THAT ON. THERE WE GO. GOOD
AFTERNOON. I'D LIKE TO WELCOME
EVERYBODY HERE. THANK YOU FOR
YOUR INTEREST IN ATTENDING, THIS
IS THE SECOND HEARING OF THE
SELECT COMMITTEE ON BUILDING A
ZERO CARBON HYDROGEN ECONOMY,
AND TODAY'S HEARINGS, WE'RE
GOING TO COVER A WIDE RANGE OF
TOPICS. BUT WE'RE UNDER SOME
DEADLINES AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO
MAKE SURE WE BETWEEN THE FIRST
HEARING AND THE SECOND HEARING,
WE'VE COVERED AT LEAST ALL THE
MAJOR, ISSUES AND STAKEHOLDERS
OUT THERE, OUR FIRST PANEL TODAY
WILL FOCUS ON BIOLOGICAL SOURCES
OF HYDROGEN SO WE CAN HAVE A
CONVERSATION ABOUT THOSE ISSUES,
AND, AND OUR PANEL BEFORE THIS
FOCUSED, EXCLUSIVELY ON THE
THREE PILLARS. AND WHETHER THE
THREE PILLARS SHOULD BE ADOPTED
OR NOT, WE, THEN WE'LL DO THIS.
I DO WANT EVERYBODY TO KNOW THAT
WE SPENT QUITE A BIT OF TIME IN,
IN TWO HEARINGS, LAST SUMMER,
TALKING ABOUT BIOMASS AND BIOGAS
AND JUST BIOENERGY IN GENERAL.
SO WE'VE, WE'VE HAD QUITE A THE
STAKEHOLDERS HAVE HAD QUITE A
BIT OF CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS
ALREADY. IT JUST HASN'T BEEN IN
THE PUBLIC EYE THROUGH AN
OFFICIAL HEARING. AND THAT'S WHY
WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE
COVERED SOME OF THOSE POINTS
HERE TODAY, OUR SECOND PANEL
WILL BE, HEARING PEOPLE FROM THE
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE GROUPS,
PEOPLE THAT ARE IN COMMUNITIES
THAT WORK DIRECTLY AND HAVE
BEEN, IMPACT ACTED, BY ENERGY
PROJECTS DIRECTLY IN THEIR
COMMUNITY, THEY HAVE, REQUEST
AND WANT TO HAVE SOME TIME TO
PRESENT TO THE PUBLIC ALSO. AND
WE REALLY APPRECIATE THAT. AND
SO WE HAVE THEM HERE. THE WE
THOUGHT IT WAS, IMPORTANT. OUR
LAST PANEL IS TO DEAL WITH TO
CLOSE THE LOOP FROM OUR FIRST
PANEL WHERE WE HAD SORT OF A WE
SHOULD OR WE SHOULDN'T IN TERMS
OF THE THREE PILLARS AND THE
LAST PANEL. AND THEN WHAT WE
ENCOURAGE IN TERMS OF THE
COMMENTS, ALTHOUGH YOU'RE
ALLOWED TO MAKE THE PUBLIC
COMMENTS ABOUT ANYTHING YOU
WANT, WE'VE EXTENDED THE PUBLIC
COMMENTS TO TWO MINUTES BECAUSE
WE WOULD LIKE PEOPLE TO BEGIN
THE PROCESS OF OFFERING TO US
ANY CREATIVE WAYS THAT WE CAN
ADDRESS INDUSTRIES CONCERNS WITH
COMPLYING WITH THE THREE PILLARS
AND OTHER PEOPLE'S CONCERNS WITH
THE NEED FOR AND THE VALUE OF
THE THREE PILLARS. IS THERE A
WAY WE CAN CREATIVELY, ADDRESS
THAT AND GET A WIN WIN, OR AT
LEAST SOMETHING THAT BOTH SIDES
CAN LIVE WITH IN TERMS OF MOVING
FORWARD, AND IN MY MIND, THAT'S,
THAT'S THE REAL FRUITFUL PART.
AND IT'S THE APPROPRIATE SORT OF
ENDING OF TWO SELECT COMMITTEE
HEARINGS IN A FAIRLY SHORT
PERIOD OF TIME. BUT WE HAVE A
LOT OF WORK THAT WE HAVE TO DO
TO DISCUSS BILLS AND MOVING
FORWARD WITH BILLS, ETC. SO WITH
THAT, WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD
AND, AND, START THIS OFF, I'LL
JUST ENCOURAGE YOU FOLKS TO MAKE
SURE YOU HAVE THE MICROPHONE
PRETTY CLOSE. ALTHOUGH THIS ROOM
SEEMS TO HAVE BETTER ACOUSTICS
AND BETTER SOUND SYSTEMS THAN,
THAN OTHERS. AND OUR, FIRST
PANEL IS BIOFUELS. WHAT IS THE
APPROPRIATE HYDROGEN POLICY
APPROACH CONCERNING BIOFUELS AND
OUR FIRST PRESENTER IS JULIA
LEVIN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE
BIOENERGY ASSOCIATION. WELCOME,
JULIA. THANKS FOR BEING HERE.
THANK YOU. AND I'M HOPING THERE
WILL BE SLIDES, BUT I'LL START
TALKING WHILE WE WAIT. SO I AM
THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE
BIOENERGY ASSOCIATION OF
CALIFORNIA. WE HAVE ABOUT 100
MEMBERS IN CALIFORNIA, INCLUDING
MANY CITIES AND COUNTIES, TRIBAL
MEMBERS, PUBLIC RESEARCH
INSTITUTIONS, COMMUNITY AND
ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS, AS WELL AS
PRIVATE COMPANIES THAT ARE ALL
WORKING TO CONVERT ORGANIC WASTE
TO ENERGY TO MEET THE STATE'S
CLIMATE CHANGE, CLEAN ENERGY,
AIR QUALITY AND OTHER
SUSTAINABILITY GOALS. SO I'M
GOING TO FOCUS TODAY ON WHY
BIOGENIC HYDROGEN OR HYDROGEN
FROM ORGANIC WASTE AND WASTE.
BIOGAS SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN ANY
SORT OF A RENEWABLE OR GREEN
HYDROGEN POLICY. NEXT, PLEASE.
SO CLIMATE SCIENTISTS AGREE
AROUND THE WORLD THAT REDUCING
METHANE AND OTHER SHORT LIVED
CLIMATE POLLUTANTS IS BY FAR THE
MOST URGENT THING WE CAN DO FOR
THE CLIMATE. IN FACT, IT'S
REALLY THE ONLY THING THAT
BENEFITS THE CLIMATE AT SCALE
RIGHT AWAY. EVERYTHING WE'RE
DOING TO REDUCE FOSSIL FUELS
WILL TAKE SEVERAL DECADES TO
CENTURIES TO BEGIN TO COOL THE
CLIMATE DOWN, AND WE JUST DON'T
HAVE THAT LONG LEFT. SO WE HAVE
TO FOCUS MORE ON REDUCING
METHANE, BLACK CARBON AND OTHER
SHORT LIVED CLIMATE POLLUTANTS.
NEXT, PLEASE. IN CALIFORNIA,
THAT IS OVERWHELMINGLY ABOUT
ORGANIC WASTE. 87% OF OUR
METHANE EMISSIONS COME FROM
ORGANIC WASTE, AND MORE THAN 90%
OF OUR BLACK CARBON EMISSIONS
COME FROM WILDFIRES, OPEN
BURNING OF FOREST AND AG WASTE
AND DIESEL TRUCKS. AND ALL OF
THESE CAN BE REDUCED OR
ELIMINATED BY CONVERTING ORGANIC
WASTE TO RENEWABLE HYDROGEN AND
USING IT IN PLACE OF DIESEL.
NEXT, PLEASE. SO IN ADDITION TO
REDUCING SHORT LIVED CLIMATE
POLLUTANTS, BIOGENIC HYDROGEN IS
ALSO REALLY IMPORTANT BECAUSE
IT'S THE ONLY FORM THAT CAN
PROVIDE CARBON NEGATIVE
EMISSIONS, WHICH WE'RE GOING TO
NEED TO REACH CARBON NEUTRALITY
BY MID-CENTURY, AS REQUIRED BY
STATE LAW, ACCORDING TO LAWRENCE
LIVERMORE, NATIONAL LAB,
BIOENERGY USING ONLY ORGANIC
WASTE COMBINED WITH CARBON
CAPTURE AND SEQUESTRATION CAN
PROVIDE TWO THIRDS OF ALL THE
CARBON NEGATIVE EMISSIONS WE
NEED TO REACH CARBON NEUTRALITY
BY MID-CENTURY, AND CAN DO SO
QUITE COST EFFECTIVELY. NEXT
PIECE. THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST
AND THE CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES
BOARD HAVE ALSO FOUND THAT
INVESTMENTS IN CONVERTING
ORGANIC WASTE TO ENERGY ARE
EXTREMELY COST EFFECTIVE AND
THAT'S BECAUSE THEY REDUCE
METHANE AND BLACK CARBON CLIMATE
SUPER POLLUTANTS UPSTREAM AND
DISPLACE FOSSIL FUELS AND
PROVIDE BENEFICIAL CO-PRODUCT
LIKE COMPOST OR BIOCHAR. NEXT,
PLEASE. NOW I'D LIKE TO FOCUS ON
AIR QUALITY BECAUSE I THINK
THERE ARE THERE ARE SOME
LEGITIMATE CONCERNS ABOUT
BIOMASS COMBUSTION. BUT
COMBUSTION DOESN'T GENERATE
HYDROGEN. SO WE ARE NOT TALKING
ABOUT BURNING ANYTHING TO
GENERATE HYDROGEN HERE. THERE'S
A LOT OF ATTENTION ON DAIRIES IN
CALIFORNIA, BUT THE BIGGEST
SOURCE OF AIR POLLUTION BY FAR
IN THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY IS NOT
DAIRIES. IT'S DIESEL POWERED
TRUCKS, WHICH CAUSE HALF OF ALL
THE AIR POLLUTION IN THE SAN
JOAQUIN VALLEY. THEY'RE ALSO THE
LARGEST SOURCE OF AIR POLLUTION
IN THE SOUTH COAST AIR DISTRICT.
THE TWO MOST POLLUTED AIR
DISTRICTS IN THE COUNTRY. AND IF
WE WANT TO GET THOSE DIESEL
TRUCKS OFF THE ROAD RIGHT AWAY,
WE SHOULD BE GENERATING
RENEWABLE HYDROGEN AND USING IT
IN ZERO EMISSION FUEL CELL
TRUCKS, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT GOING
TO BE ABLE TO ELECTRIFY HEAVY
DUTY 18 WHEELER TRUCKS THAT HAVE
TO GO UP AND DOWN THE STATE AND
ACROSS THE SIERRAS. THIS IS THE
MOST URGENT CLIMATE SOLUTION IN
BOTH THE SOUTH COAST AND THE SAN
JOAQUIN VALLEY. A CLOSE SECOND,
THOUGH, IS WILDFIRES, WHICH ARE
GETTING WORSE IN CALIFORNIA
DESPITE THE TWO LAST WET YEARS.
A BAD WILDFIRE SEASON CAN CAUSE
AS MUCH OR MORE AIR POLLUTION
AND CLIMATE POLLUTION THAN THE
ENTIRE TRANSPORTATION OR ENERGY
SECTOR IN CALIFORNIA, AND A
SINGLE LARGE WILDFIRE CAUSES
THOUSANDS OF PREMATURE DEATHS
FROM THE SMOKE. SO THESE ARE
CRITICAL AIR POLLUTION, PUBLIC
HEALTH ISSUES THAT CAN BE
ADDRESSED BY CONVERTING ORGANIC
WASTE TO HYDROGEN AND USING IT
IN PLACE OF DIESEL. NEXT, PLEASE
. JUST HOW CLEAN IS BIOENERGY?
ACCORDING TO THE STATEWIDE
ASSOCIATION OF LOCAL AIR
DISTRICTS AND THE PLACER COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT,
AND THE AIR BOARD HAS MADE
SIMILAR FINDINGS. BIOMASS
REDUCES PARTICULATE MATTER OR
BLACK CARBON BY 98 OR 99,
REDUCES METHANE AND OTHER
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS BY
95% OR MORE, AND REDUCES NOX OR
SMOG, FORMING POLLUTION BY 40 TO
70. AND THAT'S WHEN YOU COMBUST
THE MATERIAL OR THE BIOGAS. IF
YOU USE A NON COMBUSTION
CONVERSION TECHNOLOGY AND THEN
USE THE HYDROGEN IN A FUEL CELL
OR A LINEAR GENERATOR, YOU HAVE
VIRTUALLY NO EMISSIONS. THIS IS
REALLY THE HOLY GRAIL FOR
ENERGY. NEXT PLEASE. SO THIS IS
MY LAST SLIDE. SO THIS IS A
SLIDE BASED ON DATA FROM UC
DAVIS. AND LAWRENCE LIVERMORE
NATIONAL LAB OF HOW MUCH ORGANIC
WASTE CALIFORNIA GENERATES EACH
AND EVERY YEAR. AND TO SUM IT
UP, WE PRODUCE ENOUGH
TECHNICALLY AVAILABLE ORGANIC
WASTE EVERY YEAR TO REPLACE
ABOUT 4 BILLION GALLONS BILLION
WITH A B OF GASOLINE OR DIESEL.
THAT'S ALL THE DIESEL ON THE
ROAD AND ALL THE DIESEL BACKUP
GENERATORS. AND BY FAR THE MOST
BENEFICIAL THING WE CAN DO WITH
IT IS CONVERT IT TO HYDROGEN,
WHICH YOU CAN USE IN A NON
COMBUSTION CONVERSION
TECHNOLOGY. IT'S AN ENORMOUS
OPPORTUNITY. AND I JUST WANT TO
UNDERSCORE ONE LAST THING. THE
DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE BLUE
LINES AND THE GREEN LINES. THE
BLUE LINES IS DIGESTIBLE. WASTE
CAN BE ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTED
WHICH PRODUCES BIOMETHANE OR
CONVERT IT TO COMPOST. BUT YOU
CAN SEE THE GREEN LINES ARE
WHERE THE REALLY BIG QUANTITIES
COME IN. AND THAT REQUIRES OTHER
NON COMBUSTION CONVERSION
TECHNOLOGIES LIKE GASIFICATION
OR PYROLYSIS, WHICH ARE NOT
COMBUSTION. THEY'RE VERY HIGH
HEAT. AND ONE OF THE BENEFITS OF
USING THAT VERY HIGH HEAT IS IT
DESTROYS PFAS CHEMICALS, ANOTHER
SERIOUS THREAT TO HUMAN HEALTH.
SO THERE ARE JUST ENORMOUS
BENEFITS OF DOING THIS THE RIGHT
WAY. BUT IT IS CRITICAL THAT WE
DO IT THE RIGHT WAY. AND SO WE
DO THINK THERE NEED TO BE
ENVIRONMENTAL SAFEGUARDS, LIKE
NO TREES CUT DOWN FOR THE
PRIMARY PURPOSE OF ENERGY, WE
SHOULD NOT BE GROWING FOOD CROPS
FOR THE SAKE OF ENERGY. WE
SHOULD SET A LIFE CYCLE, CARBON
INTENSITY. AND THERE ARE OTHER
ENVIRONMENTAL SAFEGUARDS THAT WE
NEED TO ESTABLISH IN CALIFORNIA.
BUT THE OPPORTUNITY HERE AND THE
BENEFITS ARE ENORMOUS. SO THANK
YOU. WOW. RIGHT ON TIME TO I'M
GOING TO PAUSE THIS HEARING FOR
A MINUTE BECAUSE THESE PEOPLE
DOWN ON SITE. HE GOES.
YEAH 20 YEARS TELLING THE HALLS.
A DEMERIT OR SOMETHING
.
GIVING THEM GENERIC. THE
PRINCIPAL'S OFFICE IS MUCH
BETTER THAN. THANK YOU. ALRIGHTY
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, JULIE. AND
I'M SORRY THAT WE HAD A LITTLE
BIT OF THAT DISTRACTION WHILE
YOU WERE ON YOUR PRESENTATION,
BUT WE'RE GOING TO JUMP OVER NOW
TO JAMIE KURTZ FROM THE
LEADERSHIP COUNCIL. ALL RIGHT.
JAMIE KATZ, I'M SORRY, NOT KURT.
PERFECT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. YES.
JAMIE KATZ, MY PRONOUNS ARE SHE
OR THEY. I'M A STAFF ATTORNEY
WITH LEADERSHIP COUNCIL FOR
JUSTICE AND ACCOUNTABILITY. I
MOVE THAT MICROPHONE IN FRONT OF
YOUR MOUTH. OH OF COURSE. YES.
JAMIE KATZ, SHE ARE THERE
PRONOUNS? STAFF ATTORNEY WITH
LEADERSHIP. COUNCIL FOR JUSTICE
AND ACCOUNTABILITY. I APPRECIATE
THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO THE
COMMITTEE. TODAY I'M GOING TO
EXPLAIN WHY FACTORY FARM GAS
OTHERWISE KNOWN AS DAIRY
BIOMETHANE, IS HARMFUL TO THE
CLIMATE. AND NEARBY COMMUNITIES.
WHY? IT IS EXPENSIVE AND
INEFFICIENT AND WHY WE DON'T
NEED IT TO PRODUCE HYDROGEN. WE
WORK ALONGSIDE THE MOST IMPACTED
COMMUNITIES IN THE SAN JOAQUIN
AND EASTERN COACHELLA VALLEYS.
OF PARTICULAR RELEVANCE TODAY,
WE WORK ALONGSIDE A NUMBER OF
COMMUNITIES LIKE PIXLEY AND
PLANADA, NEAR SOME OF THE
LARGEST DAIRIES IN THE STATE AND
THE COUNTRY. RESIDENTS OF THESE
COMMUNITIES LIVE IN THE MOST
POLLUTED AIR BASIN IN THE
COUNTRY, AND FAR TOO MANY
COMMUNITIES AND HOUSEHOLDS IN
THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY LACK
ACCESS TO CLEAN DRINKING WATER.
AS A RESULT OF NITRATE
CONTAMINATION, AND OVERDRAFTING,
A MAJOR CONTRIBUTOR TO THESE
ENVIRONMENTAL INJUSTICES, ARE
THE LARGE FACTORY FARM DAIRIES
WITH THOUSANDS SOMETIMES TENS OF
THOUSANDS OF DENSELY CONFINED
ANIMALS. THEIR MASSIVE
OPERATIONS ALSO ARE ALSO MAJOR
SOURCES OF METHANE EMISSIONS.
FOR CONTEXT, 2000 COWS PRODUCE
APPROXIMATELY THE SAME AMOUNT OF
FECAL WASTE AS A CITY OF 1
MILLION PEOPLE. AS OF 2022, 2000
COWS IS NOW THE AVERAGE SIZE OF
A DAIRY IN THE SAN JOAQUIN
VALLEY. THAT MANURE, AND
SPECIFICALLY THE DECISION
INDUSTRIAL DAIRY FACILITIES HAVE
MADE TO CONCENTRATE AND LIQUEFY
THAT MANURE, PROVIDE THE
FEEDSTOCK FOR FACTORY FARM GAS
BY CREATING METHANE. FACTORY
FARM GAS HAS BEEN SUBSIDIZED BY
HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC DOLLARS IN
RECENT YEARS, INCLUDING $230
MILLION FROM CDFA, $383 MILLION
FROM THE PUC, $25 MILLION FROM
THE CEC, AS WELL AS FUNDING FROM
THE ALISO CANYON MITIGATION
SETTLEMENT AND THE LOW CARBON
FUEL STANDARD. AS A RESULT,
THERE HAS BEEN A RAPID BUILD OUT
OF DIGESTERS AND BIOMETHANE
INFRASTRUCTURE AND AN
ACCELERATION OF DAIRY HERD
CONCENTRATION AROUND THIS
INFRASTRUCTURE. THE RECENTLY
RELEASED USDA AGRICULTURAL
CENSUS SHOWS AN ACCELERATED
TREND OF SMALL DAIRIES CLOSING
AND LARGE DAIRIES GETTING
LARGER. FOR EXAMPLE, THE AVERAGE
HERD SIZE IN CALIFORNIA GREW BY
ABOUT 13% BETWEEN 2012 AND 2017,
WHEREAS THE AVERAGE HERD SIZE
GREW AN ASTONISHING 43% BETWEEN
BETWEEN 2017 AND 2022. OF
PARTICULAR NOTE, ALTHOUGH
BETWEEN 2017 AND 2022 THE TOTAL
NUMBER OF COWS DECREASED IN
CALIFORNIA, THE NUMBER OF COWS
IN THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY, WHERE
THE LARGEST DAIRIES ARE
CONCENTRATED, ACTUALLY INCREASED
DURING THE SAME PERIOD, WHEN
SUBSIDIES FOR DIGESTERS WERE
ACCELERATING, INDUSTRY ADVOCATES
WOULD HAVE YOU BELIEVE THAT THE
PRODUCTION OF FACTORY FARM GAS
WOULD ALLOW FACTORY FARM DAIRIES
TO MAINTAIN ITS BUSINESS AS
USUAL OPERATIONS, ALL WHILE
ADDRESSING METHANE EMISSIONS AND
EVEN IMPROVING LOCAL AIR AND
WATER QUALITY. THE TRUTH IS THAT
THE PRODUCTION OF FACTORY FARM
GAS IS ONLY USEFUL FOR
MAINTAINING THE STATUS QUO, A
STATUS QUO WHERE THE HEALTH AND
WELL-BEING OF LOW INCOME RURAL
COMMUNITIES OF COLORS,
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR IS A
COSTLY, UNJUST EXTERNALITY. THE
PRODUCTION OF FACTORY FARM GAS
HARMS AIR AND WATER QUALITY,
EXACERBATES DAIRIES, OVERDRAFT
OF GROUNDWATER AND PEOPLE WE
WORK WITH WHO LIVE NEAR DAIRIES
REPORT THAT DIGESTERS DO NOT
IMPROVE ODORS OR ADDRESS FLIES.
