C.J. Wilson -- 10-14-2023 - Fresno writer discovers what Yosemite can teach Californians about healthy forests.

Fresno writer discovers what Yosemite can teach Californians about healthy forests

Special to the Fresno Bee

C.J. WILSON OCTOBER 14, 2023

It was raining when I arrived in Yosemite Valley, and the forest looked more alive than I’d ever seen it. The trees were covered in dark-green moss, and the smell of wet pine made me forget my damp clothes. A small price to pay for an enriching experience. When I returned to Fresno, I find flooded neighborhoods and closed streets. 

Yosemite’s rain was way more intense than Fresno’s, but the park was beautified while my home was disrupted. As Tropical Storm Hilary came through, I thought about why.

The answer was the forest. Not the trees or the soil, or the leaves and soft earth, but all of it, working in tandem to stabilize the environment. Even the smallest parts have a big role to play.

Take mosses, for example. Mosses need the same two things as any other plant: sunlight and water. But, lacking root systems, they can’t take that water from the earth. So, instead, many specialize in holding water when it comes their way. Touch a patch of dry moss, you’ll notice a texture not unlike a dry sponge. Mosses are highly absorptive. Some can hold 20-30 times their weight. With so much moss present in a healthy environment (ground moss, alone, covers as much of the Earth’s surface as the United States), that’s a lot of material to slow flooding. Plus, the environment provided by ground moss is often prime real estate for seedlings, encouraging the growth of new trees.

or players get even smaller. Grocery store mushrooms are only the flowering part of the plant: most of the rest is made up of hair-thin strands running through the soil, called mycelium. These strands number in the hundreds, and act as reinforcing cord that keeps soil bound together to keep from washing away in a flood. These strands also weave through other plants’ roots to create a network of “mycorrhizal fungi,” which distribute nutrients from healthy plants to damaged ones and keep the forest whole. 

Moss and mycelium. Both almost beyond notice. Both are crucial. Without mosses, some trees can’t sprout seedlings, and the forest is inundated even in small rains. Without mycelium, soils are washed away with ease and the trees that buffer floodwaters are blown over or fail to recover from damage. 

Both beings are also vulnerable. Moss is sensitive to air pollution and serves as a canary in the coal mine for air quality. Mycorrhizal fungi is no less vulnerable, and Europe has linked malnourished forests to pollution-damaged fungi.

Healthy forests have become a political talking point. No surprise: we live near three national parks and they play a huge role in air quality, stable climate, and flood control. It’s easy to think of healthy forest initiatives in terms of trees planted. But, if we want to improve the health of our forests — and doing so will accomplish so much more than simply reducing flood risk — then we need to see them not as inert places full of statuesque trees, but as networks of living organisms in constant interaction. This means we need holistic approaches that take all aspects of forest health into account, rather than “magic bullet” solutions. 

In the same way the forest is tied together by the small and unnoticed, our approaches to forest health need to pay attention to the little things. Managing soil health and reducing things like microplastics and air pollution can be as important as planting those big, eye-catching trees. Likewise, we need to remember how our seemingly small actions can do big damage. Remember the moss and the fungus: crucial and fascinating, but overlooked and fragile.

C.J. Wilson is a freelance writer and outdoor/environmental educator in Fresno

https://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/readers-opinion/article280510229.html

Andrea De Zubiria - 9-17-2023 - Leaders Must Act on Climate Goals

Leaders Must Act on Climate Goals

Fresno Bee - September 17, 2023 

Thank you for printing the letter (The Bee, Sept. 2) calling on Republicans to discuss a plan for addressing climate change. 

I watched the presidential debate and couldn’t believe how the candidates barely answered the student who said that young Republicans are intensely concerned about climate change. 

I admire local congressman David Valadao, a Republican from Hanford, for stepping forward to support some bipartisan legislation to try to address air quality and climate chaos. My member of Congress, Democrat Jim Costa, has also shown bipartisan leadership in this area. The higher intensity fires and storms all over the country affect us all. We need strategies to lower greenhouse gases to be supported across the political spectrum. 

