which Antioch is downwind, thus defeating the purpose the three council members claimed was the reason for their action.

Gas pipelines in Contra Costa County and the three cities in the yellow circles affected by the two city councils’ decisions. Source: National Pipeline Mapping System

The gas had been supplied from the Brentwood natural gas field, and natural gas fields in western San Joaquin County on Union Island in the Delta, southeast of Discovery Bay, as well as in French Camp and Lathrop. But the council’s decision also forced the pipeline company’s customer that it served, Chevron refinery in Richmond, to obtain their supply elsewhere. At least 99% of that supply originates out of state with over half from natural gas fields in British Columbia, Alberta and Saskatchewan east of the Rocky Mountains in Canada, traveling a distance of as much as 3,500 miles instead of just 35.

(Top) Canadian Natural Gas Fields map shows the locations of natural gas and oil found in Canada. Red represents gas fields and green represents oil fields. Source: The Canadian Encyclopedia (Courtesy International Petroleum Encyclopedia 2010, ed. Joseph Hilyard, PennWell Corporation, 2010). (Bottom) Map of natural gas (pink) and oil (brown) pipelines in western Canada. Source: Canada Energy Regulator

In Canada, natural gas production is concentrated in the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin (WCSB), with the highest production in the provinces of Alberta and British Columbia with more than twice as much from Alberta than from BC.

Map showing the route of CRC’s natural gas pipeline that runs through Antioch. Source: City of Antioch

Pipeline Owner Sues City

Following the decision, the company that owns the pipeline, California Resources Corporation (CRC), believed they had the right to continue operating the pipeline. At that time, spokesman Richard Venn, Senior Director, Communications said, “We believe there are legal protections in place that prevent an arbitrary and immediate shutdown, and we will continue to work with the city and its staff on the best solution.”

However, that was not to be the case, the pipeline was shut down, and on Dec. 27, 2021 the company’s subsidiary, California Resources Production Corporation (CRPC), filed a lawsuit against the City of Antioch over the council’s decision.

CRPC did not file a lawsuit against the City of Brentwood and the company has reapplied for the franchise agreement for the portion of the pipeline that runs beneath that city.

CRPC did not file a lawsuit against the City of Brentwood and the company has reapplied for the franchise agreement for the portion of the pipeline that runs beneath that city.

Questions were sent on May 12, 2024, to a representative for CRC about the status of the lawsuit, details about the pipeline and any impacts the change in supply is having on the environment. Venn responded on May 28, 2024, with the company’s answers:

1. Where is CRC in the process with its lawsuit against the City of Antioch? Was one also filed against the City of Brentwood? When were they filed and how soon does CRC expect them to be finalized?

On May 25, 2023, the trial court sustained the City’s motion to dismiss CRPC’s complaint, effectively ending trial court proceedings against the City. On August 25, 2023, CRPC appealed this decision. The parties are currently briefing the appeal. CRPC’s opening appellate brief was filed on April 22, 2024. The City’s brief is due July 3, 2024. CRPC’s reply will be due on August 16, 2024. A decision is unlikely to occur until late 2024 or even early 2025.

No lawsuit has been filed against Brentwood. The application for renewal of the Brentwood franchise is still pending. Per the Brentwood City Council’s request, CRC hired independent consultants, Bear, Inc., to perform a safety study on the Union Island (“UI”) Pipeline, which was published in April 2022. The study confirmed the UI Pipeline is a very well maintained and safe pipeline.

2. If the company had certain rights granted by the California Public Utilities Commission (PUC) that would prevent the cities from stopping CRC from operating the pipeline and continuing to ship gas through it how has the City of Antioch been winning in court? What have been the decisions in favor of the City?

CRPC does not presently have any rights granted to it by the PUC related to the UI Pipeline. However, CRPC has applied for a certificate for public convenience and necessity (“CPCN”) to have the UI Pipeline converted from a private pipeline to a common carrier pipeline. If the CPCN is granted, CRPC would become a regulated public utility, with the CPUC controlling certain aspects of the UI Pipeline’s operations and the rates that CRPC can charge for use of the Pipeline. The UI Pipeline’s day-to-day operations would not change however, after flow through the UI Pipeline restarts, and CRPC would be subject to the same federal and state regulations for safety and environmental protection.

If the UI Pipeline right-of-way were condemned to allow it to resume operations as a common carrier pipeline, as part of the condemnation proceedings, CRPC would have to provide “just compensation” for use of the right of way.

3. Where does the natural gas originate that was running through the pipeline in Antioch and Brentwood?

The natural gas that was running through the pipeline originates from the French Camp, Lathrop, and Union Island natural gas fields in western San Joaquin County and the Brentwood natural gas field in Contra Costa County.