STUDIES ACTUALLY SHOW THAT
DIGESTER DIGESTION OF MANURE
EXACERBATES AIR POLLUTION AND
WATER POLLUTION. AND WHILE THERE
IS VERY LITTLE MONITORING AT
LARGER DAIRIES, ESPECIALLY
REGARDING METHANE EMISSIONS, TWO
RECENT STUDIES SHOW THAT DAIRY
DIGESTERS EMIT A SIGNIFICANT
AMOUNT OF METHANE. THE PROCESS
OF CONVERTING FACTORY FARM GAS
INTO HYDROGEN IS INEFFICIENT AND
CAN CREATE EVEN MORE POLLUTION.
FOR EXAMPLE, ONE PROJECT IN
FRESNO COUNTY BURNS FACTORY FARM
GAS IN AN INTERNAL COMBUSTION
ENGINE WHICH GENERATES
ELECTRICITY TO POWER AN
ELECTROLYZER, WHICH IN TURN
PRODUCES HYDROGEN. NOT ONLY DOES
THIS PROCESS LOSE SIGNIFICANT
ENERGY AT EACH CONVERSION, IT
ALSO PRODUCES SIGNIFICANT AIR
POLLUTION, RELYING ON FACTORY
FARM GAS TO PRODUCE HYDROGEN
WILL ENCOURAGE AND INCENTIVIZE
LARGE DAIRIES TO MAINTAIN AND
EXPAND THEIR HERD SIZES, AND
THEIR PRACTICE OF CONCENTRATING
AND LIQUEFYING UNIMAGINABLE
VOLUMES OF MANURE, AND THEREBY
CONTINUING TO POLLUTE NEARBY
COMMUNITIES. IN ORDER TO KEEP
POLLUTING PRODUCING METHANE. WE
ALREADY KNOW WHAT WE NEED TO DO
TO RAPIDLY AND RESPONSIBLY BUILD
OUT SOLAR AND WIND, AND TO
ELECTRIFY EVERYTHING THAT WE CAN
WHERE WE TRULY NEED HYDROGEN. WE
CAN DO SO WITH HYDROGEN PRODUCED
USING SOLAR AND WIND ENERGY THAT
COMPLIES WITH THE THREE PILLARS.
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE GROUPS
SPENT LAST YEAR CO-DEVELOPING A
SHARED PLATFORM ON HYDROGEN,
WHICH WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO SHARE
WITH THE COMMITTEE. FINALLY, WE
URGE THIS COMMITTEE AND ALL
DECISION MAKERS TO NOT REPLICATE
THE HISTORY OF IGNORING AND
SACRIFICING LOW INCOME
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR IN YOUR
EFFORT TO CHART A COURSE FOR
HYDROGEN, WE APPRECIATE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THIS
COMMITTEE AND WELCOME ANY FUTURE
OPPORTUNITIES FOR YOU TO MEET
WITH RESIDENTS. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. TWO SPEAKERS ON TIME.
RIGHT ON TIME. WE APPRECIATE IT.
RIGHT PRESSURE'S ON. ALL RIGHT,
SAM WADE, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC
POLICY, RENEWABLE NATURAL GAS
COALITION. THANKS VERY MUCH FOR
THE CHANCE TO PROVIDE OUR INPUT
TODAY, WHILE MY SLIDES ARE BEING
PULLED UP, I'LL JUST RESPOND TO
JAMIE BRIEFLY, FIRST AND
FOREMOST, WE APPRECIATE YOUR
RECOGNITION THAT THE STATE HAS
DIRECTED, THE INVESTMENT IN THIS
DAIRIES TO OCCUR FOR METHANE
MITIGATION. AND BECAUSE AS WE'VE
DIRECTED THAT MONEY TOWARD THESE
FARMS, WE BELIEVE THERE NEEDS TO
BE A LONG RUN PLACE FOR THEIR
GAS TO BE USED. AND HYDROGEN IS
A FANTASTIC OPTION FOR THAT GAS
TO BE USED IN THE LONG RUN.
CONSOLIDATION IN THE DAIRY SPACE
IS A LONG RUN TREND. THAT'S NOT
DRIVEN BY ABATEMENT STRATEGIES
LIKE ANAEROBIC DIGESTERS. AND
THE STATE IS NOT JUST USING
ANAEROBIC DIGESTERS, BUT ALSO
USING OTHER TECHNOLOGIES TO
REDUCE METHANE FROM FROM THE
DAIRY SECTOR GENERALLY. FINALLY,
EPA HAS EXPLICITLY SAID IN THE
PAST THAT 80 DOES REDUCE ODOR
FROM DAIRIES. AND THEREFORE WE
DISAGREE FUNDAMENTALLY WITH THE
ASSERTION THAT IT DOES NOT HELP
WITH LOCAL AIR QUALITY ISSUES.
SO TURNING TO MY PREPARED SLIDES
HERE, JUST BRIEFLY, IF I COULD
HAVE THE SECOND SLIDE, PLEASE,
WE'RE THE NATIONAL TRADE
ASSOCIATION FOR THE RNG INDUSTRY
, AND WE REPRESENT, OVER 400
MEMBERS, THAT WORK ON BIOGAS TO
POWER BIOGAS TO PIPELINE QUALITY
RENEWABLE NATURAL GAS AND BIO
AND ELECTROLYTIC HYDROGEN
PRODUCERS. BIOHYDROGEN PRODUCED
FROM BIOMASS OR BIOGAS IS AN
AFFORDABLE GREEN. AND YET OFTEN
OVERLOOKED PART OF THE HYDROGEN
EQUATION. TURNING BIOMASS WASTES
AND RESIDUALS INTO BIO HYDROGEN
CAN HELP DECARBONIZE HARD TO
ELECTRIFY INDUSTRIES, CONTRIBUTE
TO THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY, RECYCLE
NUTRIENTS AND AGRICULTURAL
SYSTEMS, AND HELP TO PERMANENTLY
STORE CARBON EITHER IN THE SOIL
OR IN FINISHED PRODUCTS OR
UNDERGROUND. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.
BIO HYDROGEN CAN PRODUCE CAN BE
PRODUCED BY MULTIPLE
TECHNOLOGIES AND FROM A VARIETY
OF FEEDSTOCKS, JULIA DID A GREAT
JOB OF COVERING SORT OF THE
SUITE OF FEEDSTOCKS THAT
CALIFORNIA HAS. AND SHE ALREADY
POINTED TO THE LAWRENCE
LIVERMORE WORK AROUND THIS. THIS
FIGURE IS ALSO FROM THAT STUDY,
IT BASICALLY FOUND THAT, ALL
THESE FEEDSTOCKS COULD BE TAPPED
AND UTILIZED IN SOME WAY,
POTENTIALLY AS HYDROGEN, TO BOTH
SIMULTANEOUSLY TAKE CARE OF, THE
METHANE ISSUES. AND THE FOREST
FIRE CHALLENGES THAT THE STATE
FACES, WHILE ALSO POTENTIALLY
GRABBING CARBON AND SEQUESTERING
IT. AND THAT'S THE IMPORTANT
THING THAT BIO HYDROGEN CAN
ACHIEVE, THAT ELECTROLYTIC
HYDROGEN CANNOT IN MOST CASES IS
CARBON NEGATIVE PERFORMANCE,
WHEN FULLY OPTIMIZED WITH
STORAGE OF CARBON IN SOME FORM,
THE WET OR DIGESTIBLE ORGANIC
WASTE STREAMS THAT ARE SHOWN IN
GRAY HERE AS JULIA ALREADY
POINTED OUT, BREAK DOWN TO
METHANE IN THE BASE CASE AND
CAPTURING THIS METHANE IS THE
PRIMARY GOAL OF OUR INDUSTRY
TODAY, THE DIRECTION FROM THE
LEGISLATURE UNDER SB 1383 TO
TACKLE METHANE IS A POTENT,
SHORT LIVED CLIMATE. FORCER IS
THE REASON THAT YOU'VE SEEN SO
MUCH INVESTMENT INTO THINGS LIKE
DAIRY DIGESTERS IN THE STATE
THAT THAT WAS SMART POLICY. IT
SHOULD BE CONTINUED. BUT AS I
MENTIONED, WE NEED A LONG RUN
HOME. IT'S CRITICAL TO ALLOW
THESE PROJECTS TO PRODUCE
HYDROGEN OR SOME OTHER FORM OF
ZERO EMISSION ENERGY CARRIER IN
THE FUTURE, IF DIRECT COMBUSTION
OF METHANE IS TO BE PHASED OUT
IN THE FUTURE, DESPITE ITS
IMPORTANCE AS A RESOURCE, AND
THE CURRENT ONGOING ACTIVE
INVESTMENT IN THE DAIRY
FEEDSTOCK, IT'S ONLY A SMALL
SHARE OF WHAT'S SHOWN HERE ON
THE SLIDE. AND YET THE
INVESTMENT COMMUNITY IS LOOKING
AT THAT, TYPE OF PROJECT AS AN
EXAMPLE. AND IF WE ABANDON THE
GOOD WORK THAT'S ALREADY BEEN
DONE, THERE, DON'T BE SURPRISED
IF YOU HAVE TROUBLE MOTIVATING
CAPITAL TO BE DEPLOYED TO
PRODUCE HYDROGEN FROM SOME OF
THESE OTHER FEEDSTOCKS, SO NO
BIO HYDROGEN IS IF I CAN HAVE
THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. BIO
HYDROGEN IS CURRENTLY PRODUCED
AT LOWER PRICES THAN
ELECTROLYTIC HYDROGEN IN MOST
CASES. AND THIS IS DEMONSTRATED
BY THE CURRENT MIX OF HYDROGEN
SUPPLYING THE FUEL CELL VEHICLE
FLEET IN CALIFORNIA IN 2022, 54%
OF THE HYDROGEN USED IN VEHICLES
WAS FROM FOSSIL GAS, 44% WAS
FROM BIO HYDROGEN, AND 2% WAS
FROM ELECTROLYSIS. AND IF YOU
CAN SEE THE TREND HERE, FOSSIL
GAS HAS ACTUALLY INCREASED
RECENTLY, IN PART DUE TO LOW,
LOW CARBON FUEL STANDARD PRICING
. SO, BECAUSE BOTH ELECTROLYSIS
AND BIO HYDROGEN ARE CURRENTLY
STRUGGLING TO COMPETE WITH
FOSSIL DERIVED HYDROGEN, WE
REALLY NEED MORE CERTAINTY FROM
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ON THESE
ISSUES AND ALSO HOPEFULLY FROM
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, WITH
RESPECT TO THE 45 VÆ TAX CREDIT,
TO BE CLEAR, WE SUPPORT
ELECTROLYTIC HYDROGEN DELIVERED,
DERIVED FROM RENEWABLE POWER.
AND WE BELIEVE THE ELECTROLYTIC
HYDROGEN WILL BECOME MORE
AVAILABLE IN THE FUTURE AND WILL
COME DOWN AND COST SIGNIFICANTLY
AND HAS THE POTENTIAL TO BE THE
LARGEST SOURCE OF CLEAN HYDROGEN
IN THE LONG RUN. BUT WE CANNOT
IGNORE THE BENEFITS OF BIO
HYDROGEN JUST BECAUSE WE WANT TO
SUPPORT ELECTROLYTIC HYDROGEN,
THEY HAVE DIFFERENT BENEFITS.
ELECTROLYTIC AND HYDROGEN WILL
BE CRITICAL FOR STORING SOLAR
AND WIND. BIO HYDROGEN DELIVERS
ALL THE BENEFITS WE'RE ALREADY
TARGETING IN STATE LAW,
INCLUDING METHANE REDUCTION,
REDUCED FOREST FIRE RISK,
NUTRIENT RECYCLING AND CARBON
SEQUESTRATION OPPORTUNITIES. SO
MY LAST SLIDE IS ABOUT THE THREE
PILLARS. AND I KNOW THE
COMMITTEE HERE HAS ALREADY HEARD
A LOT ABOUT THOSE TOPICS, BUT I
WANTED TO, TIE THE CONCEPTS TO
THE GAS SYSTEM, WHICH, YOU KNOW,
THESE SAME ISSUES ARE DEBATED
WITH RESPECT TO DELIVERY OF
RENEWABLE GASES, THE DEPARTMENT
OF ENERGY AND OTHER FEDERAL
EXPERTS HAVE LONG RECOGNIZED
THAT WE DO NEED TO THINK ABOUT,
HOW HOW TO DELIVER THE ENERGY
CARRIERS TO PRODUCE HYDROGEN AND
THAT THE BIO GAS, PORTION OF THE
GAS SYSTEM IS IMPORTANT TO LOOK
AT CAREFULLY WITH RESPECT TO
INCREMENTALITY OR ADDITIONALITY,
WELL, FIRST LET ME SAY I WANT TO
WE WANT TO ALIGN OURSELVES WITH
THE ARCHES. COMMENTS TO THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ON THESE
TOPICS, WHICH IS WHAT IS ON THE
SLIDE HERE. BUT WITH RESPECT TO
INCREMENTALITY AND
ADDITIONALITY, WE BELIEVE THAT
SUCH LIMITS ARE NOT NECESSARY
FOR GASEOUS, BIO HYDROGEN TO,
SORRY, BIO GAS TO BIO HYDROGEN,
FOR EXAMPLE, REQUIRING RNG
PROJECTS AND HYDROGEN PRODUCTION
FACILITIES TO COME ONLINE AFTER
OR AT THE EXACT SAME TIME, AS
THE HYDROGEN PRODUCTION FACILITY
IS SIMPLY UNWORKABLE
COMMERCIALLY BECAUSE THE NUMBER
OF ENTITIES INVOLVED AND THE
SCALE INVOLVED, MOST OF THE RNG
PROJECTS ARE MUCH SMALLER THAN
THE HYDROGEN PRODUCTION
FACILITY. SO MATCHING THOSE TWO
EFFECTIVELY AND TRIGGERING THEM
ALL TO COME ONLINE AT THE EXACT
SAME DATE IS VERY DIFFICULT TO
DO COMMERCIALLY, ALSO, IT'S
HIGHLY UNLIKELY THAT RNG FROM
EXISTING NON-FOSSIL USES WILL BE
DIVERTED FROM HYDROGEN
PRODUCTION AND BACKFILL WITH
FOSSIL FUELS, THE EXISTING
MARKETS ALREADY ENSURE THAT THAT
WILL NOT OCCUR, HAPPY TO KEEP
GOING ON TIME MATCHING, BUT ALSO
HAPPY TO STOP THERE, I THINK.
YEAH, YOUR TIME IS UP. THANKS. I
THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE, SO LET'S
OPEN THIS UP TO QUESTIONS OR GO
AHEAD. ASSEMBLYMEMBER, THANK
YOU, MR. CHAIR, FIRST I WANT TO
SAY THANK YOU FOR PUTTING THIS,
TOGETHER AND THE WORK THAT
YOU'VE DONE IN YOUR STAFF REALLY
APPRECIATE THAT GIVES US GIVES
ME AN OPPORTUNITY TO LEARN FROM
THE PRESENTERS AND AN
OPPORTUNITY FOR ME TO MAKE
COMMENTS ON WHAT IS BEING
PRESENTED IN FRONT OF US, BUT I
DO HAVE TO PRESENT A COUPLE OF
BILLS, THIS AFTERNOON. SO I'M
GOING TO BE IN AND OUT. I'LL TRY
TO BE HERE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE
AS I CAN, BUT I GOT TO GO AND
PRESENT A COUPLE OF BILLS.
FIRST, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT
THAT WE ACKNOWLEDGE THE HARD
WORK THAT THE ADMINISTRATION AND
STAKEHOLDERS HAVE PUT INTO EARN
CALIFORNIA. HOW DO YOU HAVE THE
DESIGNATION OF THE $1.2 BILLION
IN FEDERAL FUNDING? I'M VERY
EXCITED ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THE
INDUSTRY IN OUR STATE, AND I'M
HOPEFUL THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO
BUILD ON THIS MOMENTUM, I'M
OPTIMISTIC THAT WE CAN BOTH
DEVELOP A HEALTHY INDUSTRY AND
ENSURE HYDROGEN AS A VALUABLE
TOOL IN CALIFORNIA'S ZERO CARBON
ENERGY FUTURE, AND I'M GLAD THAT
WE HAVE THE PANEL HERE TO TALK
ABOUT THE BIOFUELS ISSUE, THANK
YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATIONS AND
I'M ALSO EXCITED TO LEARN HOW WE
CAN ENSURE HYDROGEN IS PROVIDING
REAL BENEFITS TO THE CLIMATE AND
TO AIR QUALITY, AS WELL, IN
PARTICULAR, I'M CURIOUS TO LEARN
MORE ABOUT THE BIOFUEL TO
HYDROGEN CONVERSION. AGAIN, I
APPRECIATE YOUR PRESENTATIONS
AND WHAT THE ONSITE EMISSIONS
ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT PROCESS
AS WELL, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT
WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT IN THE
LAST, HEARING WAS THAT THE THREE
PILLARS, THE THREE PILLARS, THE
CONVERSATIONS WE HAD ABOUT THE
THREE PILLARS, WHICH YOU TOUCHED
ON A LITTLE BIT, AND TO ME,
REALLY, I THINK THAT WE HAVE TO
BE MINDFUL OF THE LOW INCOME
COMMUNITIES AND THE STRUGGLES
THAT WE FACE, BECAUSE I DO
REPRESENT THOSE COMMUNITIES IN
THE HIGH DESERT, LÀ COUNTY AND
SOMEWHERE IN THE COUNTY, BUT I
AM HOPEFUL THAT WE CAN FIND A
BALANCE. WHERE THESE COMMUNITIES
ALSO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR
ECONOMIC GROWTH. THIS IS GOING
TO BE A GAME CHANGER FOR
CALIFORNIA FOR THE COMMUNITIES
THAT YOU TALKED ABOUT, THE ONES
THAT I REPRESENT, NOT TO SAY
THAT WE HAVE TO KEEP ON
SACRIFICING THOSE COMMUNITIES
WITH, THE BAD DECISIONS AND NOT
PROVIDING THE RESOURCES THAT
THEY NEED. ONE OF THE THINGS
THAT WE LACK, I BELIEVE, FOR
THOSE COMMUNITIES TO BE ABLE TO
THRIVE IS THOSE ECONOMIC
OPPORTUNITIES, HYDROGEN, TO ME,
CAN BE ONE OF THOSE MECHANISMS
TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE
OF THOSE COMMUNITIES. AGAIN,
BEING CAREFUL WITH HOW WE
PROCEED WITH, THE HYDROGEN
INDUSTRY. THE OTHER THING TO ME
THAT IS IMPORTANT IS ALSO TO
MENTION THAT WITHOUT WITHOUT ANY
ADDITIONAL FUEL THAT IS GREEN,
IT'S GOING TO REALLY NOT MAKE US
MEET THE, AMBITIOUS GOALS THAT
THE STATE SET FOR 2045, WITH ME
AGAIN, I JUST WANT TO BE
THANKFUL FOR BEING PART OF THIS
DISCUSSIONS. THANK YOU AGAIN FOR
DOING THIS, AND AGAIN, I JUST
I'M OPTIMISTIC THAT WE WILL FIND
THAT BALANCE WHERE WE CAN
ADDRESS THOSE LOW INCOME
COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE BEEN
IGNORED FOR SO LONG. AND AGAIN.
