Laserfiche WebLink
That’s a lot of greenhouse gasses! <br />Rincon also notes that “the broader influence of municipal leadership <br />in promoting Ava’s Renewable 100 electricity package warrants <br />consideration.” This means that if the City switches away from <br />Renewable 100, other Pleasanton electricity customers may follow <br />their lead and further erode our ability to meet our CAP 2.0 targets. <br />The City’s analysis estimates this switch would save about $80K per <br />year or $320K total. This is a small savings given the enormous <br />amount of pollution we’d be adding to our air. Remaining on the <br />Renewable 100% plan would only cost ~$46 per metric ton ($320K <br />savings / 7,000 MT of CO2). This is a good deal compared to many <br />other GHG reduction investments. <br />A peer-reviewed 2022 scientific paper from Princeton University and <br />UC Berkeley (ref: www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-05224-9) <br />provides detailed analysis to arrive at the real economic cost to <br />society of CO2 pollution. The study objectively analyzed the two <br />major economic impacts from climate change caused by GHGs: <br />reduction in agricultural crop yields (resulting in higher priced foods <br />and food insecurity) and premature deaths due to more frequent, <br />deadly heat waves. <br />The report estimates the true economic cost to society is $182 per <br />MT of CO2 – and they believe this is optimistically low since it limits <br />the study to objective economic data. <br />(Some other academic studies have suggested economic impacts up <br />to $400/MT!) <br />In addition, the US Federal Government has set an initial <br />assessment for carbon cost to be used for assessing impacts from <br />new projects and programs. Their initial evaluation for the cost of <br />carbon is at least $51/MT, which is recognized to still be <br />optimistically low. <br />Compared to the university study’s $182/MT, Ava’s $46/MT price to <br />save 7,000 metric tons of CO2 is a huge bargain! Even if we <br />compared it to the much lower federal estimate, the $46/MT is still a <br />good deal. <br />The $80K per year savings is only 0.6% of the $13M annual budget <br />shortfall. Surely, we can find some less damaging option to reduce <br />our expenditures by less than 1%. <br />Since Pleasanton previously mandated that the default power source <br />for resident and business electricity customers is the Renewable <br />100% plan, it seems hypocritical for the City to now back off and