Climate smart agriculture, good forest management, planting urban trees and supporting electrification can create good jobs and clean up our air. If we charge oil, coal and gas companies a gradually rising fee to make up for the costs of fossil fuel pollution, we can return that fee to households as a “carbon cashback” . This would be easy to implement without growing the size of government. It would inspire investment in clean energy and would assist low- and middle-income households to meet their needs. 

Andrea De Zubiria, Fresno

https://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/article279312334.html#storylink=cpy

Ken Wall - 9-17-2023 - State Sen. Grove omitted key points in her Bee op-ed about oil production in California

State Sen. Grove omitted key points in her Bee op-ed about oil production in California 

Fresno Bee - September 17, 2023

In a recent opinion piece in The Bee (Aug. 30), Republican state Sen. Shannon Grove of Bakersfield (who represents parts of Fresno County) presented a case for expanded oil exploration and production in California. Her argument centers on the fact that California does not currently supply enough oil for the state’s energy needs. 

In her piece, Grove brought up Ecuador, where on Aug. 20 the voters approved (with 59 percent of the vote) a referendum calling for the prohibition of oil production in a portion of Yasuni National Park. The park encompasses a wildly diverse portion of the Amazon rain forest and is home to several indigenous tribes (North American Congress on Latin America). 

The referendum in question apparently culminated a decade’s worth of effort that started with those indigenous people who were fighting to preserve their homeland from the ravages of oil companies and from the loggers that followed. The tribes were eventually joined by environmentalists and others, who mounted a grassroots campaign resulting in the voters’ approval of the referendum. The measure was vigorously opposed by the Ecuadoran state-run oil company, government officials and citizens concerned about the loss of potential oil exports and oil-based jobs. 

Grove mentioned the Ecuadoran referendum because she sees it as an argument in favor of expanded oil efforts in California, since California depends on oil imports from other countries, Ecuador being one, to satisfy current demand for oil-based energy. Her argument is that less oil from Ecuador means California should produce more for its own use (apparently California doesn’t use much oil from other U.S. states). 

Contrary to Grove’s claim, reports indicate that oil produced in California is among the most polluting in the world (Center for Biological Diversity, June 28, 2021). It is also worthy of note that petroleum workers (drillers and refiners) suffer a relatively higher degree of serious health problems (National Library of Medicine, April 4, 2021). 

Petroleum workers aren’t the only ones affected by oil and gas extraction. In recognition of the risk to people near drilling sites, the state of California recently established a law (SB 1137) requiring 3,200-foot minimum setbacks between future oil wells and dwellings, schools and other public buildings. The oil industry has vigorously opposed the law and has qualified its own referendum, negating AB 1137, for the next election . 

While the circumstances of the Ecuador and California referendums are different, the overall thrust is the same. Oil interests are pushing hard to continue expanding their extraction while disregarding opposition from people concerned about the negative health and climate outcomes associated with oil and gas production. 

Grove’s opinion piece doesn’t discuss the health and pollution problems associated with oil production, nor does it mention the economic benefits to be realized by the transition to clean energy. The benefits of the clean energy transition include new jobs in various economic sectors, such as solar and wind power installations, batteries, electrical grid enhancements, etc. 

As the transition proceeds, there is also widespread recognition that oil workers should be given the opportunity to be retrained. Those wishing to keep doing the kind of work they are already doing can also be offered the opportunity to help plug the nearly 250,000 orphan oil wells in California still leaking greenhouse gases and abandoned by oil drilling companies. 

An interesting aside is that one study estimates that the cost of sealing these orphan wells will exceed $21 billion, while the total future profits expected from California oil production are estimated to be only $6 billion (ProPublica, May 18, 2023). It seems likely, therefore, that taxpayers will ultimately be on the hook for these costs. 

Even the oil companies know that the transition to clean energy is happening, and that it needs to accelerate to avoid the worst impacts brought about by climate change. There is also no serious scientific doubt that burning fossil fuels has been the primary cause of the planet warming that has resulted in natural disasters of increased severity. 