BUT ONE OF THOSE REASONS WHY
THEY ARE IGNORED IS BECAUSE OF
THE LACK OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY
FOR THOSE COMMUNITIES. AGAIN
THAT IS NOT TO SAY THAT WE HAVE
TO CONTINUE TO IGNORE THE
QUALITY OF LIFE, THE
ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS, BUT I
WANT TO BE ABLE TO, TAKE THE
OPPORTUNITY THAT WE HAVE IN
CALIFORNIA TO BE ABLE TO USE
THAT FEDERAL FUNDING THAT'S COME
OUR WAY, AND WITH THAT, I'D LIKE
TO THANK AGAIN AND HOPEFUL THAT
WE CAN FIND THAT BALANCE WHERE
WE CAN, SUPPORT THOSE
COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE BEEN
FORGOTTEN FOR SO LONG.
APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS. THANK
YOU. WELL, AND I APPRECIATE THE
FACT THAT BECAUSE WE HAVE THIS
AS A SELECT COMMITTEE, THIS IS
ALL BEING RECORDED. AND SO ANY
ANYTHING THAT'S COVERED THAT YOU
MISS, THAT YOU'RE INTERESTED IN,
YOU'LL BE ABLE TO FOLLOW UP ON
AND STUFF, OKAY, THEN MISS LEVIN
, I HAVE A MISS LEVIN. I SHOULD
SAY, A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR YOU
ON YOUR LAST SLIDE, REGARDING
THE POTENTIAL FOR ORGANIC
ORGANIC WASTE. DOES THAT ASSUME
ALL THE ORGANIC WASTE BECOMES
HYDROGEN? IT DOESN'T ASSUME
ANYTHING. IT'S JUST A
PRESENTATION OF HOW MUCH
TECHNICALLY AVAILABLE ORGANIC
WASTE WE GENERATE EVERY YEAR.
AND THEN. THEN I TRANSLATED THAT
INTO HOW MANY, HOW MANY BILLIONS
OF GALLONS OF GASOLINE IS THAT
EQUIVALENT TO HOW MANY STANDARD
MILLION STANDARD CUBIC FEET OF
BIOMETHANE AND HOW MANY
KILOGRAMS OF HYDROGEN? BUT IT
DOESN'T ASSUME WE WILL USE IT
ALL. AND THERE ARE OTHER
BENEFICIAL USES. WE'RE NOT
SAYING ALL OF IT SHOULD GO TO
HYDROGEN, BUT BUT THAT'S THE
TOTAL POTENTIAL THAT'S
TECHNICALLY AVAILABLE. THAT'S A
TOTAL POTENTIAL THAT THAT IS
AVAILABLE. RIGHT. AND TODAY HOW
MUCH ORGANIC WASTE, HOW MUCH
ORGANIC WASTE. BIOGAS DOES
CALIFORNIA USE? DO YOU KNOW IT'S
A MINUSCULE FRACTION OF THAT
TOTAL POTENTIAL? THE LAST I
LOOKED, IT WAS 15% OF OUR TOTAL
ORGANIC WASTE. DO WE DO? IT WAS
WHAT PERCENT? ONE, FIVE, 15% OF
OUR ORGANIC WASTE IS USED FOR
ANY BENEFICIAL ALTERNATIVE.
OKAY. WE STILL LANDFILL MOST OF
IT. OR IT'S PILED AND LEFT TO
DECAY OR PILED AND BURNED.
GREAT. SO 8,085% OF IT IS STILL
AVAILABLE. 85% OF IT IS LEFT TO
DECAY. OR WHAT WAS THE OTHER
THING YOU SAID? WELL, SO IF IT'S
URBAN ORGANIC WASTE, THE FOOD
WASTE THAT WE THROW AWAY, OR
PIZZA BOXES THAT HAVE TOO MUCH
CHEESE, THE VAST MAJORITY OF
THAT 85% BECOMES METHANE.
EXACTLY. OR EVEN WORSE, IF IT'S
PILED AND BURNED OR BURNED IN A
WILDFIRE, IT BECOMES BLACK
CARBON, AND MR. WADE, DO YOU
HAVE ANY FURTHER STATISTICS.
YEAH. I JUST ADD THAT I THINK
THAT THE PENETRATION OF
RENEWABLE GAS IN THE GAS SYSTEM
IS STILL LESS THAN 5. SO THE,
THE USE AS A GASEOUS ENERGY
CARRIER IS LOW. THERE'S
CERTAINLY STILL A SIGNIFICANT
SHARE THAT GOES TO BIOGAS TO
POWER OR BIOMASS TO POWER. OKAY.
THANK YOU, HOW ABOUT ONCE
BIOMASS AND BIOGAS IS PUT INTO
THE PIPELINE FOR TRANSPORTATION?
IS THERE ANY WAY TO
DIFFERENTIATE THAT FROM THE
FOSSIL FUEL THAT IS IN THE
PIPELINE? I ASSUME THE FIRST
DIFFERENTIATOR IS THE STANDARDS
TO PUT BIOMETHANE IN THE
PIPELINE ARE ACTUALLY FAR MORE
STRICT THAN THE STANDARDS FOR
FOSSIL FUEL GAS, IT WAS AN
UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE OF A BILL
AB 1900 BY FORMER ASSEMBLYMAN
GORDO THAT WAS DESIGNED TO
PROMOTE IN-STATE BIOMETHANE.
THAT BILL RIGHTLY ASKED THE AIR
BOARD AND THE OFFICE OF
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH HAZARD
ASSESSMENT TO PROPOSE HEALTH
PROTECTIVE STANDARDS, WHICH THE
TWO AGENCIES DID. BUT IN THEIR
REPORT SAID RIGHT UP FRONT, WE
SHOULD ALSO BE DOING THIS FOR
NATURAL GAS, BUT WE'RE NOT
REQUIRED TO AND YOU HAVEN'T
DIRECTED US TO. AND SO WE HAVE
VERY, VERY PROTECTIVE STANDARDS.
IN FACT, THE AIR BOARD AND OHA
JUST PROPOSED AN UPDATE, BUT WE
DON'T DO THAT FOR NATURAL GAS.
AND SO IT IS MORE CLEAN GOING IN
ONCE IT'S IN THE PIPELINE, IT'S
METHANE, CH4. SO AT THAT POINT
IT'S INDISTINGUISHABLE. TO
ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. AND THEN
FOR EITHER OF YOU AND JAMIE, IF
YOU HAVE I'M SORRY, MR, KATZ, IF
YOU HAVE THE HAVE THE ANSWER,
BUT, CAN YOU ENLIGHTEN US ON HOW
EMISSIONS FROM DIGESTERS ARE
CURRENTLY CALCULATED AND
REPORTED, AND ARE THERE
EMISSIONS FROM DIGESTERS AND ARE
THEY CALCULATED AND REPORTED?
MR. WADE, I CAN TAKE A FIRST
CRACK OF THAT. SURE. SO, WITHIN
THE AIR BOARD'S RULES AROUND THE
INCENTIVE INCENTIVE RULES FOR
THIS, THERE'S VERY CAREFUL
MONITORING OF THE ACTUAL METHANE
PRODUCED. AND THERE'S A UTILITY
GRADE METER THAT MEASURES HOW
MUCH METHANE IS CAPTURED AND
INJECTED INTO THE GAS SYSTEM,
AND THEN THERE'S ALSO AN
ASSESSMENT OF, OF HOW MUCH RAW
BIOGAS YOU CAPTURED. AND SO
BETWEEN THOSE TWO, YOU CAN
ASSESS A LOSS FACTOR. AND THOSE
LOSS FACTORS ARE VERY LOW
COMPARED TO THE AMOUNT OF
METHANE CAPTURED. SO THE IDEA
THAT, INSTALLING DIGESTERS STILL
LEAK A WHOLE LOT IS NOT TRUE.
AND DEMONSTRATED BY THE FACT
THAT WE ARE PAID FOR THE AMOUNT
WE INJECT, SO YOU CAN CLEARLY
SEE THESE THESE ARE EFFECTIVE
METHANE CAPTURE TOOLS. OKAY. SO
YEAH, JUST TO RESPOND TO THAT, I
THINK FIRST OF ALL, YOU KNOW, WE
AGAIN, WOULD BE HAPPY TO PRODUCE
THE STUDIES THAT SHOW THAT
THERE'S SIGNIFICANT METHANE
EMISSIONS THAT CONTINUE TO COME
FROM FACILITIES THAT HAVE THESE
DIGESTERS. IN ADDITION, THE, YOU
KNOW, STORING MANURE, ANAEROBIC
Kò IN WATER PRODUCES MORE
METHANE THAN IF IT'S STORED IN A
WAY THAT WHERE IT INTERACTS WITH
OXYGEN, AND FINALLY, JUST TO BE
CLEAR, ALTHOUGH THERE IS
SPORADIC TESTING, SPORADIC
SATELLITE DATA, THERE IS NOT
CONSISTENT FENCE LINE
MONITORING, MONITORING OF THESE
FACILITIES. SO WE DO NOT, IN
FACT, KNOW WHAT THE METHANE
EMISSION PROFILES ARE OF THESE
FACILITIES. WE'RE BASING IT ON
MONITORING BASED ON NON PUBLICLY
AVAILABLE DATA. SO A COUPLE OF
POINTS. YOU MENTIONED THE
FACILITIES. AND BY THAT I TAKE
IT YOU MEAN THE WHOLE DAIRY
OPERATION DAIRY DIGESTERS ONLY
DEAL WITH THE MANURE. THEY WERE
NOT DESIGNED TO ADDRESS EVERY
ISSUE AT DAIRIES. THEY'RE STILL
ENTERIC FERMENTATION WHICH IS
METHANE EMISSIONS DIRECTLY FROM
THE COW. THAT'S HALF. THERE'S
NOTHING THE DAIRY DIGESTERS ARE
GOING TO DO TO STOP THAT. THAT
HAS TO BE ADDRESSED IN OTHER
WAYS. BUT THERE IS NO SCIENTIFIC
QUESTION THAT DAIRY DIGESTERS
ARE CAPTURING THE VAST MAJORITY
OF THE METHANE FROM THE MANURE,
WHICH WOULD NOT ALL BE
AEROBICALLY DIGESTED OUT IN ITS
IN LARGE PILES. IT'S OFTEN IN
OPEN LAGOONS WHERE OTHER THAN
THE SURFACE, THE REST OF IT IS
ALSO ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTING,
AND THE METHANE IS 100% GOING UP
IN THE ATMOSPHERE. SO WE KNOW
HOW MUCH AS SANSA, WE KNOW HOW
MUCH WE'RE PUTTING IN THE
PIPELINES. THAT IS A NET
REDUCTION IN THE AMOUNT GOING UP
IN THE ATMOSPHERE. IT'S GOING TO
GENERATE THE SAME AMOUNT OF
METHANE. I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY
STUDIES THAT SAY WE PRODUCE MORE
METHANE. THIS WAY WE CAPTURE
MORE, BUT IT'S VIRTUALLY ALL
ANAEROBICALLY DIGESTING EITHER
WAY. SO WE NEED TO CAPTURE THE
METHANE. SO I WOULD SAY I MEAN,
ONE THE METHANE THAT'S WHATEVER
IS CAPTURED IS STILL USED. IT'S
STILL BURNED. IT'S STILL USED IN
WHATEVER APPLICATION IT'S USED
IN. IT'S STILL CREATING
EMISSIONS FROM THAT. AND AGAIN,
WE THE FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES ARE
ONE, WHEN YOU HAVE THIS MUCH
MANURE IN THIS SMALL OF AN AREA,
THE FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE IS HOW
MUCH MANURE YOU HAVE VERSUS HOW
MUCH CROPLAND THERE IS. THE
MANURE, THE DIGESTION DOESN'T
MAKE THE MANURE GO AWAY. IT
DOESN'T REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF
NITROGEN CONTENT. WHEN YOU APPLY
THAT MANURE TO CROPLAND AND IT
GETS INTO THE GROUNDWATER AND
THAT THAT DIGESTATE, WHEN YOU
APPLY IT TO CROPLAND, ALSO
CONTINUES TO EMIT METHANE, WHERE
AND AGAIN, WHEN YOU STORE MANURE
IN WATER, WHEN YOU STORE IT
ANAEROBICALLY, IT PRODUCES MORE
THAN OTHER ALTERNATIVES. WHAT WE
NEED TO DO IS BE SUPPORTING
OTHER WAYS OF DAIRYING THAT
REQUIRE LESS CONCENTRATION OF
DAIRY HERDS AND MINIMIZE THE
ANAEROBIC AND LIQUID STORAGE OF
MANURE. SO I HEARD NEARLY ALL OF
YOUR COMMENTS TODAY HAVE BEEN
ABOUT DAIRY, AND THAT'S YOUR
PRIMARY FOCUS? YEAH THAT'S MY
EXPERTISE OF YOUR CONCERN. YEAH.
I WOULD JUST BE HAPPY TO
RESPOND. SORT OF. GENERALLY,
THERE ARE FOLKS HERE TODAY WHO
ARE PREPARED TO PROVIDE PUBLIC
COMMENT SPECIFICALLY ON BIOMASS.
AND I WOULD SAY, YOU KNOW, OUR
ALTHOUGH IT IS NOT SORT OF A
DEEP EXPERTISE OF MINE, LIKE WE
HAVE SEEN THROUGH THE
PROLIFERATION OF DAIRY
DIGESTERS, WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU
COMMODIFY POLLUTION. AND WE HAVE
A LOT OF CONCERNS. THANK YOU,
BEFORE WE MOVE ON, NUMBER ONE,
THE MAJOR CRITERIA THAT WE'VE
HAD SINCE WE BEGAN THESE
DISCUSSIONS ALMOST A YEAR AGO,
BUT THEY WEREN'T IN A COMMITTEE
HEARING FORMAT, WAS THAT WE
WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE
PRESENTED THEIR COMMENTS IN
FRONT OF THE OPPOSITION
SPECIFICALLY, SO WE COULD HAVE
THIS BACK AND FORTH. AND MISS
LEVIN WAS ABLE TO OFFER. AND
THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE THINK IS
THE BEST WAY FOR US TO DEVELOP
GOOD POLICY IS THAT NOBODY GETS
TO JUST MAKE A CLAIM THAT GOES
SORT OF UN, UN RESPONDED TO
BECAUSE THEY DID IT PRIVATELY
AND SOME OFFICE OR WHATEVER, AND
YOU CAN STRETCH. SO WE
APPRECIATE AND WE APPRECIATE THE
FACT THAT YOU'RE WILLING TO DO
THAT. SO IN THE SPIRIT OF THAT
MEMBERS, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING
ELSE WITH THIS PANEL BEFORE WE
LET THEM GO? I DO, FOLLOWING UP
ON THE DISCUSSION JUST NOW, I'M
A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED. THEN ARE
YOU SAYING THAT WE'RE BETTER OFF
NOT DOING ANYTHING ABOUT THE
MANURE? JUST LEAVING IT THERE?
TO ME, IT'S A BETTER APPROACH TO
UTILIZE THE RESOURCES THAT ARE
THERE. IF I CAN CALL MANURE
RESOURCE TO PRODUCE HYDROGEN,
THE BYPRODUCTS OF CREATING,
HYDROGEN FROM METHANE, THE
MANURE, THOSE BYPRODUCTS ARE
THERE. THEN WORST THAN LEAVING
THE MANURE THE WAY THAT IT'S
BEEN RIGHT NOW. SURE. NO, I
APPRECIATE THE QUESTION. I THINK
IT'S AN IMPORTANT ONE. I THINK
IT'S A QUESTION OF WHAT? WHAT IS
THE ALTERNATIVE THAT WE'RE
DISCUSSING. RIGHT. SO CALIFORNIA
HAS A NUMBER OF PROGRAMS TO FUND
ABATING METHANE PRODUCTION FROM
THE AGRICULTURAL SECTOR. SO
INVESTMENT IN DIGESTERS HAS
RECEIVED AN OUTSIDE SHARE OF
THAT FUNDING. BUT THERE'S ALSO
THE ALTERNATIVE MANURE
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM, THEY'RE
INCENTIVES FOR, FOR
TRANSITIONING TO, TO PASTURE
BASED AREAS. THERE ARE
ALTERNATIVES. I THINK OUR
FUNDAMENTAL POSITION IS ONE THAT
WE SHOULD BE SUPPORTING WAYS OF
DAIRYING THAT PREVENT THAT,
MINIMIZE THE PRODUCTION OF
METHANE IN THE FIRST PLACE
VERSUS CREATING METHANE, THAT
THEN WE HAVE TO CAPTURE AND
IDENTIFY SOME USE FOR. THAT IS
STILL GOING TO GOING TO STILL.
SO IF YOU DON'T CREATE THE
METHANE IN THE FIRST PLACE, THEN
YOU DON'T HAVE TO ADDRESS
SOMETHING TO DO WITH IT. AND IN
ADDITION, IN IN ORDER TO CAPTURE
WHATEVER AMOUNT OF METHANE WE
ARE AND TRY TO FIND SOME
BENEFICIAL USE FOR IT, YOU'RE
CONTINUING TO, YOU KNOW, CREATE
LOCAL AIR POLLUTION, LOCAL WATER
POLLUTION AND DIGESTERS DON'T
ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES. THEY, YOU
KNOW, THEY CONTINUE THE MANURE
SOLIDS THAT COME OUT OF A
DIGESTER ARE APPLIED TO
CROPLAND, CONTRIBUTE TO 94% OF
GROUNDWATER POLLUTION FROM
DAIRIES. AND THERE'S NOT A WAY
TO ADDRESS THAT WITH THE WAY
DIGESTERS OPERATE. THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. SO I'M
GOING TO I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU
EACH A MINUTE TO CLOSE. AND
WE'RE GOING TO GO IN REVERSE
ORDER IF WE CAN. MR. WADE. YEAH,
SURE. HAPPY TO. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH AGAIN FOR THE OPPORTUNITY,
I WOULD SAY FUNDAMENTALLY, I
AGREE THAT WE NEED TO THINK
ABOUT THESE WASTE AS RESOURCES.
AND WE HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO
TURN THESE WASTES INTO FUELS
WITH THE MINIMAL AMOUNT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT POSSIBLE,
THE CHOICE OF HYDROGEN AS AN
ENERGY CARRIER IS CLEARLY
CLEANER THAN THE CHOICE OF
METHANE IN MANY INSTANCES. AND
SO TO BE PROHIBITED FROM ENDING
UP IN THE CLEANEST ENERGY
CARRIER OR ONE OF THE CLEANEST
ENERGY CARRIERS WOULD BE A REAL
PROBLEM. FROM OUR INDUSTRY'S
PERSPECTIVE, THE MAJORITY OF
THIS INDUSTRY WAS STARTED TO
ABATE METHANE AND TO HELP
CONTROL ONE PORTION OF ISSUES
ASSOCIATED WITH FARMS, WE'VE
NEVER CLAIMED WE SOLVE ALL
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES ASSOCIATED
WITH FARMS, BUT WE DO BELIEVE WE
ARE CONTRIBUTING TO THE
SUSTAINABILITY OF THE DAIRY
INDUSTRY AND WOULD LIKE TO BE
ABLE TO CONTINUE TO DO SO IN THE
LONG RUN, ESPECIALLY IN THE, YOU
KNOW, TO THE HYDROGEN ECONOMY
ESSENTIALLY. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU, MR. KATZ. THANK YOU SO
MUCH. I THINK JUST BRIEFLY, YOU
KNOW, I THINK THERE'S BEEN A LOT
OF DISCUSSION ABOUT ALL OF THE
FEDERAL FUNDING THAT'S AVAILABLE
TO SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT OF A
HYDROGEN ECONOMY IN CALIFORNIA.
AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR
US TO DRAW DRAW OUR ATTENTION TO
A LOT OF THE CONCERNS AND
SAFEGUARDS IN THE 45 THAT THE
TREASURY RELEASED AS PART OF 45
VÆ, INCLUDING, YOU KNOW, REALLY
SIGNIFICANT CONCERNS ABOUT THE
INCLUSION OF FACTORY, FARM GAS
AS A FEEDSTOCK FOR HYDROGEN. AND
I THINK ALSO, I MEAN, CERTAINLY
TO THE COMMENTS THAT YOU MADE,
LIKE, WE ALSO HAVE TREMENDOUS
CONCERNS ABOUT THE DIESEL
EMISSIONS CONTRIBUTING TO AIR
QUALITY IN THE SAN JOAQUIN
VALLEY. BUT WE THINK THAT THAT'S
A SEPARATE QUESTION, RIGHT? WE
BELIEVE THAT WE NEED TO GET
DIESEL TRUCKS OFF THE ROAD. WE
NEED TO FIND WAYS OF REDUCING
THOSE EMISSIONS. AND WE DON'T WE
DON'T NEED TO CONTINUE THE
PRACTICE OF TELLING SAN JOAQUIN
VALLEY COMMUNITIES THAT THEY
NEED TO LIVE WITH ONE SOURCE OF
POLLUTION IN ORDER TO ADDRESS
ANOTHER, AND WE BELIEVE THAT
THERE'S A WAY OF TRANSITIONING
THAT WHETHER IT BE THROUGH
ELECTRIC, ELECTRIC TRUCKS OR
WHATEVER THE FUTURE MAY BE IN A
WAY THAT REDUCES THOSE, THOSE
EMISSIONS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
MISS. SO I WANT TO CLOSE BY
THANKING ALL OF YOU AND
ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU HAVE
MULTIPLE OVERLAPPING HEARINGS
TODAY, THIS IS SUCH A TIMELY AND
CRITICAL ISSUE. YOU KNOW, EVERY
STUDY THAT HAS LOOKED AT HOW ARE
WE GOING TO DECARBONIZE? WILL
MAINTAINING ENERGY RELIABILITY,
MAINTAINING OUR INDUSTRIAL AND
MANUFACTURING AND OTHER SECTORS,
AND HOW ARE WE GOING DO IT IN A
WAY THAT PROTECTS COMMUNITIES?