4. Who are the customers served by the pipeline?

The gas is transported from the UI Pipeline to Chevron Corporation’s Richmond Refinery. The gas is used to power the refinery and used in its industrial processes to make jet fuel, diesel and gasoline that is distributed throughout Northern California.

5. From where are those customers now receiving the gas?

The gas that the Richmond refinery is no longer receiving from the UI Pipeline is supplanted by gas from PG&E’s system. The overwhelming majority of PG&E-supplied gas is from out of state. According to the most recent published information on PG&E’s gas sources, over 50% of the natural gas supplied by PG&E comes from Canada via the Gas Transmission Northwest (“GTN”) system. See 2023 California Gas Report, Table 5, https://www.socalgas.com/sites/default/files/Joint_Biennial_California_Gas_Report_2023_Supplement.pdf. Only around 1% of PG&E’s gas comes from California.

Around 80% of the natural gas produced in British Columbia, the upstream production region feeding the GTN pipeline, is produced by fracking. See https://stand.earth/.

6. Is the gas coming from Canada, is it not as clean as that produced in California, and how many miles is the gas now being shipped versus how many miles, previously?

As stated above, 80% of the natural gas produced in British Columbia is produced by fracking. Accordingly, we expect the majority of PG&E gas from Canada to be the result of fracking. This means that by stopping the UI Pipeline from operation, the City may be prioritizing the use of fracked gas.

The GTN system, which transports PG&E’s Canada gas to California, is a > 1,300-mile pipeline system. A map of it can be found at https://www.tcenergy.com/siteassets/pdfs/natural-gas/gas-transmission-northwest/tc-gas-transmission-northwest-map.pdf. (See center map at top of this article)

The >1,300-mile figure does not reflect the total distance Canadian gas must travel to reach Richmond, California, though. The GTN system only runs from the Canadian border in Montana to northern California. Accordingly, Canadian gas going to the Richmond refinery must be transported from wherever the natural gas fields are located in Canada to the mouth of the GTN system in Montana. It must also be transported from northern California to the Bay area. Accordingly, gas from Canada travels well over 1,300 miles to reach the Richmond refinery.

By contrast, the UI Pipeline assisted in the transportation of local gas from the natural gas fields in western San Joaquin County and the Brentwood natural gas field in Contra Costa County to Richmond, a drastically shorter distance.

7. Have there been any environmental impacts because of the change in the natural gas supply to those customers?

The farther that natural gas must travel to its destination, the greater the carbon emissions attendant to those pipeline operations. Additionally, the gas transported by the UI Pipeline is not fracked, as compared to the majority of PG&E’s gas obtained from Canada.

Finally, any GHG emissions from gas production in California are compensated for under the cap-and-trade program, which is not the case in most of the other jurisdictions supplying PG&E.

8. Has there been a change in the costs to CRC’s customer(s) in both the purchase of the natural gas from one or more different sources and the production of their products to their customers? And ultimately to the consumers?

Without the UI Pipeline, local gas cannot be delivered to the Chevron refinery. The contribution of local gas to the refinery helps keep gas prices competitive, which further keeps prices low and the refinery open. The Richmond refinery has a workforce of over 2,700 company employees and 850 contract workers, according to the Richmond Chamber of Commerce. See https://www.rcoc.com/membership-directory-2/name/chevron-richmondlorenz/.

9. Is the pipeline that runs through Brentwood and Antioch different than the high-pressure line that exploded in San Bruno in 2010? What are the differences between the two pipelines?

Source: CRPC

10. What could the Antioch and/or Brentwood City Council do to remedy the situation?

The City could extend the franchise to allow for operation of the UI Pipeline. With an extension, the City could propose additional conditions on the operation of the Pipeline to address any of its continuing concerns. Using this authority to ensure enhanced protections or benefits for the City, while allowing the Pipeline to safely transport gas as it has for the past thirty years, was not something the City officials considered during the public hearing on the franchise renewal. This kind of win-win solution would have protected the citizens from the costs of litigation, brought revenue to the City, and given the City peace of mind about the UI Pipeline’s operations.

It is also important to keep in mind that the UI Pipeline is by no means the only natural gas pipeline running through Antioch. All federally regulated natural gas and hazardous liquid pipelines can be identified using the National Pipeline Mapping System Public Viewer, which can be accessed at https://pvnpms.phmsa.dot.gov/PublicViewer/.