At the next election, I suggest California voters follow the example of the people of Ecuador. Let us overwhelmingly vote against the oil industry referendum, and metaphorically consign it to one of those abandoned orphan wells, sealed off and rendered harmless. 

And in doing so, say no to increased oil and gas production in California. 

Ken Wall is a retired banker and bank regulator in Fresno, and is a local environmental advocate.

Read more at: https://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/readers-opinion/article279352109.html#storylink=cpy

C.J. Wilson - 8-24-2023 - Republican Denial

 REPUBLICAN DENIAL 

“Presidential debate shows how GOP candidates are struggling to address concerns about climate change,” 

(fresnobee.com, Aug. 24)

 During the recent Republican presidential debate, candidates were asked whether they believed in human-caused climate change. Not a single one raised their hand. One was openly hostile to the idea and endorsed coal and oil. Meanwhile, the likely frontrunner for the nomination, Donald Trump, actively rolled back climate protections in office. 

This is a humiliating situation. Over half the country — 54%, according to the Pew Research Center — views climate change as a “major threat.” Yet when “polarizing” terms like “climate change” are replaced by green policy suggestions, like swapping fossil fuels with renewables, the percentage of supporters spikes dramatically (to 69%, in that specific case). 

Putting aside, for a moment, the scientific validity of human-caused climate change (it’s valid), Republicans lack a presidential candidate that represents the opinions of a major segment of the public. For Republican voters, this should be worrying. Electability is hurting their party. 

Some Republican representatives in the Valley only won in the last election due to abysmal voter turnout. Meanwhile, disagreements on what’s important prevents working across the aisle. If Republicans want to remain relevant, they need to push candidates who actually represent them on issues like climate change. In the meantime, Democrats will finally get to have a conversation about real, meaningful solutions. 

C.J. Wilson Fresno

Read more at: https://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/article278866019.html#storylink=cpy

Scott Lecrone 8-2-2023 - Thankful for Valadao's focus on sustainability

Thankful for Valadao's focus on sustainability

Aug 2, 2023

Bakersfield Californian

The Citizens Climate Lobby Bakersfield chapter would like to express our gratitude to Rep. David Valadao for his dedication to bipartisanship in various policy areas for the good of his CA-22 constituents and the well-being of the earth.

In particular, we applaud his recent decision to join the congressional Climate Solutions Caucus, which is composed of 29 Republican and 29 Democrat representatives who are working to address climate change and protect the economic prosperity of the USA.

While we are waiting to see what the Caucus can accomplish, Valadao has already taken steps of bipartisan climate action by co-authoring the Converting Our Water Sustainably Act to support dairy/livestock manure management (reduce methane air pollution) and the Rural Energy in America Program Modernization Act to make it easier for individuals to achieve renewable energy and energy efficiency.

CCL supports the aforementioned, and also clean energy permitting reform, carbon pricing fee and dividend, healthy forests initiatives (like the Save our Sequoias) and building electrification and efficiency.

Let us work together for a sustainable future.

— Scott Lecrone, Bakersfield

https://www.bakersfield.com/opinion/letters-to-editor/letter-to-the-editor-thankful-for-valadaos-focus-on-sustainability/article_dde8e05c-309f-11ee-b109-2f329da56b48.html

Devin Carroll 7-25-2023 - Save Our Sequoias Act is Controversial, But Would Be a Bipartisan Climate Win

 Save Our Sequoias Act is Controversial, But Would Be a Bipartisan Climate Win

GV Wire - July 25, 2023

Kudos to all of our local Members of Congress for coming together in support of the bipartisan Save Our Sequoias Act (H.R.2989). Republican House Speaker Kevin McCarthy is the bill sponsor, joined by Republican cosponsors David Valadao, John Duarte, and Tim McClintock, and Democrat Jim Costa. Total California House support includes 13 Democrats and 12 Republicans.

Devin Carroll

Opinion

The S.O.S. Act seeks to protect the Giant Sequoias, following the unprecedented death by wildfire of 20% of these iconic trees in just two years. Wildfires have grown more destructive from a combination of changing climate and a history of misguided policies of fire suppression. S.O.S. would speed clearing out underbrush around the remaining Sequoia groves.