IT'S ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL. I JUST
WANT TO SAY, I THINK BIOGENIC
HYDROGEN NEEDS TO BE INCLUDED IN
THE DEBATE. APOLOGIES FOR THE
COUGH AND MY VOICE. WE DO NEED
ENVIRONMENTAL SAFEGUARDS AS
WELL, AND WE ARE HAPPY TO TALK
ABOUT THOSE. BUT THERE ARE SO
MANY BENEFITS OF DOING THIS VERY
. I'M DONE. DID SHE SAY SHE WAS
DONE? YEAH THAT'S THAT'S NOT AN
APPROPRIATE WAY FOR US TO END.
BUT AS IT IS, IT IS HOW WE'RE
GOING TO HAVE TO END THIS FIRST
PANEL. THANK YOU BOTH VERY MUCH
FOR BEING HERE, AND IF OUR,
PANEL TWO, PANELISTS WOULD COME
ON UP FOR THE ISSUE OF COMMUNITY
ISSUES, RIGHT.
THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. AND,
GLAD YOU'RE OKAY, MISS LEVIN,
AND SO WE HAVE, ARI EISENSTADT
FROM THE ENERGY JUSTICE MANAGER,
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
ALLIANCE, WHICH COMMONLY KNOWN
AS SIERRA AND, FARAZ REYES
RIZVI, POLICY AND CAMPAIGN
MANAGER, ASIAN PACIFIC
ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK. AND IF
YOU WILL, GO AHEAD AND KICK US
OFF, ARI. YEAH. THANK YOU SO
MUCH. MY NAME IS ARI EISENSTADT.
MY PRONOUNS ARE HE, HIM, AND I
AM AN ENERGY JUSTICE MANAGER AT
SIERRA. AND I THINK AS AS YOU
KNOW, ASSEMBLY MEMBER BENNETT,
WE REPRESENT TENS OF THOUSANDS
OF LOW INCOME COMMUNITIES OF
COLOR, PEOPLE OF COLOR, AND
REALLY APPRECIATE BEING INVITED
HERE TO TALK TODAY ABOUT
HYDROGEN'S IMPACTS ON EJ
COMMUNITIES. WE'RE DEEPLY
COMMITTED TO DECARBONIZATION AND
MITIGATING THE IMPACTS OF THE
CLIMATE CRISIS, PARTICULARLY
GIVEN THAT THE COMMUNITIES WE
SERVE ARE THOSE HIT FIRST AND
WORST. THIS COMMITMENT IS BACKED
BY COLLECTIVE DECADES OF WORK BY
SAGE'S STAFF AND ALLIANCE
MEMBERS TO DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT
POLICIES, REGULATIONS AND
PROGRAMS THAT REDUCE CLIMATE
WARMING POLLUTANTS AND THEIR
CO-POLLUTANTS. IT'S BECAUSE OF
THIS DEEP EXPERTISE THAT WE COME
HERE TO OFFER A STRONG WORD OF
CAUTION ABOUT HYDROGEN, AND A
CALL TO ENSURE THAT WE DO NOT
REPLICATE THE DISASTERS OF OUR
FOSSIL FUEL DRIVEN ECONOMY WITH
HYDROGEN AS A STATE, WE'VE TAKEN
A HEADFIRST DIVE INTO COMPLETELY
TRANSFORMING THE ECONOMY WHILE
IGNORING THE PEOPLE AND
COMMUNITIES WHO WILL BE MOST
DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY HYDROGEN
FACILITIES. THERE IS AMPLE DATA
INDICATING THAT HYDROGEN HAS THE
POTENTIAL TO CAUSE IMMENSE HARM.
WE KNOW THAT HYDROGEN IS A
VOLATILE, EXTREMELY FLAMMABLE
GAS THAT IS DIFFICULT TO
TRANSPORT REQUIRES IMMENSE
AMOUNTS OF ENERGY AND WATER TO
PRODUCE, AND WILL REQUIRE
HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS IN PUBLIC
INVESTMENT TO MAKE, TO MAKE
VIABLE. EVEN STILL, I'M NOT HERE
TODAY TO TRY TO DISSUADE THE
LEGISLATURE FROM PURSUING
FEDERAL FUNDING FOR HYDROGEN OR
TO SAY THAT THERE IS NO PLACE
FOR HYDROGEN IN CALIFORNIA'S
FUTURE. I AM HERE TO ENCOURAGE
YOU TO LET ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
COMMUNITIES CHOOSE FOR
THEMSELVES THE EXTENT AND NATURE
OF HOW HYDROGEN SHOWS UP IN
THEIR LIVES. PART OF HOW THIS
HAPPENS IS IN UPHOLDING THE
STATE'S LAWS AND PROCESSES LIKE
SEQUA, THAT ENSURE THAT EJ
COMMUNITIES HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY
TO CONSENT TO PROJECTS FAR
BEFORE SHOVELS HIT THE GROUND.
ANOTHER PART OF THIS IS GIVING
EQUAL AIRTIME TO ENERGY
ALTERNATIVES THAT AREN'T
HYDROGEN. THIS INCLUDES PROPERLY
ACCOUNTING FOR THE POTENTIAL OF
COMMUNITY SOLAR LONG DURATION
STORAGE, WIND ENERGY EFFICIENCY,
AND DEMAND RESPONSE TO SOLVE FOR
THE SAME ISSUES THAT HYDROGEN
PURPORTS TO SOLVE. GIVING
COMMUNITIES AGENCY ALSO INVOLVES
FULLY ACCOUNTING FOR HYDROGEN'S
COSTS AND BENEFITS, AND THIS
MEANS A FULL, PUBLICLY
ACCESSIBLE ASSESSMENT OF THE
PUBLIC HEALTH COSTS, RATEPAYER
IMPACTS, AND MORE OF HYDROGEN
INFRASTRUCTURE WHICH CURRENTLY
DOESN'T EXIST. AND IF IT DOES,
IT'S HIDDEN BEHIND MANY
DIFFERENT NDAS THAT ARCHES IS
ERECTING AS A BARRIER TO PUBLIC
PARTICIPATION. EJ COMMUNITIES
HAVE BEEN FIGHTING FOR TRULY
CLEAN, CARBON FREE ENERGY FOR
MUCH LONGER THAN HYDROGEN HAS
BEEN AN OPTION FOR CALIFORNIA,
AND WE'RE HOPING THAT WE CAN
START COMPARING HYDROGEN NOT AS
MUCH TO FOSSIL FUELS, BUT AS
MORE TO OTHER SOURCES OF CLEAN
ENERGY. WE KNOW THAT WE HAVE TO
DECARBONIZE, AND SO WE'RE HOPING
THAT WE CAN START CHOOSING
BETWEEN HYDROGEN AND OTHER CLEAN
ENERGIES AS OPPOSED TO HYDROGEN
AND FOSSIL FUELS, THAT WE SEE
THAT AS NOT REALLY A PART OF THE
DEBATE ANYMORE. WE'VE SEEN ALSO
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE STATE
IGNORES COMMUNITY MEMBERS. WE'VE
SEEN THE DISASTROUS CONSEQUENCES
OF OUR CURRENT ENERGY GRID,
EXORBITANT PRICES, UNRELIABLE
ENERGY RESOURCES, LACK OF
RESILIENCE AND TOXIC POLLUTION
RESULTING IN ENDLESS HORRORS FOR
LOW INCOME PEOPLE OF COLOR TO
DATE, STATE LED AND SPONSORED
HYDROGEN PROCESSES LIKE ARCHES
HAVE REPLICATED THIS SAME
UNILATERAL, OPAQUE, AND
INACCESSIBLE DECISION MAKING
THAT GOT US HERE IN THE FIRST
PLACE. SO WHILE THE EU'S THREE
PILLARS ARE A GOOD REGULATORY
STARTING POINT FOR HYDROGEN,
THEY ARE JUST THAT A STARTING
POINT. WE STAND AT A UNIQUE
MOMENT IN THE ENERGY HISTORY OF
CALIFORNIA, THE UNITED STATES
AND THE PLANET. AND SO IF YOU
HAD A TIME MACHINE AND COULD GO
BACK TO THE 1930S, WHEN OIL
WELLS WERE DOMINATING THE
CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE, WHAT WOULD
YOU HAVE DONE? WOULD YOU HAVE
CONTINUED TO FIGHT FOR FOSSIL
FUELS AND SACRIFICE THE PLANET
AND PEOPLE? WE HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY RIGHT NOW TO BUILD A
JUST ENERGY FUTURE AND CORRECT
THAT COURSE. BUT TO DO THAT, WE
NEED COMMUNITY CHOICE AT EVERY
LEVEL OF THE HYDROGEN PROCESS.
WE CAN EITHER DEREGULATE, BUILD
FAST, AND SPEND THE NEXT HALF
CENTURY SUFFERING THE HEALTH AND
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES, OR
WE CAN LEARN FROM THE PAST AND
MAKE SPACE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
JUSTICE COMMUNITIES TO TRULY
CONSENT AND BUILD IT RIGHT. SO
IN CLOSING, WE'RE HOPING THAT
THIS COMMITTEE'S CHARGE CAN BE
TO FULLY ASSESS HYDROGEN, NOT AS
A STANDALONE TECHNOLOGY, BUT
WITH FULL CONSIDERATION OF ITS
POLLUTION, POTENTIAL RATEPAYER
COSTS, AND IN DIRECT COMPARISON
TO OTHER CLEAN OPTIONS, NOT JUST
FOSSIL FUELS. THANK YOU.
ANYTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT OUR
OUTSIDE NOISE, PLEASE. THANK
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BEING ON
TIME. OUR NEXT SPEAKER. YEAH,
FARAZ RIZVI FROM APAN ASIAN
PACIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK,
AHRI REALLY KICKED US OFF AND,
YOU KNOW, HAS ARTICULATED SO
MANY THINGS THAT I'VE ALWAYS
ALSO WILL BE ECHOING. I'M REALLY
GRATEFUL FOR BEING ASKED TO COME
HERE AND SPEAK ABOUT THE
COMMUNITY'S CONCERNS AND ISSUES
REGARDING THE USE OF HYDROGEN IN
CALIFORNIA'S CLIMATE FUTURE.
IT'S CLEARLY NO SECRET THAT
ENVIRONMENTAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL
JUSTICE ORGANIZATIONS ARE REALLY
CONCERNED ABOUT THE IMPLICATIONS
OF HYDROGEN FOR THE COMMUNITY WE
REPRESENT, AND WE WELCOME THIS
COMMITTEE'S WILLINGNESS TO
EXPLORE THESE ISSUES AND BEGIN
THE CONVERSATION FOR THE
RELEVANT REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
THAT MAXIMIZES REYES, BOTH
EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS AND
COMMUNITY PROTECTIONS. THE
REALITY IS, OIL AND GAS
COMPANIES WANT US TO BELIEVE
THAT HYDROGEN IS SOME KIND OF
MAGIC CLIMATE SOLUTION, BUT THE
TRUTH IS, IS THAT THE PRIMARY
FUNCTION OF HYDROGEN TODAY IS TO
PRODUCE MORE FOSSIL FUELS.
CURRENTLY, 95% OF ALL HYDROGEN
IS PRODUCED FROM FOSSIL FUELS
LIKE OIL, COAL AND FRACKED GAS
THROUGH A CARBON INTENSIVE AND
POLLUTING PROCESS CALLED STEAM
METHANE REFORMING. SMR 780% OF
THE HYDROGEN PRODUCED IN THE
UNITED STATES SPECIFICALLY USED
TO REFINE PETROLEUM WHEN
HYDROGEN IS PRODUCED AND USED
THIS WAY, IT EMITS A HUGE AMOUNT
OF CARBON DIOXIDE AND ALSO
PARTICULATE MATTER, NITROGEN,
NITROGEN OXIDES, AND OTHER
TOXINS THAT CAUSE SERIOUS HEALTH
ISSUES FOR PEOPLE LIVING NEARBY.
FROM RICHMOND TO SOUTH, LÀ Ã
BRINGS TOGETHER FAMILIES AND
NEIGHBORS WHO LIVE ALONGSIDE THE
STATE'S BIGGEST OIL REFINERIES
TO FIGHT FOR CLEAN AIR AND A
HEALTHY FUTURE. OUR KIDS ATTEND
PRESCHOOL AND ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
ON THE FENCE LINE OF REFINERIES,
AND SO MANY OF THEM HAVE ASTHMA
THAT AT RECESS, TEACHERS HAND
OUT INHALERS LIKE THEY HAND OUT
SNACKS. OUR COMMUNITIES HAVE
SEEN FIRSTHAND THAT WHEN OIL
REFINERIES EXPAND TO PRODUCE
MORE HYDROGEN, IT MEANS EVEN
MORE POLLUTION AND HEALTH ISSUES
FOR OUR FAMILIES. FOR EXAMPLE,
IN RICHMOND, THE CHEVRON
REFINERY BROUGHT NEW DIRTY,
DIRTY HYDROGEN UNITS ONLINE IN
2018. SINCE THEN, RESIDENTS HAVE
EXPERIENCED EXPERIENCED RECORD
BREAKING LEVELS OF FLARING FOR
THE PAST THREE YEARS, CHEVRON'S
FLARING HAS DUMPED 52 TO 63 TONS
OF SULFUR DIOXIDE INTO THE AIR
ANNUALLY, A POLLUTANT THAT
STINKS OF ROTTEN EGGS AND
EXACERBATES RESPIRATORY ISSUES
FOR PEOPLE LIVING NEARBY. RIGHT
NOW, OIL AND GAS LOBBYISTS ARE
WALKING THE HALLS OF CONGRESS
AND LOBBYING FEDERAL AGENCIES TO
FUNNEL EVEN MORE MONEY FROM 45
VÆ TAX CREDITS AND OTHER FEDERAL
INVESTMENTS TO EXPAND DIRTY
FOSSIL HYDROGEN, TOGETHER WITH
BIG AG, THE OIL LOBBY IS
REWRITING INTERNATIONALLY
ACCEPTED DEFINITIONS OF GREEN
HYDROGEN AND DEMANDING THAT
DIRTY FOSSIL HYDROGEN BE ALLOWED
TO CLAIM THE HIGHEST TIER OF 45
VÆ TAX CREDITS, AND ATTEMPTING
TO LOCK IN LOW PROJECTIONS FOR
METHANE LEAKAGE THAT ALLOWED
THEIR DIRTY ENERGY PROJECTS TO
CLAIM FULL DECADES OF SUBSIDIES,
REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY'RE
ACTUALLY THEIR ACTUAL ON THE
GROUND PROJECTS EVER MEET. THESE
PROJECTIONS? IN CALIFORNIA, WE
HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SET THE
STANDARDS AND PROTECT OUR
COMMUNITIES AS BILLIONS OF
DOLLARS OF FEDERAL AS BILLIONS
OF FEDERAL DOLLARS POUR INTO OUR
STATE TO FUND HYDROGEN PROJECTS,
WE CAN ENSURE THAT OUR PUBLIC
FUNDS ARE USED TO BUILD A TRULY
GREEN, CLEAN HYDROGEN ECONOMY
THAT IS END TO END ZERO
EMISSION. WE HAVE TO REJECT OIL
EXECUTIVES ATTEMPTS TO USE
ACCOUNTING GIMMICKS AND
LOOPHOLES TO LEVERAGE DOLLARS
FROM PUBLIC HYDROGEN SUBSIDIES
TO FUND DIRTY FOSSIL HYDROGEN
PROJECTS. WE ESPECIALLY NEED
NEAR FIRM TARGETS TO ENSURE THAT
DEMAND FOR RETAIL HYDROGEN DOES
NOT OUTPACE CLEAN HYDROGEN
PRODUCTION, AND WE MUST SET
STRONG STANDARDS TO PROTECT THE
AIR, LAND, WATER AND BODIES OF
MILLIONS OF CALIFORNIANS. SO
THAT'S ON PRODUCTION. THERE ARE
ALSO CONCERNS ON DELIVERY AND
STORAGE. AS RAY SAID, HYDROGEN
IS HIGHLY EXPLOSIVE. IT'S ALSO
THE SMALLEST PARTICLE IN THE
UNIVERSE, MAKING IT VERY PRONE
TO LEAKAGE. IN JULY OF 2023, THE
FIRST HYDROGEN FUELING STATION
IN BAKERSFIELD EXPLODED,
DESTROYING AN ENTIRE BUS WHILE
IT CHARGED. THAT DOES NOT CREATE
AN ILLUSION OF SAFETY FOR OUR
COMMUNITIES, WE BELIEVE THAT
THIS COMMUNITY HAS AN ESSENTIAL
DUTY TO BUILD CONSENSUS WITH
FRONTLINE COMMUNITIES ON
RELEVANT SAFEGUARDS AND
PROTECTIONS, AND WHILE THIS
PANEL IS A STEP IN THE RIGHT
DIRECTION, IT'S IMPERATIVE THAT
HYDROGEN PROJECTS THEMSELVES
INCLUDE ROBUST COMMUNITY
ENGAGEMENT PROCESSES, RECENT
EFFORTS AT CEQA, STREAMLINING
FOR HYDROGEN INFRASTRUCTURE ARE
DEEPLY CONCERNING AND HIGHLIGHT
THE FEARS OUR ORGANIZATIONS HAVE
ABOUT THE ABSENCE OF HEALTH,
SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL
CONCERNS ABOUT HYDROGEN
INFRASTRUCTURE. TO ADD TO THIS,
THE WELL-DOCUMENTED LACK OF
TRANSPARENCY AROUND PROJECTS
INCLUDED IN THE ARCH'S HYDROGEN
HUBS PROGRAMS CONFIRMS OUR
SUSPICIONS THAT INDUSTRY TENDS
TO LEAVE COMMUNITIES SUCH AS
REFINERY COMMUNITIES IN THE BAY
AREA AND LÀ OR DAIRY DIGESTER
ADJACENT COMMUNITIES IN CENTRAL
CALIFORNIA, COMPLETELY OUT OF
ANY CONVERSATION ABOUT HYDROGEN.
THIS ERASURE CAN REPLICATE THE
ENVIRONMENTAL INJUSTICES OF THE
LAST CENTURY AS RELIANCE ON
FOSSIL FUELS, LEAVING OUT
RESIDENTS WHO LIVES,
COMMUNITIES, JOBS AND HEALTH
WILL BE MOST DIRECTLY IMPACTED,
THE SAME INDUSTRY THAT SPENT
DECADES DENYING CLIMATE CHANGE
IS EVEN REAL ARE NOW CONVINCING
DECISION MAKERS THAT THIS
TECHNOLOGY HASN'T, WHICH HAS AN
IMMENSE CARBON FOOTPRINT. IS THE
MISSING INGREDIENT FOR OUR
CLIMATE GOALS. AND I KNOW I'M AT
TIME, BUT I DON'T THINK IN THESE
FIVE MINUTES I'VE BEEN ABLE TO
EXHAUSTIVELY ARTICULATE THE
SHEER VOLUME OF COMMUNITY
CONCERNS. BUT WE REALLY WANT TO
FRAME THIS AS A STARTING POINT
TO BEGIN THOSE CONVERSATIONS.
THANK YOU. AND WE APPRECIATE
THAT EVERY PANELIST IS
COMPLETELY FRUSTRATED BY FIVE
MINUTE TIME LIMIT IN TERMS OF
THEIR PRESENTATION AND THERE IS
NO NOBODY CONTENDING THAT
EVERYTHING WE NEED TO PRESENT IS
GOING TO HAPPEN IN THESE
HEARINGS. VERY TRUE. BUT IT DOES
GET YOU AND YOUR YOUR BASIC
COMMENTS OUT INTO THE PUBLIC,
FOR SOMEBODY WHO WATCHES THIS,
EITHER NOW OR LATER AND DOES
ALLOW AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THOSE
CONVERSATIONS TO CONTINUE. SO WE
ENCOURAGE YOU TO, NOT VIEW THIS
AS, AS THE ONLY OPPORTUNITY, I
DO HAVE A QUESTION, FOR YOU,
YOU, REPEATEDLY MADE THE
COMMENTS ABOUT HAVING THE
COMMUNITY BE INVOLVED AND COULD
YOU GIVE US 60S OF THE KEY
ELEMENTS OF COMMUNITY
INVOLVEMENT WITH HYDROGEN THAT
DO YOU THINK ARE MOST IMPORTANT?