There are several natural gas transmission pipelines running through Antioch besides the UI Pipeline. Some of these are high-pressure pipelines, in contrast to the UI Pipeline, which is considered a low-pressure pipeline. In addition to these other natural gas pipelines, there are over 34,000 natural gas connections in Antioch.

11. If the council(s) choose to settle the lawsuit(s) would the city(ies) have to reimburse CRC for their attorney’s fees?

The terms of any settlement would govern whether attorney’s fees are reimbursed by either side.

12. Is there anything else you would like to share about the matter?

CRPC is committed to operating in a manner focused on safety, environmental stewardship, and promoting the health and welfare of all Californians. One of our leading “Values” is being a responsible operator, meeting – if not exceeding – California’s high standards for safety and environmental protection. We have a decades-long successful track record of safely and efficiently operating critical energy infrastructure such as the UI Pipeline within the City of Antioch and we look forward to continuing to work with the City and its staff to provide safe, reliable, and low carbon.

Local Environmental and Economic Benefits of Pipeline, Supports Farmers

In addition, CRPC shared information from their application to the state’s PUC about the pipeline and its benefits to the environment and local economy. The company wrote, “The UI Pipeline currently provides the only viable avenue for the natural gas produced from the Fields to reach the market, including the Richmond Refinery, which currently utilizes all of the natural gas carried on the UI Pipeline. The use of in-state natural gas displaces the use of out-of-state natural gas produced in other states and transported by pipeline into California. Currently, California imports over 90% of its natural gas from out-of-state fields where the environmental and greenhouse gas regulations may not be as stringent as those required here in California. Absent the UI Pipeline, production from the Fields would cease and the State would have to look to alternate natural gas capacity at a time when natural gas supply constraints have been widely reported.

“Given California’s current natural gas demand, the natural gas production from these Fields would likely be replaced by out-of-state production, which would be contrary to statutory preferences for in-state production of natural gas and would result in appreciable environmental impacts and increased costs. Natural gas produced out of state is not obligated to follow California’s more stringent environmental and greenhouse gas regulations, and transporting natural gas from out of state through interstate pipelines increases greenhouse gas emissions, as compared to in-state production. Furthermore, in the future, the Field would be capable of converting to carbon dioxide storage and sequestration, which is widely considered a necessary component to achieving long-term climate goals. The UI Pipeline is therefore a key component in not only ensuring the Fields continue to provide in-state natural gas, but also in reducing the environmental impact of natural gas consumption. In-state natural gas production may also mitigate the substantial increases in natural gas costs to California customers over the past year.

“Closure of the UI Pipeline would also have a significant economic impact to the local community. Over 200 local landowners receive revenue from royalties associated with natural gas transported on the UI Pipeline. Many of the royalty holders are local farmers, and monetizing these mineral rights helps support local farming operations. Closure of the UI Pipeline would eliminate any opportunity for those mineral owners to monetize their assets.”

Questions for Council Members Go Unanswered

All five council members were informed of the answers provided by CRPC on Monday, June 24, 2024. Herandez-Thorpe, Wilson and Torres-Walker were asked if, knowing now that the action by the council majority has had a greater impact on the environment, will they reconsider and reverse their vote to deny the franchise agreement allowing the pipeline to resume operations in Antioch.

They were all also asked if they know how much the City has spent to date defending against the lawsuit by the pipeline owner.

None of the council members responded prior to publication time.

Additional Questions for CRC

Asked if the Antioch City Council reverses its decision and approves their franchise agreement can the pipeline reopen, company spokesman Venn said, “The renewal for the franchise for Brentwood is still pending.”

Both cities must approve their separate franchise agreements in order for the pipeline to reopen.

Local Oil Producer Says Council Members “Doing the Opposite of What They Claim”

When reached for comment about the information from CRPC and the council’s decision to shutter the pipeline, Brentwood businessman, Bob Nunn, whose company is the only holder of a permit to drill for natural gas and oil in Antioch said, “We have the strictest rules for oil and gas in California. The energy used to move the gas 100 times further is going to be greater.”

“California is doing its best in the name of climate change. But in the last three years, California has used more oil each year than in the previous year,” he continued. “The production of oil in California to support that demand has gone down each of those three years. CARB (California Air Resources Board) will show you, on the whole, imported oil will have more emissions than oil produced in California.”

“If they’re doing it in the name of climate change, they’re doing the opposite of what they claim,” Nunn stated. “The issue is to lower demand not squeeze supply. It’s Economics 101. Their model is flawed.”

“I support decisions that will reduce man’s impact on climate change. But make sure you do your homework that their positions are for the benefit of climate change,” he said. “If not, then you’re just doing it for political reasons. That only benefits them, not us on climate change.”

Please check back later for any updates to this report.