Citizens’ Climate Lobby supports this bill. CCL is a nationwide non-partisan organization dedicated to climate solutions. CCL especially applauds the bipartisan cooperation. Bills need to pass to do any good.

Some respected environmental organizations oppose S.O.S. They say redwoods are adapted to fires. Many seedlings have already germinated around the dead giants. S.O.S. might allow logging where it is not appropriate.

Fast Action is Critical

Other environmentalists counter that fast action is critical. The current rate of clearing will take 50 years to complete. Environmental reviews will be streamlined, not eliminated. Restorative thinning is not the same as logging.

We need the current Congress to pass bipartisan legislation that will build on the climate progress made in the last session. Under the Paris Agreement of 2015, the United States committed to a 50% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, starting from 2005 levels. Models estimate that even with last year’s Inflation Reduction Act and the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, we will achieve only 28%.

CCL has four goals for policies that, if passed, would take us below our commitment, to about 60%.

Goal #1 is permitting reform. Our investments in clean power and power transmission will not help much if permitting for energy projects takes 10 years. Streamlining the process could reduce emissions by another 12%. But haphazard repeal of environmental review is not acceptable.  Good legislation should protect people’s health and safety, and encourage early input from local communities.

Compromise Will Produce More Clean Energy

Bipartisan legislation will include streamlined permitting for fossil fuel projects. This will alarm many environmentalists. But under present rules, fossil fuel permitting is often easier than for renewable energy. Interstate pipelines are easier to approve than electrical transmission. Drilling for natural gas is easier than drilling for geothermal energy. Plus, many more clean energy projects are already awaiting approval. So, this compromise seems worth it, since it will lead to many more clean energy projects than fossil fuel projects.

Goal #2 is Carbon Fee and Dividend. Charge oil, coal, and gas companies a fee when their fossil fuels leave the ground. Use the money to pay dividends to us, the people. Carbon fees are a policy favored by most economists, conservative and liberal. Models say they will give us another 12% reduction. A carbon fee would also allow America, under international rules, to impose a carbon border adjustment mechanism on goods coming from countries that don’t have  a market mechanism for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Europe already has a carbon border adjustment that American companies will pay, until we pass our own fee.

Goal #3 is promoting Healthy Forests, to increase carbon sequestration. The Save Our Sequoias Act is in this category.  Well-managed forests and more urban trees brings another 5% reduction.

Goal #4 is Electrification. Electrifying buildings, transportation, and other energy users could reduce emissions by 3%.

If we achieve all four of these goals, our emissions will be 60% less than in 2005, more than achieving our Paris commitment.

About the Author

Devin Carroll is a semi-retired Agricultural Pest Management Consultant.  He volunteers with Citizens’ Climate Lobby Fresno as the Lobby Team Leader and Youth Team Advisor.  He can be reached at fresno@citizensclimatelobby.org.

Lesa Schwartz - 8-13-2023 - Climate Reality

 CLIMATE REALITY 

Congressman Tom McClintock’s latest letter to his constituents explains the importance of “not hamstringing the economy with climate regulations.” He explains that we have experienced warm periods and major ice events before. But this is not the complete picture. Our planet has always gone through changes in climate, however, these changes in climate historically took hundreds of thousands to millions of years. 

The drastic changes happening now have taken place over the last hundred years or so and have brought about an increase of 2°F. This has occurred, for the most part, due to human-caused fossil fuel emissions. As a result, we are spending billions of dollars addressing the havoc that resulting extreme weather events have caused. 

In addition, the deadly effects to our health from these emissions costs us billions each year. Green energy solutions such as wind, water and solar technologies have the ability to create jobs, help our economy grow and make us a major player in the world of green energy production. We all need to understand what must be done. 

Most importantly, without intelligent, informed action from members of Congress, we will live on a planet that will be very difficult to inhabit. 

Lesa Schwartz Fresno

Read more at: https://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/article278148017.html#storylink=cpy