SURE. YEAH. AND I THINK FEROZ
WOULD ALSO PROBABLY BE VERY WELL
EQUIPPED TO ANSWER THIS
QUESTION, GIVEN THAT APAN DOES
DIRECT COMMUNITY ORGANIZING, BUT
I CAN GIVE A I'LL GIVE A LITTLE
32ND AND THEN HAND IT OVER TO
FARAZ. I THINK PART OF IT IS
MAKING SURE THAT COMMUNITIES
KNOW EVERYTHING THERE IS TO KNOW
ABOUT A PROJECT. WHILE IT'S IN
THE PROPOSAL PHASE, ONE OF THE
THINGS THAT HAS BEEN EXTREMELY
DIFFICULT WITH ARCHES, WHICH I
THINK MANY OF US SEE AS THE
NUMBER ONE PLACE WHERE HYDROGEN
IS BEING IMPLEMENTED RIGHT NOW,
IS THAT WE CAN'T FIND OUT
ANYTHING ABOUT IT UNLESS WE SIGN
AN NDA THAT BASICALLY PROHIBITS
US FROM TALKING TO COMMUNITY
MEMBERS ABOUT WHAT WE LEARN. AND
THAT'S A WAY TO REALLY STIFLE
DIRECT COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT. AND
IT'S BEEN VERY EFFECTIVE. WE
DON'T KNOW VERY MUCH AT ALL. AND
SO WE DON'T KNOW WHERE PROJECTS
ARE GOING TO BE, WHAT THEY'RE
GOING TO LOOK LIKE, WHAT THE
POLLUTION BURDEN COULD BE FROM
THOSE. AND THAT MEANS THAT
COMMUNITIES CAN'T ACTUALLY
PARTICIPATE IN THOSE DECISIONS.
AND SO WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, OUR
OWN WAYS OF DOING COMMUNITY
ORGANIZING, WHERE WE TRY TO
BRING COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO
DECISION MAKING SPACES AND TRY
TO BRING DECISION MAKING SPACES
TO COMMUNITY MEMBERS. BUT THAT
CAN'T HAPPEN IF WE'RE NOT
ALLOWED TO DO OUR JOBS. AND SO
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE REALLY
ARE HOPING FOR GOING FORWARD AND
REALLY APPRECIATE THAT, THAT
YOU'VE HELPED FACILITATE.
ASSEMBLY MEMBER, IS THIS TYPE OF
TRANSPARENCY BETWEEN DECISION
MAKING SPACES AND FOLKS LIKE US,
BUT ALSO DIRECTLY WITH COMMUNITY
MEMBERS WHO WE MUCH PREFER THAT
THEY SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES THAN
SPEAK THROUGH ADVOCATES LIKE US?
SURE. SO I'LL TURN TO YOU. WHAT
GIVE US A MINUTE OR SO ON. WHAT
YOU THINK ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT
STEPS WE NEED TO DO TO PROTECT
THE COMMUNITIES THAT YOU'RE
SPECIFICALLY TRYING TO PROTECT?
YEAH. I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S AN
EXCELLENT QUESTION. AND I THINK
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THINGS
THAT ARE REALLY IMPORTANT. AND,
YOU KNOW, AS ARI, YOU KNOW,
SUGGESTED WITH ARCHES, THERE'S
LOTS OF CONCERNS ABOUT, YOU
KNOW, HOW PRIVATE THOSE THOSE
PROGRAMS ARE. I THINK RECENTLY
WHAT I UPLOADED IN MY COMMENTS,
THE POTENTIAL FOR SEQUA
STREAMLINING. WE ACTUALLY DO
NEED ROBUST ENVIRONMENTAL
PROCESSES TO MAKE SURE THAT, YOU
KNOW, THEY'RE FROM END TO END,
THAT THERE ISN'T POLLUTION, YOU
KNOW, THAT'S COMING TO OUR
COMMUNITIES, THAT THERE IS
ACTUALLY PROTECTIONS IN TERMS OF
DELIVERY AND STORAGE. AND I
THINK THESE NEED TO BE
COMMUNICATED, AND WE NEED TO
MAKE SURE RESOURCES ARE HANDED
OUT TO COMMUNITIES THAT ARE
BILINGUAL. YOU KNOW, FOR
EXAMPLE, A LOT OF THE
COMMUNITIES THAT WE REPRESENT,
YOU KNOW, ARE MANDARIN SPEAKING
AND SPEAK OTHER LANGUAGES. SO
MAKING SURE THAT THERE IS
CULTURALLY SENSITIVE OUTREACH AS
WELL, AND, YOU KNOW, MAKING SURE
THAT THERE ARE PLENTY OF TOUCH
POINTS FOR COMMUNITIES TO HAVE
RELEVANT STAKEHOLDER,
CONVERSATIONS AND GIVE PUBLIC
COMMENT. SO I THINK THERE ARE A
NUMBER OF ROBUST PROCESSES. AND,
YOU KNOW, THERE'S, THERE IS A
KIND OF, YOU KNOW, DUALITY
BETWEEN WANTING TO SCALE THIS UP
VERY QUICKLY AND ALSO WANTING TO
MAKE SURE THAT COMMUNITIES ARE
CONSULTED, THAT THERE IS A LEVEL
OF CONSENT INTO WHICH YOU KNOW
HOW THESE ARE GOING TO IMPACT
THEM. WHAT ARE THE MITIGATION
EFFORTS FOR ANY POTENTIAL
POLLUTION? AND, YOU KNOW, EVEN,
FOR EXAMPLE, MAKING SURE THAT
THE BENEFITS FROM THESE PROJECTS
ARE GOING TO COMMUNITIES THAT
ARE GOING TO HOUSE THEM. YOU
KNOW WHAT? HOW ARE WE BENEFITING
THE COMMUNITIES IN SOUTH LA, IN
WILMINGTON THAT ARE GOING TO BE
OR IN RICHMOND THAT ARE GOING TO
BE, YOU KNOW, GROUND ZERO FOR A
LOT OF THESE PROJECTS? GREAT
ASSEMBLYMEMBERS ANY ANYTHING.
YOU'RE BOTH VERY ARTICULATE
SPOKESPERSONS FOR YOUR GROUPS,
AND I MEAN THAT SINCERELY. SO
REALLY APPRECIATE THE BEGINNING
OF CONVERSATIONS WITH YOU AND
HOPE WE CAN CONTINUE TO HAVE
THOSE CONVERSATIONS AS THE
SEARCH FOR THE RIGHT HYDROGEN
POLICY FOR CALIFORNIA CONTINUES.
SO THANK YOU BOTH VERY MUCH. I'M
GOING TO GIVE YOU BOTH ONE
MINUTE TO CLOSE. SURE. THANK YOU
SO MUCH, JUST REALLY WANT TO
CLOSE TO, YOU KNOW, BY ECHOING
WHAT FARAZ JUST MENTIONED ABOUT
THE PLACES WHERE THESE PROJECTS
ARE GOING TO HAPPEN. YOU KNOW,
WE'VE STARTED FINDING OUT, YOU
KNOW, THROUGH THROUGH THE
GRAPEVINE TRICKLES OF PROJECTS
THAT ARE BEGINNING SOME IN
TRIBAL COMMUNITIES, SOME IN THE
COMMUNITIES THAT WE WORK WITH,
SOME YOU KNOW, IN THE CENTRAL
VALLEY THAT JAMIE WORKS WITH.
AND AT THAT POINT, WHILE THERE'S
STUFF THAT WE CAN STILL DO TO
SUPPORT, IT'S A LITTLE BIT TOO
LATE, YOU KNOW, FOR REAL
COMMUNITY CONSENT. AT THAT
POINT, WE'RE SORT OF GRASPING AT
STRAWS, YOU KNOW, PUTTING
TOGETHER COMMUNITY BENEFITS
AGREEMENTS, WHICH ARE ONLY MEANT
TO ACCOUNT FOR HARM. THAT
HAPPENS IN THE FIRST PLACE. WE
WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
COMMUNITIES GET TO DECIDE IF
THAT HARM OCCURS AT ALL AND NOT
THEN ARE IN THE PROCESS OF
HAVING TO NEGOTIATE FOR THEIR
SAFETY. AND SO ONE OF THE THINGS
THAT WE DO KNOW IS THAT
COMMUNITIES WANT RESILIENCE
AGAINST THINGS LIKE BLACKOUTS.
THEY WANT POLLUTION BURDENS
ELIMINATED, NOT JUST REDUCED
MARGINALLY. AND SO THOSE ARE THE
TYPES OF THINGS THAT WE'RE GOING
OFF OF AND THAT WE WANT DIRECTLY
COMPARED TO WHAT HYDROGEN HAS TO
OFFER TO MAKE SURE THAT
COMMUNITY CHOICE IS ACTUALLY A
PART OF THE CONVERSATION. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. AND YOU'RE CLOSE.
YEAH, I THINK I REALLY WANT TO
SPEND SOME TIME TALKING ABOUT
THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, I THINK
THERE IS THIS IMPRESSION WITHIN
THE LEGISLATURE THAT HYDROGEN
IS, YOU KNOW, INHERENTLY A CLEAN
CLIMATE SOLUTION, YOU KNOW,
BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, FUEL CELLS
DON'T REALLY HAVE, EMISSIONS
FROM THEM, AND I THINK WHAT I
REALLY WANT TO STRESS IS THAT
THIS IS ACTUALLY THIS OBSCURES
THE REALITY OF HYDROGEN MARKET
RIGHT NOW, AND THAT HYDROGEN IS
ACTUALLY DEEPLY EMBEDDED IN THE
FOSSIL FUEL PRODUCTION CHAIN.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING IN THE
FUTURE. IT EXISTS RIGHT NOW. AND
HOW WE UTILIZE THIS FROM TAKING
IT FROM THE FOSSIL FUEL
PRODUCTION CHAIN INTO THESE END
USES. HOW WE SCALE THAT MARKET
UP IS GOING TO REALLY IMPACT OUR
COMMUNITIES. AND SO WE NEED TO
BE CLEAR THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO
USE HYDROGEN FOR CALIFORNIA'S
CLIMATE FUTURE, WE'RE NOT DOING
SO IN A WAY THAT'S GOING TO
CONTINUE TO EXTEND SO MUCH OF
THIS INFRASTRUCTURE. THAT IS THE
LEGACY OF FOSSIL FUELS. FOR THE
LAST CENTURY. THANK YOU BOTH
VERY MUCH. REALLY APPRECIATE IT.
ALL RIGHT. WE'LL MOVE ON TO OUR
NEXT PANEL. SO WE DIDN'T SWITCH
OVER TO NRDC. THAT'S RIGHT,
THAT'S RIGHT. HELLO. I WANT TO
THANK YOU BOTH FOR BEING HERE
AND WELCOME THE FACT THAT AS THE
DAY HAS MOVED ON, THE CROWD
NOISE OUTSIDE HAS DIMINISHED,
SO, THIS, PANEL IS CREATIVE
POLICY SOLUTIONS TO ACHIEVE THE
GOALS OF THE THREE PILLARS. AND
AS I DESCRIBED EARLY IN MY
INTRODUCTORY COMMENTS, THE GOALS
OF THE THREE PILLARS, TRYING TO
THE ULTIMATE GOAL OF THE THREE
PILLARS IS TRYING TO MAKE SURE
THAT CALIFORNIA ENDS UP WITH THE
RIGHT PORTFOLIO OF RENEWABLE
RESOURCES, AND IT DOESN'T GET
SKEWED BY ANYTHING BUT HYDROGEN
POLICY IN PARTICULAR. SO ANY
CREATIVE WAY THAT WE CAN GET
THERE WOULD BE GREAT. AND WE'RE
HONORED TO HAVE, MISS JANICE
LIN, THE FOUNDER AND PRESIDENT
OF THE GREEN HYDROGEN COALITION,
TO KICK THIS OFF. MISS LIN,
THANK YOU, CHAIR BENNETT. THANK
YOU. COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY NAME
IS JANICE LIN, FIRST, A QUICK
INTRO. THE GREEN HYDROGEN
COALITION IS AN INDEPENDENT
EDUCATIONAL NONPROFIT, AND OUR
MISSION IS TO ACCELERATE THE
REALIZATION OF GREEN HYDROGEN
PRODUCTION AND NEEDED
INFRASTRUCTURE TO ACHIEVE
ECONOMY WIDE DECARBONIZATION. I
WANT TO EMPHASIZE, ESPECIALLY ON
THE HEELS OF THE LAST PANEL,
THAT OUR GOAL IS TO DISPLACE
FOSSIL FUELS AT SCALE AS FAST AS
POSSIBLE. I'D LIKE TO THANK ALL
OF YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP IN
CLEAN ENERGY, FOR HOSTING THESE
HEARINGS, AND FOR RECOGNIZING
THE IMPORTANT ROLE OF RENEWABLE
HYDROGEN GOING FORWARD. SO ON
THE THREE PILLARS, OUR HYDROGEN
ECONOMY NEEDS TO BE IMPLEMENTED
WITH CLIMATE INTEGRITY. I THINK
WE CAN BE I DIDN'T HEAR
IMPLEMENTED WITH CLIMATE
INTEGRITY. THIS IS SOMETHING WE
CAN ALL AGREE ON. AND THAT'S WHY
THE CONCEPT OF THREE PILLARS
EXISTS FOR OUR HYDROGEN ECONOMY
TO DISPLACE LARGE VOLUMES OF
FOSSIL FUELS, WE NEED TO SCALE
IT. AND THIS REQUIRES THE
CONCURRENT DEVELOPMENT OF
PRODUCTION AT SCALE. TRANSPORT,
STORAGE AND MULTISECTORAL END
USE WITHOUT VISIBILITY INTO
AFFORDABLE DELIVERED HYDROGEN.
RENEWABLE HYDROGEN AT SCALE.
USERS OF GASOLINE, DIESEL,
NATURAL GAS THEY'RE JUST NOT
GOING TO SWITCH. GETTING THIS
ECOSYSTEM STARTED IS REALLY
HARD, AND I'D LIKE TO THANK YOU
FOR YOUR, RECOGNITION OF THE
IMPORTANCE OF THE POWER SECTOR
IN GETTING US GOING ON. THE
GREEN HYDROGEN COALITION
SUPPORTS CLIMATE INTEGRITY AND
THE INTENT OF THE THREE PILLARS
FOR THE COUNTRY AS A WHOLE. THE
QUESTION IS, HOW DO WE GET
THERE? IMPORTANTLY IT MUST BE
IMPLEMENTED IN A PRACTICAL WAY
AND PHASED IN OVER A LONG PERIOD
OF TIME TO AVOID CONSTRAINING
NEAR TÂM PROGRESS AS OUR
RENEWABLE HYDROGEN ECONOMY IS
JUST GETTING STARTED. WE ALSO
RECOMMENDED TO TREASURY THAT THE
THREE PILLARS MUST BE
IMPLEMENTED IN A WAY THAT
CONSIDERS THE POLICY CONTEXT OF
VARIOUS STATES. THERE IS A HUGE
AMOUNT OF DIVERSITY OF STATES
ACROSS THE US, NATIONALLY, OUR
EFFORTS TO ENSURE CLIMATE
INTEGRITY ON THE PRODUCTION SIDE
ALSO HAS TO BE BALANCED AND WITH
OUR OVERARCHING GOAL FOR HOW TO
ACCELERATE THE DISPLACEMENT OF
FOSSIL FUEL USE ON THE END USE
SIDE, THAT'S WHERE WE'RE GOING
TO GET OUR AIR QUALITY
IMPROVEMENTS. AND THIS CANNOT
HAPPEN OVERNIGHT BECAUSE OF THE
SCALE OF OUR FOSSIL FUEL USE.
THREE PILLARS IS FUNDAMENTALLY
ABOUT ACHIEVING CLIMATE
INTEGRITY. AND I BELIEVE THE
GOAL FOR THIS PANEL IS HOW TO DO
THAT IN CALIFORNIA. NHÀ. AND AS
A CALIFORNIAN, I JUST WANT TO
SAY I'M REALLY PROUD TO BE PART
OF CALIFORNIA. AND FOR OUR
LEADERSHIP THAT'S HAPPENING
ALREADY. WE ARE ALREADY VERY FAR
ALONG IN DECARBONIZING OUR GRID
THROUGH OUR RPS AND SB 100. I'LL
NOTE THAT THESE POLICIES ALREADY
EMBODY MANY OF THE PRINCIPLES OF
THE THREE PILLARS IN
ADDITIONALITY, DELIVERY,
ABILITY, AND TIME MATCHING ARE
ALREADY A FUNDAMENTAL PART OF
OUR POWER SECTOR GOALS. INDEED,
WE WILL NEED, AS YOU'VE
RECOGNIZED, RENEWABLE HYDROGEN
TO GET TO THAT LAST 10. IT'S FOR
THIS REASON THAT WE RECOMMENDED
TO TREASURY THAT ANY REGION WITH
CLEAN GRIDS SHOULD BE EXEMPT
FROM ADDITIONALITY REQUIREMENTS,
OR THE EAC'S ENERGY ATTRIBUTE
CERTIFICATES SHOULD BE REDUCED.
TREASURY SHOULD REWARD FIRST
MOVERS AND NOT PUNISH THEM. MANY
REGIONS WITH HIGH RENEWABLE
PENETRATION ARE ALREADY
EXPERIENCING CURTAILMENT. WE
SHOULD BE USING FINDING WAYS TO
ENCOURAGE THE USE OF THIS
CURTAILED RENEWABLE, AND WE CAN
DO THAT THROUGH BOOK AND CLAIM
EVEN THE EUROPEAN UNION. THEIR
DIRECTIVE ALLOWS FOR GRIDS WITH
HIGH RENEWABLE ENERGY CONTENT TO
BE DEEMED RENEWABLE. CALIFORNIA
IS ALSO A LEADER WHEN IT COMES
TO TRANSPORTATION FUELS. CARB'S
LCFS PROGRAM IS A SUPER
EFFECTIVE PROGRAM TO FOSSILIZE
THE TRANSPORTATION SECTOR. WE
SUPPORT CARB'S QUARTERLY
MATCHING APPROACH AND INDEED
RECOMMENDED THAT TO TREASURY AS
A GREAT WAY TO, AS A GREAT MODEL
TO MOVE FORWARD. THE THREE
PILLARS ARE BEING PROPOSED AT
THE FEDERAL LEVEL, PRIMARILY TO
AVOID UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
NATIONALLY, FROM A MARKET
DEVELOPMENT STANDPOINT, WE THINK
THE FINAL RULE SHOULD BE
IMPLEMENTED BY THE TREASURY AS
PART OF THE RULES FOR THEIR
INCENTIVE PROGRAM. AND WE
BELIEVE THAT OUR EXISTING
POLICIES AND MECHANISMS ALREADY
ENSURE THAT ANY ELECTROLYTIC
HYDROGEN PRODUCED HERE WILL BE
CLEAN AND CLEANER OVER TIME. WE
ARE ALREADY A ROLE MODEL FOR THE
REST OF THE COUNTRY, SO THE
DEBATE THAT WE HAVE ON THE THREE
PILLARS IS A NATIONAL DEBATE
ABOUT WHETHER TO FORCE
COMPLIANCE SOONER AND OR
SELECTIVELY ON ONE LOAD, BECAUSE
OF OUR EXISTING CLEAN ENERGY
POLICY WITH THE RPS AND SB 100.
