Menlo Park council open to bold new climate goal: carbon neutrality by 2030 | News | Almanac Online |

News

Menlo Park council open to bold new climate goal: carbon neutrality by 2030

 

Faced with the increasingly real and local threat of climate change, the Menlo Park City Council hosted a discussion on Tuesday, Dec. 10, to talk about developing a new climate action plan that better reflects what scientists say is an urgent need to decrease carbon emissions.

The council expressed openness to exploring a far bolder goal than its current climate goals, which has been recommended by the city's Environmental Quality Commission: to make Menlo Park carbon neutral by 2030.

Currently, the city's goal is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 27% below 2005 levels by 2020. The most current data, from 2017, indicates the city has reduced emissions by about 18.6%.

Much of the reduction achieved so far has to do with the city switching to Peninsula Clean Energy, which offers 90% clean and renewable electricity; reducing emissions due to building energy usage policy changes with PG&E; and the installation of efficient gas-capture devices at Ox Mountain Landfill, according to Rebecca Lucky, Menlo Park sustainability manager.

Lucky said that in the next climate action plan, the city can focus on three main areas: shifting transportation to low carbon fuel alternatives, which could prevent 200,000 tons of greenhouse gas emissions; achieving the city's zero-waste goal by 2035, which could prevent 100,000 tons of emissions; and reducing natural gas use in existing buildings, which could prevent 80,000 tons of emissions.

Further recommendations for local governments, put forward by the Carbon Neutral Cities Alliance, are to: adopt a zero-emissions standard for new buildings; build electric vehicle charging infrastructure; mandate composting of organic material; electrify heating and cooling systems in buildings; designate car-free and low-emission vehicle zones; support local producers and buyers of renewable electricity; and set a city climate budget to support eliminating carbon emissions.

In addition, the Environmental Quality Commission has developed its own set of recommendations for the new climate action plan, which includes a proposal to obtain 100% carbon-free electricity citywide through Peninsula Clean Energy. Currently, households have to "opt up" to get this type of energy mix, which is slightly more expensive than PG&E offers, instead of the 90% clean mix that is slightly cheaper.

The commission also recommends electrifying as many existing buildings as possible; reducing the miles vehicles travel; supporting electric vehicle purchasing and increasing infrastructure for electric vehicles; reducing carbon emissions from construction; electrifying municipal buildings and fleet vehicles; implementing a zero-waste plan; deterring the installation of appliances that emit carbon, like gas water heaters, in new buildings; planting more trees and landscaping; and developing adaptation measures to prepare the city for climate change.

A number of residents spoke in favor of the more stringent carbon emission restrictions.

"The future begins in Menlo Park," said Mitch Slomiak, former Environmental Quality Commission member and a founder of Menlo Spark, urging the council to get the community to carbon neutrality as fast as possible. "That's the role we can play as a small community, by going far beyond our numbers," he added.

Speaking as an individual, Environmental Quality Commission member Tom Kabat commented that over the past 12 years, "things have gotten more serious," when it comes to climate action. Our leadership can inspire others."

Other cities have also been updating their climate action plans, putting additional resources toward implementing strategies to reduce carbon emissions. For instance, Mountain View has committed to spending $4.6 million over the next three years on 10 new staff positions, plus $3 million to support and implement climate action programs.

The City Council is expected to consider adding a project to update the city's climate action plan to its work plan at its annual goal-setting meeting in January.

--

Sign up for Almanac Express to get news updates. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. Or show your support for local journalism by subscribing.

What is community worth to you?
Support local journalism.

Comments

Like this comment
Posted by sea level rise
a resident of Menlo Park: Fair Oaks
on Dec 11, 2019 at 12:52 pm

related Almanac articles:

"Sea level rise could cost area billions, countywide study finds"


7 people like this
Posted by Lselkins
a resident of Menlo Park: The Willows
on Dec 12, 2019 at 11:59 am

It’s so aggravating to me that no one wants to consider a ban on gas powered leaf blowers as a means of reducing GHG emissions. Sure, as a percentage they don’t amount to as much carbon as cars but they are much more polluting than cars and there are efficient and effective alternatives readily available. On top of their carbon spewing two-stroke engines they destroy peace and quiet, remove top soil, aerosolize toxic lawn chemicals and animal feces, destroy insect habitats and terrorize birds. Let’s ban gas blowers in Menlo Park!


3 people like this
Posted by Joseph E. Davis
a resident of Woodside: Emerald Hills
on Dec 12, 2019 at 12:38 pm

Lselkins, I like your idea. It is both practical and likely to improve the quality of life for Menlo Park residents. Unfortunately, those qualities mean that it is unlikely to be of any interest to the council.


2 people like this
Posted by real action needed
a resident of Menlo Park: Allied Arts/Stanford Park
on Dec 16, 2019 at 3:50 pm

Bold goals mean nothing if there isn't action to support them. How many years did it take from the Green Ribbon Citizens' Committee work before a goal was even adopted? How many years will it be before the Council makes decisions about development rules so mixed use development occurs rather than this boom of office buildings that just bring commuters (not even sales tax revenue)? How many years before there is a viable continuous network of safe passages for bicyclists and pedestrians? How many years and how many millions more of consultant dollars will occur before a council makes the tough decisions that enough is enough? The downtown plan and the bayfront plan were supposed to manage development until at least 2040 but both are getting blown away (at least the office parts of them). Sitting idly won't fix anything, especially the climate.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields


Stay informed

Get daily headlines sent straight to your inbox.

Pluto's appears to close after more than two decades in downtown Palo Alto
By Elena Kadvany | 17 comments | 7,820 views

Edible Education – Free Course - UC Berkeley Online
By Laura Stec | 2 comments | 1,892 views

Local Pols Debate Climate
By Sherry Listgarten | 2 comments | 1,650 views

Hallelujah! "Real Facts" Still Matter To The Menlo Park City Council
By Dana Hendrickson | 0 comments | 1,283 views

Letting Christmas Linger
By Cheryl Bac | 5 comments | 946 views