THAT'S WHY WE DON'T NEED THREE
PILLARS TO BE APPLIED TO FAST
GROWING LOADS LIKE AI DATA
CENTERS, BATTERY ELECTRIC
VEHICLES. AND WE THINK IN THE
NEAR TUM WE DON'T NEED IT FOR
ELECTROLYTIC HYDROGEN PRODUCTION
EITHER. SO FOR THIS REASON WE
RESPECTFULLY ALSO OFFER THE
SUGGESTION THAT WE THINK IT
WOULD BE A MISTAKE TO
PREEMPTIVELY IMPLEMENT
ADDITIONAL THREE PILLARS
GUIDELINES IN STATE LAW, BECAUSE
OUR WORRY IS IT WOULD
DISADVANTAGE CALIFORNIA VIS A
VIS THE INCENTIVE PROGRAM THAT'S
BEING ROLLED OUT NATIONALLY. AND
LIKELY PUSH PRODUCTION OUTSIDE
OF THE STATE. IT WOULD IT WOULD
PUSH THE BENEFITS, THE ECONOMIC
BENEFITS, THE JOB CREATION, AND
PUT THE POLLUTION REDUCTION
BENEFITS ON THE END USE FOR
THEIR OUT OF REACH, WE THINK
ARCHES DOES HAVE A GREAT PLAN
FOR HOW TO GET STARTED AND BASED
ON ON TIME. OKAY AND BASED ON
UP, GO AHEAD AND BASED ON TWO
TWO SENTENCES. SO BASED ON THEIR
ANALYSIS WHICH WAS DONE, YOU
KNOW, BY THIRD PARTIES AND
OBJECTIVELY THAT THE THREE
PILLARS WOULD LIMIT THE AMOUNT
OF DIESEL WE CAN DISPLACE
SOMETHING ON THE ORDER OF 18.7
MILLION GALLONS PER YEAR, WHICH
WOULD BE COMBUSTED. AND THAT'S
JUST AT THE PORTS. SO I'LL JUST
WRAP BY SAYING IT'S SUPER
IMPORTANT THAT ALL OF US ALIGN
ON OUR GOAL TO END FOSSIL FUEL
USE, AND THAT STARTS BY
ACCELERATING THE DEVELOPMENT OF
A SCALABLE, RELIABLE, RENEWABLE
FUEL ALTERNATIVE. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND THE,
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS MISS CAITLIN
RUDNER SUTTER, CALIFORNIA STATE
DIRECTOR OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL
DEFENSE FUND. EXCELLENT. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. SUTTER,
APPRECIATE YOU INVITING ME HERE
TODAY. IT'S GOOD TO BE WITH YOU
ALL, I AM CAITLIN RUDNER,
SUTTER, CALIFORNIA, DIRECTOR FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND, I
THINK YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH EDF,
SO I WON'T GO INTO BACKGROUND AT
THIS POINT, I GUESS I WILL JUST
START BY SORT OF UNDERSCORING
THE IMPORTANCE OF THE OUTCOMES
THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO BE ACHIEVED
THROUGH THE THREE PILLARS
HYDROGEN, OF COURSE, HAS IMMENSE
POTENTIAL AS AN IMPORTANT
CLIMATE SOLUTION IN CERTAIN HARD
TO DECARBONIZE SECTORS. BUT IN
ORDER TO MAXIMIZE THE POTENTIAL
CLIMATE BENEFITS, IT MATTERS HOW
IT IS PRODUCED, HOW IT'S
MANAGED, AND HOW IT'S USED. AND
I KNOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
PRODUCTION TODAY, BUT THAT
ENTIRE VALUE CHAIN MATTERS WHEN
WE THINK ABOUT THE ROLE OF
HYDROGEN IN A DECARBONIZED
ECONOMY, ONE OF THE MOST
IMPORTANT FACTORS AND I'M
THINKING HERE SPECIFICALLY, OF
COURSE, ABOUT ELECTROLYTIC
HYDROGEN, ONE OF THIS IMPORTANT
FACTORS FOR DETERMINING THE
CLIMATE IMPACTS OF ELECTROLYTIC
HYDROGEN IS THE SOURCING OF
ELECTRICITY, IT'S, OF COURSE, A
VERY ENERGY INTENSIVE PROCESS,
EDF HAS DONE EXTENSIVE RESEARCH
ON THIS, AND OUR LATEST PEER
REVIEWED RESEARCH DEMONSTRATES
THAT WITHOUT ADDITIONALITY OR AS
I WILL GET INTO, POLICY THAT IS
INTENDED TO AVOID INCREASED
EMISSIONS, HYDROGEN CAN IN FACT
CAUSE SYSTEM WIDE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS TO BE SIGNIFICANT,
HIGHER RELATIVE TO THE FOSSIL
FUELS THAT WE'RE REPLACING. SO
ALL OF THIS IS TO SAY, IS THE
FOCUS ON EMISSIONS REALLY
MATTERS. AND THAT IS WHAT THE
GOAL OF THREE PILLARS IS, IS TO
MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE REDUCING
EMISSIONS AND NOT INCREASING
EMISSIONS, I'M NOT GOING TO
REHASH ALL OF THE ARGUMENTS THAT
WE'VE HAD ABOUT THREE PILLARS,
YOUR FIRST HEARING WAS EXCELLENT
AND COVERED A LOT OF GROUND ON
THAT, SO ALL I WILL SAY IS THIS
IT IS A FRAMEWORK REALLY
DESIGNED TO MAXIMIZE CLIMATE
BENEFITS, AND, YOU KNOW, JANICE
MENTIONED THE EU EXPERIENCE. AND
I THINK THAT DEMONSTRATES THAT,
THAT FRAMEWORK IS CERTAINLY
FEASIBLE. ALL OF THAT BEING
SAID, AND REMEMBERING OUR GOAL
IS ABOUT EMISSION REDUCTIONS,
THERE IS SOME POTENTIAL FOR
ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES TO THREE
PILLARS THAT COULD, UNDER VERY
CIRCUMSTANCES, CERTAIN
CIRCUMSTANCES ACHIEVE THE SAME
OUTCOME OF ENSURING WE DO NOT
SEE INCREASED POWER SECTOR
EMISSIONS, YOU KNOW, WE'VE
TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT
CURTAILMENTS AND, AND OTHER
APPROACHES, BUT WHAT I AM GOING
TO TALK ABOUT, IS AN ALTERNATIVE
TO THE INCREMENTALITY
REQUIREMENT BASED ON STATE
EMISSION CAPS. SO ECONOMY WIDE
EMISSION LIMITS THAT CAN
DEMONSTRATE THEIR EFFECTIVENESS
AT PREVENTING INCREASES IN
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.
CALIFORNIA IS PRETTY UNIQUE HERE
IN THAT THE CENTERPIECE OF OUR
CLIMATE POLICY IS AN ECONOMY
WIDE EMISSIONS CAP ESTABLISHED
UNDER AB 32, TYING HYDROGEN
ELIGIBILITY TO A STRINGENT STATE
EMISSIONS CAP COULD ACHIEVE THE
SAME OUTCOME AS THE
INCREMENTALITY PILLAR. THAT IS,
ENSURING SYSTEM WIDE EMISSIONS
DO NOT INCREASE AS A RESULT OF
HYDROGEN PRODUCTION. THE
INCREMENTALITY REQUIREMENT
ITSELF WITHIN THREE PILLARS IS A
PROXY FOR DETERMINING THAT
GENERATION USED FOR HYDROGEN
ELECTROLYSIS WOULD NOT HAVE
OTHERWISE EXISTED, BUT IT'S NOT
A PERFECT PROXY BECAUSE IT
CANNOT ENSURE THAT FUTURE CLEAN
GENERATION CAPACITY WOULD THAT
WOULD HAVE OTHERWISE EXISTED, TO
SERVE OTHER GRID CONNECTED END
USES IS NOT THEN IN THE FUTURE
DIVERTED TO HYDROGEN
ELECTROLYSIS, WHEREAS IN
EFFECTIVE STRINGENT STATE CAP
COULD PROVIDE AN ALTERNATIVE
MECHANISM TO PREVENT AGAINST
THAT. THERE ARE SOME
QUALIFICATIONS TO THIS THOUGH,
FIRST IS THIS APPLIES TO AN
EMISSIONS CAP WHICH IS DIFFERENT
FROM A CLEAN ENERGY STANDARD, A
RENEWABLE PORTFOLIO STANDARD,
INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLANS, ALL
OF THAT. THOSE ARE ALL
IMPORTANT, BUT THEY DON'T
PROVIDE THE SAME ASSURANCE OF
EMISSION REDUCTIONS BECAUSE
THERE IS NOT AN EMISSIONS LIMIT
AND EMISSIONS IS NOT THE METRIC
OF THOSE POLICIES. AN EMISSIONS
CAP IS FUNDAMENTALLY ABOUT
DECLINING GREENHOUSE GAS
POLLUTION AND NEEDS TO BE
SUFFICIENTLY STRINGENT TO ENSURE
THAT THE COVERED EMISSIONS ARE
IN FACT DECLINING, THE SECOND
QUALIFICATION IS THE
DELIVERABILITY BOUND NEEDS TO
ALIGN WITH THE STATE CAP, THAT
IS BOTH THE ELECTROLYZER AND THE
ELECTRICITY PROCURED ARE COVERED
BY THE CAP. CALIFORNIA DEALS
WITH THIS BY COVERING OUR
IMPORTED ELECTRICITY, WITH OUR
EMISSIONS CAP, AND THEN LASTLY,
LEAKAGE RISK THAT IS THE RISK OF
EMISSIONS DECREASING IN
CALIFORNIA. AND THEN INCREASING
OUTSIDE OF CALIFORNIA, NEEDS TO
BE MITIGATED AS MUCH AS
POSSIBLE. AND CALIFORNIA DOES
HAVE POLICY IN PLACE THAT THAT
DOES THAT IN THAT THOSE
IMPORTED, THAT IMPORTED
ELECTRICITY, THE IMPORTERS OF
ELECTRICITY MUST TURN IN
COMPLIANCE ALLOWANCES ON THE
BASIS OF THEIR EMISSIONS
INTENSITY FOR THE IMPORTED POWER
AND CARB ACTUALLY IS IN THE
PROCESS RIGHT NOW. THEY HAVE
CONTRACTED WITH A THIRD PARTY TO
DO AN ANALYSIS OF OUR LEAKAGE OR
EXISTING LEAKAGE POLICY TO SEE
IF IT'S WORKING, BASICALLY. SO
THAT WORK IS HAPPENING ALREADY,
AND I WILL JUST WRAP UP BY
SAYING THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO
REMEMBER THAT THE THREE PILLARS
ARE NOT THE END GOAL IN AND OF
THEMSELVES. THE END GOAL IS TO
ENSURE THAT THE BUILDOUT OF A
HYDROGEN ECONOMY DOES NOT
INCREASE EMISSIONS AND INCREASE
CLIMATE POLLUTION, INSTEAD OF
DECREASE CLIMATE POLLUTION. AND
SO WHEN WE HAVE ROBUST AND
AMBITIOUS POLICY IN PLACE THAT
CAN ENSURE THAT EMISSIONS DO NOT
INCREASE, THAT SHOULD BE
CONSIDERED, ALONG WITH FURTHER
MODELING AND ANALYSIS AND ALL OF
THAT, AND, AND ASSUMING IT IS
SUFFICIENTLY STRINGENT AND
DURABLE AND MINIMIZES LEAKAGE,
CALIFORNIA'S EMISSIONS CAP COULD
POTENTIALLY FIT THE BILL. THANK
YOU BOTH VERY MUCH. AND I WANT
YOU TO KNOW THAT WE WELCOME IF
YOU HAVE A THOUGHT ABOUT
SOMETHING THAT SOMEBODY BUT BUT
EITHER ONE OF YOU HAVE SAID,
FEEL FREE TO OFFER THAT IN TERMS
OF COMMENTS AS WE'RE DOING THESE
QUESTIONS AND QUESTIONS AND
ANSWERS, ETC, BECAUSE OUR OUR
GOAL IS TO TRY TO GET US AS MUCH
GOOD THINKING OUT THERE AS
POSSIBLE AND AGAIN, MAKE SURE
THAT COMMENTS ARE MADE IN AN
ENVIRONMENT WHERE THEY CAN BE
COUNTERED. BY THE OPPOSITION, SO
I'M GOING TO START WITH YOU,
MISS LYNN, AND THAT IS, I
APPRECIATE THAT YOU SAID YOU
ALIGN YOURSELVES WITH ARCHES.
ARCHES, POSITION HAS IT HAS
BEEN, YOU KNOW, TO NOT HAVE THE
THREE PILLARS, YOU SHOULD NOT
ADOPT THE THREE PILLARS IN YOUR,
FAIRLY EXTENSIVE DOCUMENT THAT
YOU SUBMITTED TO THE TREASURY
DEPARTMENT. YOU ACTUALLY HAVE
SOME SOLUTIONS LIKE
GRANDFATHERING AND, QUARTERLY
MATCHING, ETC. SO, SINCE THE
FOCUS OF THIS PANEL IS ON
CREATIVE POLICY SOLUTIONS, YOU
KNOW, WE HAVE OVER HERE DON'T DO
ANYTHING WITH THREE PILLARS. AND
SO TO THE EXTENT THAT PEOPLE
ALIGN THEMSELVES WITH THAT,
THAT'S THAT'S FINE. WE'RE AND WE
HAD A WHOLE DISCUSSION ABOUT DO
WE OR DON'T WE RIGHT NOW IF I'D
LIKE TO FOCUS ON SO YOU TALKED
ABOUT GRANDFATHERING PROJECTS IN
AND IN YOUR, DOCUMENT YOU TALKED
ABOUT. BUT AT SOME POINT IN TIME
HAVE HOURLY MATCHING BE, YOU
KNOW, BE THE BE THE STANDARD AND
BE THE REQUIREMENT. AM I
CORRECT? THERE WAS A YES. THESE
WERE OUR AND WE DID SHARE OUR
COMMENTS WITH EVERY, MEMBER OF
THE SELECT COMMITTEE. WE ALREADY
HAVE. YES. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU,
SO THESE WERE COMMENTS TO THE
TREASURY AND. OUR
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE TREASURY,
ARE THAT AS, CAITLYN SAID, THAT
THE GOALS OF THE THREE PILLARS
IS TO REDUCE EMISSIONS AND TO
ENSURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE
UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES ON A
NATIONAL BASIS. AND, WE ALSO HAD
A PRETTY EXTENSIVE SECTION THAT
NOT EVERY STATE SHOULD BE
TREATED THE SAME. THERE ARE
STATES OUT THERE THAT STILL RELY
ON A LOT OF FOSSIL FUELS IN
THEIR POWER SECTOR, SO WE NEED
TO HAVE A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD.
FIRST OF ALL, WE DON'T. IDEALLY,
THE WAY WE SEE IT IS THAT
RENEWABLE HYDROGEN WILL BE ONE
OF THE WORLD'S MOST TRADED
COMMODITIES. SO THE MORE WE CAN
HARMONIZE, ESPECIALLY OUR
FEDERAL INCENTIVE PROGRAM AROUND
A COMMON ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA,
THE BETTER. JUST NOT EVERY STATE
NEEDS TO BE TREATED THE SAME, IN
OUR COMMENTS, WE ALSO WE MADE
VERY STRONG RECOMMENDATIONS
ABOUT NOT TO REWARD FOR PUNISH
FIRST MOVERS. RIGHT. IT'S THOSE
FIRST PROJECTS THAT ARE SO HARD
TO GET GOING. IT'S SO HARD TO
FINANCE A PROJECT, AND TO HAVE
THE RULES CHANGE IN BETWEEN.
THAT'S WHY WE'RE STRONGLY
SUPPORTIVE OF GRANDFATHERING.
FOR EXAMPLE, IN TERMS OF
INCREMENTAL RESOURCE USE, I
THINK JUST LIKE BLUNTLY SAYING,
IS IT NEW WITHIN THREE YEARS, IS
NOT REFINED ENOUGH, RIGHT. WE
NEED TO LOOK AT, WAS IT
REPOWERED? WAS IT UPGRADED? WAS
IT EXPANDED, WE NEED TO CONSIDER
ANY CURTAILED RENEWABLE
ELECTRICITY, YOU KNOW, WE'VE
BEEN TALKING A LOT OF WIND AND
SOLAR. WHAT ABOUT HYDRO UNITS
THAT HAVE BEEN INSTALLED OR
FULLY DEPRECIATED? AND MAYBE
THEY ARE BEING CYCLED
DIFFERENTLY TODAY BECAUSE OF
INTERMITTENT GENERATION? WOULD
WE NOT BE ABLE TO USE THAT
PREEXISTING RESOURCE THAT'S
RIGHT THERE IN A MORE EFFECTIVE
WAY? SO FUNDAMENTALLY IT'S ABOUT
SYSTEM OPTIMIZATION. SO IF I
COULD ASK, YOUR ADVOCACY FOR
GRANDFATHERING IN, I ASSUME IS
BECAUSE WHEN PEOPLE DO A
PROJECT, THE LOGIC THAT I WANT
TO CHECK MYSELF IN TERMS OF THE
LOGIC BEING, WELL, WHEN THEY
WHEN THEY CREATE THE PROJECT
THAT THEY WANT TO KNOW, THESE
ARE THE THESE ARE THE RULES THAT
I HAVE TO MEET FOR THIS PROJECT.
AND WE SHOULD SAY WE WOULD NEVER
WE'D NEVER TIGHTEN THAT UP.
COULD COULD IT WOULD WITH
GRANDFATHERING. WE WOULD NEVER
BE ABLE TO GO BACK AND SAY, HEY,
YOU NOW HAVE TO MOVE FROM IF YOU
CAME IN UNDER ANNUAL, ANNUAL,
YOU KNOW, MATCHING OR IF YOU
CAME UNDER QUARTERLY MATCHING,
NO MATTER HOW GOOD THE
TECHNOLOGY GETS, ETC, OR HOW
EASY IT MAY BECOME BECAUSE OF
TECHNOLOGY TO DO HOURLY MATCHING
THAT THAT WOULDN'T BE
APPROPRIATE FROM FROM YOUR
PERSPECTIVE, IT'S, YOU KNOW,
IT'S OUR VIEW THAT IT'S SO HARD
TO FINANCE AND GET A PROJECT
DEVELOPED TODAY THAT HAVING TO
PLAN FOR THAT CHANGE TODAY,
BECAUSE THESE ARE FUNDAMENTALLY
CAPITAL INTENSIVE ASSETS, RIGHT?
RIGHT. LIKE ALL THE UPFRONT COST
NEEDS TO BE PLANNED FOR, YOU
NEED TO PROJECT YOUR YOUR IRR,
YOUR CASH FLOW TODAY. IT'S
REALLY DIFFICULT TO FIGURE OUT
HOW TO SWITCH THAT MIDSTREAM. WE
DON'T EVEN HAVE, YOU KNOW, WE
HAD A WHOLE SECTION ABOUT NOT
GETTING AHEAD OF WHERE THE
MONITORING AND COMPLIANCE,
ORGANIZATIONS ARE, RIGHT? LIKE,
HOW WOULD YOU DO YOU DO YOU DO
HAVE A SECTION ON AFTER A
CERTAIN TIME PERIOD, THOSE
PROJECTS SHOULD HAVE TO MEET THE
NEW STANDARD OF HOURLY MATCHING,
CORRECT. AFTER A CERTAIN DATE.
IT'S LIKE IF YOU'RE YOUR
GRANDFATHERED IN, IF YOU COME IN
AT THIS POINT AT X TIME, YOU'RE
GRANDFATHERED IN. YES. IF YOU IF
YOU COME IN FOR NEW PROJECTS
AFTER, MAYBE IT'S 2030. I DON'T
HAVE THE DETAILS, BUT THE NEW
PROJECT AFTER A CERTAIN DATE,
ALL NEW PROJECTS WOULD HAVE TO
BE HOURLY MATCHED. THAT'S
CORRECT. PROVIDED PROVIDED THAT
THE MONITORING AND COMPLIANCE
ORGANIZATIONS THAT NEED TO
CERTIFY AND DO THIS CAN HAVE
BEEN IN PLACE AND HAVE THE AND
HAVE DEMONSTRATED THAT FOR AT
LEAST A YEAR. SO YOU HAVE TO
WORK OUT THE KINKS AND
CALIFORNIA BEING A LEADER WOULD
PROBABLY, AT SOME POINT IN TIME
HAVE THE AGENCIES THAT WOULD BE
ABLE TO DO HOURLY MATCHING. I
WOULD, I WOULD HOPE RIGHT.
CERTAINLY SO CALIFORNIA,
WHATEVER THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
DOES WITH RESPECT TO THE THREE
PILLARS, THERE'S A VERY STRONG
INCENTIVE OF FINANCIAL INCENTIVE
FOR ANY PROJECT THAT'S DEVELOPED
HERE TO COMPLY. AND IT'S JUST
HARD TO SAY NOW EXACTLY WHEN
THOSE, THOSE BODIES, THOSE
COMPLIANCE AND TRACKING
ORGANIZATIONS WILL BE READY
WOULD BE DEVELOPED. YEAH. BUT
BUT BUT YOUR YOUR DOCUMENT DID
IDENTIFY THAT AFTER A CERTAIN
DATE HOURLY MATCHING WOULD BE
APPROPRIATE. RIGHT THANK YOU, IF
I COULD GO HERE, YOU YOU YOU YOU
YOU'RE TRYING TO HAVE THE FOCUS
BE BY, BY BY. YOU'RE TRYING TO
HAVE THE FOCUS BE ON EMISSIONS.
LET'S LET'S NOT GET AS CAUGHT UP
IN ALL THE OTHER STUFF. BUT JUST
BOTTOM LINE IS WE HAVE TO HAVE
VERIFIABLE EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS.
AND IF WE'RE DOING IT IN A WAY
THAT IS ACTUALLY CAUSING
EMISSIONS TO GO UP, WHICH IS
WHAT SOME PEOPLE ARE CONCERNED
ABOUT WITH, WITH HYDROGEN,
HYDROGEN DONE THE WRONG WAY.
SOME PEOPLE ARE SAYING, WELL,
CAUSE EMISSIONS GO UP, CORRECT,
HYDROGEN PRODUCED HEAVILY BY
FOSSIL FUEL WOULD NOT, NOT, NOT
NOT FIT. BUT CAN YOU EXPLAIN A
LITTLE BIT MORE HOW HOW, AN
EMISSIONS CAP COULD WORK? SURE.
WHAT IS IT THAT YOU WHAT DO YOU
PROPOSE TO IN TERMS OF IF. SURE.
THERE WAS AN IF THERE WAS AN
INTEREST IN THAT, HOW WOULD HOW
WOULD IT WORK? CORRECT SO I
GUESS LET ME START BY SAYING I
AM ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE WHO IS
CONCERNED THAT THAT HYDROGEN
WILL ACTUALLY BE HARMFUL TO THE
CLIMATE IF WE DON'T DO IT RIGHT.
SO I THINK THOSE ARE VERY REAL
CONCERNS. AND THOSE CONCERNS
EXIST AT EVERY STEP ALONG THE
VALUE CHAIN, SO I MEAN, THAT'S
THAT'S A VERY REAL CONCERN,
FUNDAMENTALLY, YOU KNOW, THE,
THE FRAMEWORK OF THE THREE
PILLARS IS, IS TO PREVENT ON THE
PRODUCTION SIDE, ESPECIALLY FOR
ELECTROLYTIC HYDROGEN, THAT WE
AREN'T CREATING A CLIMATE
PROBLEM INSTEAD OF A CLIMATE
SOLUTION, RECOGNIZE HUSING THAT,
YOU KNOW, CALIFORNIA DOES HAVE A
SIGNIFICANT SUITE OF CLIMATE
POLICIES, YOU KNOW, WHERE WHERE
ARE WE TRULY NOT TO MAKE A BAD
PUN, BUT WHERE IS THE POLICY
ADDITIONAL, AND I AND THAT'S
WHERE WE STARTED LOOKING AT THE
EMISSIONS CAP, BECAUSE THE
REASON AND TO BE CLEAR,
CALIFORNIA HAS AN EMISSIONS CAP
THAT COVERS ABOUT 80% OF OUR
ECONOMY. IT IS ENFORCED BY A
DECLINING NUMBER OF ALLOWANCES.
SO EVERY SINGLE YEAR, THE
CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD
ISSUES A SET NUMBER OF
ALLOWANCES, AND ONE ALLOWANCE
EQUALS ONE TON OF GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS. AND THERE ARE FEWER
AND FEWER AND FEWER OVER TIME,
WHICH IS WHY WE CAN SAY WITH
MUCH GREATER CERTAINTY THAT
EMISSIONS WILL IN FACT GO DOWN
OVER TIME, BECAUSE THE NUMBER OF
PERMITS AVAILABLE, IF YOU WILL,
GOES DOWN OVER TIME, CALIFORNIA
IS ONE OF TWO STATES THAT HAS
THIS WASHINGTON STATE JUST
ADOPTED A VERY SIMILAR APPROACH
A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. NEW YORK
IS CONSIDERING IT RIGHT NOW.
MARYLAND IS CONSIDERING IT RIGHT
NOW, SO, I MEAN, THIS IS THIS IS
SOMETHING THAT CALIFORNIA HAS
HAD IN PLACE FOR OVER A DECADE
AT THIS POINT, AND THE CERTAINTY
IT PROVIDES BECAUSE OF THOSE,
YOU KNOW, DECLINING NUMBER OF
ALLOWANCES IS VERY UNIQUE
COMPARED TO A PROCUREMENT
STANDARD OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT,
OR LIKE THE RENEWABLE PORTFOLIO
STANDARD, WHICH, WHICH IS
IMPORTANT, LIKE DON'T MISS
MISHEAR THIS, BUT IT PLAYS A
DIFFERENT ROLE THAN THE
EMISSIONS CAP CAN. WOULD IT BE A
SIMILAR STRUCTURE TO HOW WE HAVE
AB 32 RIGHT NOW, OR DO YOU SEE
IT AS BEING DIFFERENT? HOW CAN
YOU FOR ASSEMBLY MEMBERS, CAN
YOU JUST GIVE US THE BASIC
STRUCTURE OF HOW YOU WOULD SEE
AN EMISSIONS CAP WORKING WITH,
WITH THE HYDROGEN SECTOR? SURE
SO I MEAN, THIS WOULD BE ENABLED
BY AB 32. BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT,
YOU KNOW, ENABLED THE
DEVELOPMENT OF AN ECONOMY WIDE
EMISSIONS CAP. I THINK THE WAY
WE WOULD IMAGINE THIS WORKING
AND THIS IS I'M GOING TO ANSWER
YOUR QUESTION, IS WHEN WE THINK
ABOUT 45 VÆ, FOR INSTANCE, THE
THREE PILLARS SHOULD BE THE
FOUNDATION. AND THEN WE COULD
ENVISION SOME SORT OF PROCESS
WHERE A CALIFORNIA PROJECT, OR
WHETHER ARCHES APPLIES TO DOE,
FOR A DIFFERENT APPROACH BECAUSE
BECAUSE OF THE EMISSIONS CAP
THAT IS ALREADY IN PLACE, NOW WE
NEED TO HAVE A LONG TERME
EMISSIONS CAP WELL BEYOND 2030.
SO THERE'S, THERE'S SOME THINGS
WE NEED TO DEAL WITH HERE, BUT,
BUT IT BASICALLY WOULD BE THAT
PROCESS THAT A PROJECT WOULD
DEMONSTRATE THAT, YOU KNOW, OUR
EMISSIONS, THE SYSTEM WIDE
EMISSIONS ARE NOT GOING TO GO UP
BECAUSE OF OUR PROJECT, BECAUSE
OF THE SYSTEM THAT IS IN PLACE.
SO WE SO IF I COULD BE CLEAR. SO
A PROJECT COULD MEET THE THREE
PILLARS OR A PROJECT COULD SAY
WE'RE NOT GOING TO MEET THE
THREE PILLARS SPECIFICALLY, BUT
WE ARE GOING TO QUALIFY UNDER
THE EMISSIONS CAP. IS THAT WHAT
YOU'RE SAYING? AM I? IT IS. THIS
APPLIES TO THE ADDITIONALITY
PILLAR. EXACTLY. SO IT'S WE'RE
GOING TO MEET THE YOU KNOW I'M
SORRY. WE'RE NOT GOING TO MEET
THE ADDITIONALITY PILLAR.
CORRECT YEAH. AND INSTEAD OF
MEETING THE ADDITIONALITY
PILLAR, WE'RE GOING TO APPLY
UNDER THE EMISSIONS CAP. WE ARE
SUBJECT TO THIS OTHER PROGRAM
THAT ENSURES THAT SYSTEM WIDE
EMISSIONS DECREASE AS THE
ADDITIONALITY PILLAR IS ALSO
ATTACHED AS A CREATIVE SOLUTION
TO THE ADDITIONALITY PILLAR. BUT
THERE'D STILL BE THE OTHER
PILLARS WOULD STILL BE IN FORCE.
RIGHT, MEMBERS, QUESTIONS? I DO
THANK YOU. ASSEMBLY MEMBER
CARILLO THANK YOU, I'M NOT
FAMILIAR WITH THE DOCUMENT THAT
YOU TALKED ABOUT WHERE YOU
SUGGEST TO GRANDFATHER,
FACILITIES, WOULD THAT, ALLOW
FOR THOSE GRANDFATHER FACILITIES
IF THAT WERE THE CASE TO COME
INTO COMPLIANCE? IF THEY DECIDE
TO EXPAND THEIR FACILITY, IN
USING LAND USE TERMS WHEN A
FACILITY IS BEING, EXIST. AND IF
THEY WANT TO EXPAND TO WHETHER
IT BE IN 25% OR 50, THEN WOULD
THAT BE A RECOMMENDATION THAT
THAT'S THE TIME WHEN THE
FACILITY WOULD HAVE TO COMPLY
WITH THE STANDARDS THAT ARE
GOING TO BE SET FOR HYDROGEN?
WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT YOU
SEE POSSIBLE? YEAH, THAT'S AN
EXCELLENT QUESTION. AND THAT
LEVEL OF DETAIL WAS NOT IN OUR
COMMENTS. BUT IT IS A CERTAINLY
A GREAT SCENARIO THAT WAS, YOU
KNOW, IS WORTH THINKING ABOUT.
THAT'S IT'S THERE'S SO MANY
LAYERS TO THIS AT A POINT IN
TIME IN THE FUTURE, IF A
FACILITY WERE TO CHANGE AND
UPDATE, YOU WOULD IMAGINE THAT
THAT WOULD BE A NEW FINANCING, A
NEW DEVELOPMENT PROJECT. AND
DEPENDING ON WHAT THE TREASURY'S
RULES ARE AT THE TIME, MY GUESS,
AND I DON'T KNOW HOW THE IRS
ULTIMATELY IT WILL BE UP TO THEM
TO DECIDE THAT PARTICULAR
CIRCUMSTANCE, BUT BUT I DON'T
KNOW HOW THEY WOULD RULE, BUT I
COULD IMAGINE THAT THAT THAT
COULD BE SOMETHING THAT THEY
WOULD SAY, WELL, YOU'RE IF
YOU'RE IN THE, YOU KNOW, NEW
PROJECT TIME LIMIT, YOU HAVE TO
COMPLY NULLIUS IN THE
GRANDFATHER IN TERMS FOR
LOCATIONS WHERE THERE'S BEEN
HEAVY INVESTMENT AND THAT ARE
PRACTICALLY SHOVEL READY TO
START THE, THE FACILITY BECAUSE
BECAUSE OF THE INVESTMENT,
BECAUSE OF THE TIME THAT THEY'VE
GONE THROUGH ANTICIPATING THAT
WE'LL FIND A SOLUTION SOON
ENOUGH FOR THESE FACILITIES TO
BE ABLE TO BREAK GROUND AGAIN,
BEING SHOVEL READY AND KEEPING
IN MIND THE CONSTRAINTS OF THE
THREE PILLARS. ONE OF THEM THAT
YOU JUST MENTIONED, THE
ADDITIONAL PILLAR,
ADDITIONALITY. I'M SORRY, AND
THE OTHER PILLAR WHERE 100%
RENEWABLE ENERGY MAY NOT BE THE
STARTING POINT. WHAT IF IT'S 60,
70? SO THAT WE ARE ABLE TO JUMP
START THIS, SHOVEL READY
FACILITIES, AND AGAIN, TO BE
ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE
FEDERAL FUNDING THAT'S
AVAILABLE. AND I SAY THAT
BECAUSE YOU MENTIONED THAT THERE
ARE OTHER STATES THAT ARE STILL
PRODUCING ENERGY FOR VERY, VERY
DIRTY. AND TO ME, THAT REALLY
PUTS US IN A BIG DISADVANTAGE
NOT KNOWING HOW THESE OTHER
STATES ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO
RECEIVE THE FUNDING FROM THE
FEDERAL MONEY THAT'S AVAILABLE.
THAT WOULD PUT US AT A
DISADVANTAGE, RATHER THAN
PUTTING CALIFORNIA AT AN
ADVANTAGE FOR HAVING BEEN SO
PROACTIVE IN THE CLEAN ENERGY
GOALS THAT WE HAVE SET, AGAIN,
NOT KNOWING WHAT THOSE STATES
ARE AND, AND KNOWING IF THERE
WOULD BENEFIT FROM THIS FEDERAL
FUNDING, BUT TO ME, THAT'S A
REAL CONCERN. HAVING NOT, THE
EQUAL PLAYING FIELD FOR
CALIFORNIA SINCE, AGAIN, WE'VE
BEEN ABLE TO PUT THESE
AGGRESSIVE GOALS, TO PROVIDE
PRODUCE, CLEAN ENERGY. AND THOSE
STATES, YOU KNOW, WHO ARE NOT
EVEN FRIENDLY IN PRODUCING CLEAN
ENERGY, WOULD THAT PUT US AT A
BIG DISADVANTAGE? AND I THINK
THAT IT WOULD, AGAIN, NOT
KNOWING IF THOSE STATES ARE
GOING TO BE RECEIVING FUNDING, I
COULDN'T AGREE WITH YOU MORE.
AND IN FACT, THAT'S WHY WE
RECOMMENDED THAT FOR STATES LIKE
CALIFORNIA THAT HAVE THESE
REQUIREMENTS, THESE EMISSION
CAPS, MANDATES IN OUR RENEWABLE
POWER SECTOR, THE TREASURY
SHOULD NOT PUNISH STATES LIKE
FOR IN FACT, WE SHOULD BE HELD
UP AS A HIGHER STANDARD AND SAY
LIKE ENCOURAGED. YEAH. AND JUST
TO CLOSE ON ON WHAT YOU SAID
ABOUT, PUNISHING THOSE, RED
SITES, SHOVEL READY PROJECTS TO
START THIS TECHNOLOGY. Kò,
THAT'S A REAL CONCERN FOR ME
HAVING TO PUNISH THOSE THAT HAVE
BEEN TRYING TO COMPLY AND NOW
WITH THIS, NEW REQUIREMENT THAT
WE'RE EXPLORING TO TALK ABOUT
THE THREE PILLARS, THAT HAS TO
BE 100, I WOULD ASK THAT THE
CHAIR THAT WE START A
CONVERSATION TO SEE HOW WE CAN
FACILITATE THAT WITH THE
ULTIMATE GOAL TO GET TO THE 100%
ON THE THREE PILLARS IS, EVERY
TECHNOLOGY THAT IS ARISING, WE
KNOW THAT WITHIN TIME, AND
SOONER THAN LATER, WE'LL BE ABLE
TO ADVANCE IN TECHNOLOGY TO BE
ABLE TO MEET THE THREE PILLARS,
WOULD APPRECIATE IF WE ARE ABLE
TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION. OAN.
GREAT. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
WELL, THAT'S EXACTLY WHY WE'RE
IN THIS PART OF THE PANEL, WHICH
IS WHAT OUR CREATIVE SOLUTIONS
AND PHASING IN AS A CREATIVE
SOLUTION, YOU KNOW, RELYING ON
AN EMISSIONS CAP AND, YOU KNOW,
SORT OF ACCELERATING OR
EMPHASIZING THE EMISSIONS CAP,
YOU KNOW, FOR THAT, I, I WANT TO
MAKE SURE ANY ANYTHING ELSE I
WANT TO BECAUSE THIS IS THE MOST
IMPORTANT PART OF, OF THE, OF
THE TASK AHEAD OF US IS, YOU
KNOW, HOW DO WE SQUARE THESE,
YOU KNOW, SORT OF STAKEHOLDERS
AND VERY, YOU KNOW, SOME
STAKEHOLDERS VERY FAR APART AND
OTHER STAKEHOLDERS SOMEWHERE IN
BETWEEN. BUT HOW DO WE SQUARE
ALL OF THAT, I'D LIKE TO EXAMINE
A COUPLE OF THINGS, IF I COULD.
ONE, ON THIS ISSUE OF, OF
ADDITIONALITY, I'M GOING TO RUN
SOMETHING BY THAT I HAVE IN MY
HEAD AND GIVE YOU BOTH A CHANCE
TO, TO RESPOND TO IT. AND THAT
IS IF HYDROGEN IF THERE IS AN
INCENTIVE. PAID BY THE
GOVERNMENT, FOR USING RENEWABLE
RESOURCES WHEN YOU PRODUCE YOUR
HYDROGEN, WHICH IS WHAT THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS OUT THERE
RIGHT NOW, THAT WILL, THAT WILL
THAT WILL POTENTIALLY GIVE
HYDROGEN PRODUCERS AN
OPPORTUNITY TO, OUTCOMPETE THE
COMMUNITY CHOICE AGGREGATES FOR
THE RENEWABLE POWER THAT THEY
ARE, BY LAW, MANDATED THAT THEY
HAVE TO BUY. SO THEY HAVE TO BUY
THAT RENEWABLE ENERGY, WHICH
MEANS THEN THOSE COMMUNITY
CHOICE AGGREGATES WILL HAVE TO
TRY TO COMPETE AND RAISE THE
PRICE ALSO. AND SO ONE OF THE
CONCEPTS OF ADDITIONALITY IS NÓ.
THE HYDROGEN PRODUCER, THE NEW
HYDROGEN PRODUCER CAN'T JUST
COME AND BUY UP THE RENEWABLE
RESOURCE THAT'S BEING USED BY
THE COMMUNITY CHOICE AGGREGATE.
THEY HAVE TO COME UP WITH A
CREATIVE WAY FOR A NEW RENEWABLE
RESOURCE. EITHER CREATE ONE OR
USE THE CURTAILED ENERGY OR, YOU
KNOW, SOMETHING, YOU KNOW,
REPOWER UP SOMETHING THAT WAS
ALREADY OUT THERE. SO IF WE, IF
WE JUST ALLOW IF WE DON'T, IF WE
DON'T HAVE THAT AS A REQUIREMENT
FOR NEW, NEW START UPS BECAUSE
WE KEEP, YOU KNOW, WE SAY WE
DON'T WANT TO WE DON'T A
HAMSTRING A NEW STARTUP, RIGHT.
IF THE, IF THE, IF THE NEW
STARTUP, IS GOING TO, NOT HAVE
THAT REQUIREMENT, WE HAVE THAT
POTENTIAL PROBLEM WITH HYDROGEN
WITH A $3 CREDIT COMPETING WITH
THE WITH THE COMMUNITY CHOICE
AGGREGATES BECAUSE THE ARGUMENT
I HEAR FROM THE COMMUNITY CHOICE
AGGREGATES CONSTANTLY ABOUT THE
DRAWING A BLANK ON THE RESOURCE
ADEQUACY REQUIREMENT THAT THEY
HAVE IS THEY'RE COMPETING WITH
EACH OTHER BECAUSE THERE'S A
FIXED NUMBER OF RENEWABLE
RESOURCES, AND THEY CAN'T REALLY
EXPAND THE NUMBER OF RENEWABLE
RESOURCES, PARTIALLY BECAUSE OF
HOW THE GRID IS SET UP, ETC. SO
THAT IS A BIG ARGUMENT FOR
ADDITIONALITY. MY UNDERSTANDING,
THAT'S A THAT'S A BIG ARGUMENT
FOR ADDITIONALITY. I APPRECIATE
SEEING YOU BOTH SHAKING YOUR
HEAD. AND SO IF WE ALLOW THE
BEGINNING COMPANIES TO NOT HAVE
AN ADDITIONALITY REQUIREMENT,
HOW DO WE ADDRESS THAT CONCERN
THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE A
CROWDING OUT IN THE SHORT RUN OF
THE RENEWABLE RESOURCES THAT
THEY ARE ARE BUYING? THEY WANT
TO GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO
AND YOU MIGHT SAY THERE ISN'T.
SO YOU MIGHT SAY THERE IS, BUT
YOU MIGHT SAY YOUR SOLUTION
MIGHT ADDRESS THAT. IT MIGHT
NOT. BUT GO AHEAD EITHER ONE OF
YOU. RIGHT. SO A COUPLE
THOUGHTS, I GUESS FIRST I THINK
OF THE THREE PILLARS AGAIN IS
FUNDAMENTALLY ABOUT PREVENTING
AN INCREASE IN EMISSIONS, NOT
ENSURING CARS HAVE A LOW PRICE
FOR THEIR POWER. CAN I JUST I'M
JUST GOING TO INTERRUPT YOU
HERE, HERE'S HERE'S HOW IT TURNS
INTO AN INCREASED EMISSIONS AT
SOME POINT IN TIME. IF THERE'S
AN INCREASE IN DEMAND FOR
ELECTRICITY AND YOU CAN'T EXPAND
YOUR RENEWABLE RESOURCES, THEN
THEY'RE NOT GOING TO LET THE
GRID GO DOWN. THEY'RE JUST GOING
TO GO OUT AND USE NATURAL GAS TO
INCREASE. YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY'S
GOING TO USE MORE NATURAL GAS.
LET'S YOU KNOW, EITHER A CCA IS
GOING TO MEET THE VIOLATE THEIR
REQUIREMENT BECAUSE THEY CAN'T
COMPETE AFTER THE PRICES GO UP
OR SOMETHING'S GOING TO HAPPEN.
BUT IF THE ENERGY DEMAND GOES
UP. SO THAT'S HOW IT RELATES TO
EMISSIONS. SO IT'S NOT BECAUSE
OUR GOAL HERE IS TO PROTECT THE
CARS NECESSARILY. ALTHOUGH WE
ARE, AS A LEGISLATURE, CONCERNED
ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT
ELECTRICITY RATES DON'T KEEP
GOING UP HIGHER AND HIGHER,
WHICH COULD HAPPEN WITH THIS
COMPETITION. BUT ANYWAY, BACK TO
YOU THAT THAT WAS ACTUALLY KIND
OF WHERE I WANTED TO GO IS I
THINK THERE IS A BIGGER QUESTION
HERE. AND THAT IS WE NEED TO
BUILD SO MUCH MORE CLEAN
GENERATION, SORT OF REGARDLESS,
I MEAN, BOTH TO PRODUCE
HYDROGEN, BUT ALSO TO ENSURE
THAT WE MEET OUR EXISTING CLEAN
ENERGY GOALS, TO ENSURE THAT WE
IMPROVE RELIABILITY, WE NEED TO
INCREASE OUR CONNECTION WITH THE
REST OF THE WEST AND CLEAN
RESOURCES THAT ARE PRODUCED
ACROSS THE REGION, SO I HEAR THE
CONCERN, I THINK THERE IS SO
MUCH MORE WE NEED TO DO TO
ADDRESS THAT CONCERN BEYOND,
BEYOND JUST THE THREE PILLARS, I
GUESS. I MEAN, THIS IS THIS IS A
MUCH, BUT YES, WE NEED TO BUILD
A WHOLE LOT OF CLEAN GENERATION.
THE FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE OF OUR
TIME RIGHT NOW. ABSOLUTELY. FROM
FROM A STANDPOINT OF ENERGY, IS
SO WE NEED AS MANY INCENTIVES AS
POSSIBLE TO CREATE MORE
RENEWABLE ENERGY. I WANT TO TURN
IT BACK OVER TO MISS LIN. YEAH.
I I AGREE WITH YOU, CAITLYN. AND
YOU KNOW, ULTIMATELY IT'S A IT'S
A CHALLENGE OF SYSTEM
OPTIMIZATION. AND I MEAN, SYSTEM
OPTIMIZATION IN THE BROADEST
SENSE, FIRST OF ALL, STARTING
WITH THE CCAS IN THIS CASE, YOU
MENTIONED LIKELY THEY ALL HAVE
LONG TERME CONTRACTS FOR NOW IN
THE SHORT TERMS. SO THOSE WOULD
NOT BE DISRUPTED IF THEY'RE IN A
PERVERSE WAY. I ACTUALLY THINK
THE ADDITIONALITY REQUIREMENT
MAY MAKE IT MORE EXPENSIVE TO
PRODUCE. WELL, IT WILL MAKE IT
MORE EXPENSIVE TO PRODUCE
ELECTROLYTIC HYDROGEN BECAUSE OF
THE ADDITIONALITY REQUIREMENTS.
SOME OF THE WAY THE DRAFT RULE
HAS BEEN WRITTEN, IT WOULD
PROHIBIT YOU FROM EXISTING
UTILIZING EXISTING RESOURCES.
REMEMBER MY HYDRO EXAMPLE OR
CURTAILED RENEWABLES SUPER
EFFECTIVELY, AND WHAT YOU WOULD
WANT IS THROUGH THAT INCENTIVE
TO ENCOURAGE MORE DEVELOPMENT
AND REMEMBER NOT ALL THE
DEVELOPMENT OF RENEWABLE
ELECTRICITY PLANTS IS GOING TO
BE PUMPED. PUMPING THE
ELECTRICITY THROUGH THE GRID.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF
LARGE SCALE PROJECTS THAT ARE
CO-LOCATED, AND THE ADVANTAGE OF
USING SOME GRID ELECTRICITY IS
NOW YOU CAN IMPROVE THE CAPACITY
FACTOR OF THAT ELECTROLYSIS
EQUIPMENT. SO INSTEAD OF JUST
RUNNING IT, SAY 6 OR 7 HOURS A
DAY WITH YOUR BIG CO-LOCATED
SOLAR FARM, YOU CAN PLUG IN AND
TAKE CLEAN ENERGY OFF THE GRID
AT NIGHT. AND WHEN YOU CAN RUN
THAT ELECTROLYSIS EQUIPMENT MORE
FULLY, IT DROPS THE COST DOWN.
AND FROM A SYSTEM OPTIMIZATION
POINT, THE HYDROGEN THAT'S BEING
THE ELECTRICITY THAT THOSE
HYDROGEN AN ELECTROLYSIS
EQUIPMENT IS USING ISN'T JUST
COMPETING WITH CARS. REMEMBER
THE HYDROGEN THAT'S BEING
PRODUCED IS ALSO PROVIDING AN
ALTERNATIVE FUEL TO DISPLACE
DIESEL, DIESEL AND TRUCKS.
DIESEL IN THE PORTS, GASOLINE.
AND SO THAT HAS A SYSTEMIC
BENEFIT OF REDUCING SPENDING BY
CONSUMERS, BY TAXPAYERS. MOST OF
THAT COST ACTUALLY GOES OUT OF
STATE. GREAT. THANK YOU. IF I
COULD CARS HAVE BEEN AROUND FOR
QUITE SOME TIME, SO SOME CCS I
MEAN YES, THEY HAVE LONG TERME
CONTRACTS, BUT LONG TERME
CONTRACTS EXPIRE WHEN THOSE LONG
TERME CONTRACTS EXPIRE AND YOU
HAVE HYDROGEN SITTING THERE
READY TO SAY WE'RE GOING TO BUY
THAT CONTRACT OR WE'RE GOING TO
OUT COMPETE WITH YOU FOR THAT
CONTRACT, BECAUSE THEY HAVE A $3
INCENTIVE THAT'S A, THAT'S A
PROBLEM FOR CARS, AND AGAIN, I'M
BRINGING THIS UP SO YOU CAN
RESPOND TO IT BECAUSE THAT'S
THE, THE, THE SECOND THING IS
THAT WE'RE, WE'RE TRYING TO
CREATE, YOU KNOW, THE RIGHT
OVERALL INCENTIVES AS YOU SAID,
SORT OF SYSTEM WIDE, YOU KNOW,
IN TERMS OF BEING ABLE TO DO
THIS. SO I WANT TO TURN MY
ATTENTION TO, HOURLY MATCHING.
RIGHT. AND, AND THAT IS THAT, MY
UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IF WE,
LET'S SAY WE STAY WITH ANNUAL
HOURLY MATCHING, WHICH IS WHAT
SOME PEOPLE. RIGHT, SOME MONEY
COULD GO OUT AND BUY THEIR,
THEIR ENERGY CREDIT AT 2:00 IN
THE AFTERNOON ON JULY 15TH. NICE
SUNNY HOT DAY. AND THEN USE THAT
CREDIT TO PLUG INTO THE GRID AT
2:00 IN THE MORNING ON DECEMBER
15TH, WHEN THERE'S WHEN THE GRID
IS PROBABLY PRETTY DIRTY BECAUSE
THERE IS THERE'S NO THERE'S NO
SOLAR INTO THE GRID. AND IF, IF,
IF THAT IS ALLOWED AND I'M
TRYING TO CHECK MY THINKING,
THAT'S WHY I'M BRINGING THIS. IF
THAT IS ALLOWED, THEN THERE'S
NOT VERY MUCH INCENTIVE FOR
ANYBODY TO DEVELOP A RENEWABLE
ENERGY SOURCE. AT 2:00 IN THE
MORNING ON DECEMBER 15TH,
BECAUSE WE'RE WE'RE MEETING OUR
ENERGY NEEDS BECAUSE OF THESE
CREDITS. SO IT DOESN'T GIVE US
THE BALANCED RENEWABLE PORTFOLIO
THAT WE NEED. WE NEED A
BALANCED, RENEWABLE PORTFOLIO.
SO THAT MEANS WE NEED INCENTIVES
FOR PEOPLE TO DEVELOP A 2:00 IN
THE MORNING ON DECEMBER 15TH,
WHEN THE RENEWABLE RESOURCE AND
QUITE FRANKLY, ONE OF THE
INTERESTING THINGS I THINK IS
HYDROGEN COULD BE THAT RENEWABLE
RESOURCE AT 2:00 IN THE MORNING
IF WE SEND THE RIGHT PRICE
SIGNALS. RIGHT. AND I WANT TO GO
BACK TO PRICE SIGNALS, BECAUSE
THAT'S ONE FINAL THING. IF WE
SEND THE RIGHT PRICE SIGNALS,
HYDROGEN COULD ACTUALLY BE
PRODUCED ON JULY 15TH. RIGHT. IT
AT 2:00 IN THE AFTERNOON, BUT
STORED FOR SIX MONTHS AND THEN
USED AT 2:00 IN THE MORNING ON
DECEMBER 15TH. AND NOW WE HAVE A
MUCH WE CREATED AN INCENTIVE FOR
SOMEBODY. IT'S A COST TO STORE
HYDROGEN FOR SIX MONTHS TO, YOU
KNOW, AND ALL THAT. BUT WE
CREATED AN INCENTIVE FOR
SOMEBODY TO GO TO THAT COST SO
THAT ULTIMATELY AT 2:00 IN THE
MORNING ON DECEMBER 15TH, WE
ARE, WE DON'T NEED TO DO USE
FOSSIL FUEL ANY LONGER. THAT'S
THAT WOULD THAT WOULD BE THE
GOAL. THAT WOULD BE CERTAINLY
BETTER FOR CALIFORNIA. SO I'M
TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, I'M TRYING
TO FIND OUT WHETHER BECAUSE
THERE'S TWO THINGS WE'RE TRYING
TO DO. WE'RE TRYING TO GET THE
HYDROGEN INDUSTRY OFF THE GROUND
FINANCIALLY, BUT WE'RE ALSO
TRYING TO END UP WITH A ROBUST
RENEWABLE PORTFOLIO OF ENERGY
SOURCES THAT KEEP CALIFORNIA,
YOU KNOW, ON RENEWABLES, 24
HOURS A DAY. IF WE CAN'T OR
CREATE AS MANY PRICE SIGNALS AS
POSSIBLE. SO I GOT ONE OTHER
THING AFTER THAT ABOUT PRICE
SIGNALS IN, IN THE, IN THE
INCENTIVE. BUT AM I AM I WRONG
THAT HYDROGEN THAT THAT THAT
COULDN'T BE A GOOD A GOOD USE
FOR HYDROGEN AT 2:00 IN THE
MORNING ON DECEMBER 15TH. I LOVE
YOUR EXAMPLE. I'M SMILING SO
MUCH BECAUSE THAT'S EXACTLY THE
USE CASE OF WHY I GOT EXCITED
ABOUT RENEWABLE HYDROGEN IN
2016, BECAUSE I USED TO BE SUPER
INTO BATTERY STORAGE, WHICH I
STILL AM, BUT THE USE THE USE
CASE THAT YOU DESCRIBE IS THE
PRICE SIGNALS. IT'S A
COMPENSATION MECHANISM FOR
COMPENSATING FOR WHAT SEASONAL
STORAGE IS. THE EXAMPLE RIGHT
NOW, THERE'S NO WAY TO GET PAID
FOR. WE USE THE SEASONAL STORAGE
WE HAVE AS NATURAL GAS IN AN
UNDERGROUND CAVERN TO GENERATE
ELECTRICITY. THAT'S OUR SEASONAL
STORAGE TODAY. BUT IF WE HAD A
PRICE SIGNAL FOR A SEASONAL
STORAGE IN THE FORM OF RENEWABLE
ELECTRICITY IN THE FORM OF
HYDROGEN STORED IN MASS
QUANTITIES, THAT WOULD SOLVE
THAT. AND THEN ON THE PRODUCTION
SIDE, I, I BELIEVE IT'S ACTUALLY
A BILL THAT'S BEING INTRODUCED
BY SENATOR BECKER, 1993. IT'S A
THE IDEA OF A TARIFF, A
BENEFICIAL TARIFF THAT WOULD BE
AS NO COST SHIFTING, BUT AS LOW
COST AS POSSIBLE TO INCENTIVIZE
BENEFICIAL LOAD LIKE THE
PRODUCTION OF RENEWABLE HYDROGEN
AT CERTAIN TIMES OF THE DAY,
KIND OF LIKE A TIME OF USE
TARIFF. DOES AN HOURLY MATCHING
HELP US SEND THAT PRICE SIGNAL?
I SEE A HEAD SHAKING, YES. DOES
HOURLY MATCHING HELP SEND THAT
PRICE SIGNAL THAT 2:00 IN THE
MORNING ON DECEMBER 15TH? IT
DOES IT IT IT'S A COMPLIANCE
MECHANISM AND THE INCENTIVES
THROUGH THE TAX CREDIT. BUT IT'S
NOT NECESSARILY ALIGNED WITH THE
WELL IT IS IT WOULD BE ALIGNED
BECAUSE YOU'RE MATCHING
RENEWABLE ENERGY. BUT IT'S NOT
NECESSARILY IT'S IN ADDITION TO
A PRICE SIGNAL THAT WE COULD DO
HERE. WELL, SURE. THERE ARE
OTHER PRICE SIGNALS WE COULD
SEND, BUT HOURLY MATCHING WOULD
HELP SEND THAT PRICE SIGNAL.
BECAUSE IF YOU HAVE TO MATCH
WITHIN THAT HOUR AND IT'S 2:00,
YOU GOT TO FIND SOME RENEWABLE
ENERGY SOMEPLACE AT 2:00. SO
YOU'RE GOING TO PAY MORE, AND
MAYBE YOU'LL USE YOUR $3
KILOWATT HOUR CREDIT THAT YOU
GOT TO PAY TO GET THAT EXTRA
RENEWABLE ENERGY. BUT SOMEHOW
YOU WE HAVE TO WE HAVE TO GET
THE PRICE UP AT 2:00 IN THE
MORNING. SO THAT PEOPLE WILL
HAVE AN INCENTIVE TO DO THAT.
AND I'M GOING TO IT'S GO AHEAD.
LET'S LET'S GO HERE. RIGHT, CAN
YOU GIVE US AN IDEA OF THE
MASSIVE INVESTMENT TO STORE
HYDROGEN FOR SIX MONTHS? THE
REAL ESTATE COST OF STORING
HYDROGEN FOR SIX MONTHS, AND
THEN I LIKE TO FOLLOW UP ON THE
CASE AND THE, THE FACT THAT
TODAY WE RELY ON IMPORTING
ENERGY FROM OTHER STATES. YES.
SO ON THE TOPIC OF HYDROGEN
STORAGE AND TRANSPORT, THE GOOD
NEWS IS WE ALREADY DO THIS
COMMERCIALLY TODAY, HYDROGEN IS
STORED TODAY AND COMMERCIALLY
DEVELOPED SALT CAVERNS. IT'S NOT
RENEWABLE HYDROGEN. SOON IT WILL
BE. THERE'S ONE IN CENTRAL UTAH.
THE IT NEEDS TO BE STORED IN A
IN A ROCK FORMATION. GEOLOGIC
SALT. SO IT'S PERFECTLY SEALED.
YOU STICK WATER DOWN THERE, YOU
MELT OUT THE SALT, AND YOU HAVE
THIS PERFECTLY SEALED CAVERN.
THESE ARE BIG CAVERNS, LIKE THE
SIZE OF THE EMPIRE STATE
BUILDING. AND WHAT CONNECTS
THOSE CAVERNS TO LARGE OFF
TAKERS TODAY IS HYDROGEN
PIPELINES. WE HAVE SOMETHING ON
THE ORDER OF 1600 MILES ALREADY
OF HYDROGEN PIPELINES, INCLUDING
17 MILES IN LÀ. SO THEN IT
WOULDN'T BE A SIGNIFICANT
INVESTMENT ON HAVING THE
CAPACITY TO STORE HYDROGEN FOR
SIX MONTHS. IT'S VERY COST
EFFECTIVE, LIKE GIGAWATT HOURS
OF STORAGE. I THINK OF THOSE
SALT CAVERNS AS, YOU KNOW, WE
HAVE PETROLEUM RESERVES THAT
COULD BE A RENEWABLE ENERGY
RESERVE, BUT NOT EVERY STATE HAS
A SALT CAVERN, SALT DOME. I
DON'T BELIEVE WE HAVE THESE
GEOLOGIC FORMATIONS IN
CALIFORNIA, WHICH IS WHY WE NEED
TO COLLABORATE WITH OTHER
STATES. BACK TO YOUR POINT,
CAITLYN, ABOUT IT'S A REGIONAL
SOLUTION AND THE GOOD NEWS IS
OUR NEIGHBORING STATES HAVE
THESE AND WE CAN INTERCONNECT
WITH THEM WITH A CASE, EXAMPLE
THAT YOU USED EARLIER, WE KNOW
THAT THEY GO THROUGH LONG TERME
CONTRACTS TO PROVIDE THE ENERGY,
AND WE KNOW THAT SOME OF THAT
ENERGY, ACCORDING TO THE
CONTRACTS, HAS TO BE CLEAN
PRODUCED OR A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE
SO THAT THEY CAN MEET THE
REQUIREMENTS OF THOSE CONTRACTS,
WHEN THOSE CONTRACTS EXPIRE,
THERE ARE LONG TERME 20, 25
YEARS, WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE.
DO YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE THAT WE
WOULD STILL NOT BE RELYING ON
IMPORTING ENERGY FROM OTHER
STATES? OUR ENERGY USE IS HUGE,
ESPECIALLY THE LIQUID I WHEN I
WHEN I TALK ABOUT. LET'S
ACCELERATE OUR. IT'S OUR
REDUCTION OF RELIANCE ON FOSSIL
FUELS EVEN IN INDUSTRY ANALYST.
WHEN YOU LOOK OUT TO 2050 OUR
ENERGY DEMAND IS STILL GOING TO
REQUIRE MOLECULES, I'M OF THE
BELIEF THAT WE CAN MAKE THOSE
MOLECULES. WE CAN MAKE THEM HERE
WITH OUR ABUNDANT FEEDSTOCKS AND
GIVE THE FOSSIL FUELS A LITTLE
COMPETITION. THÀNH. RIGHT. OKAY.
THANK YOU. YOU LOOK LIKE YOU'RE
WANTING TO SAY SOMETHING. I WAS
GOING TO TAKE THE ANSWER TO THAT
QUESTION IN A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT
DIRECTION AND SAY THAT I AS FAR
AS ELECTRICITY. YES. I THINK WE
WILL CONTINUE TO IMPORT
ELECTRICITY AND I, I DON'T THINK
THAT'S A BAD THING. IMPORTING
ELECTRICITY HAS BEEN VERY, VERY
IMPORTANT TO MAINTAINING
RELIABILITY IN THE STATE. AND
THE MORE WE CAN IMPORT AND
EXPORT CLEAN ELECTRICITY, WE CAN
TAKE ADVANTAGE IN CALIFORNIA OF,
YOU KNOW, MAYBE IT'S NOT SUNNY
HERE, BUT THE WIND IS BLOWING IN
WYOMING. LIKE WE WANT TO TAKE
SOME OF THAT POWER TO, YOU KNOW,
HOPEFULLY SOMEDAY WE WILL HAVE
OFFSHORE WIND BUILT OFF THE
COAST OF CALIFORNIA THAT WE THEN
HAVE AS A RESOURCE TO SELL TO
THE REST OF THE WEST. SO I
THINK, I THINK IT'S A GOOD THING
THAT WE HAVE THOSE
RELATIONSHIPS. AND IF I, IF I
COULD, THE, WITH REGARDS TO
UTAH, UTAH HAS A SALT MINES AND
LOS ANGELES ACTUALLY IS BUILDING
THE CONNECTION TO THE SALT. THEY
ARE PRODUCING CLEAN HYDROGEN.
THEY'RE GOING TO STORE IT IN THE
SALT MINES AND BRING IT DOWN FOR
LÀ POWER, AND THAT THAT IS A
PROJECT THAT IS APPROVED AND
MOVING AND ALL OF THAT. SO IT IS
A, SO, SO YES, YES, THE STORAGE
OF HYDROGEN IS, IS CERTAINLY
DOABLE AND IS STARTING TO, YOU
KNOW, WILL WILL CERTAINLY EXPAND
AS WE GO FORWARD. WE HAVE BEEN,
QUITE SOME TIME ON OUR, ON OUR
PANEL HERE TODAY, AND UNLESS I
HEAR OTHER QUESTIONS, I KNOW WE
WANT TO MAKE SURE BECAUSE WE
HAVE TWO MINUTES FOR EACH
SPEAKER IN TERMS OF COMMENTS AND
WE WANT TO HEAR CREATIVE IDEAS.
YOU'RE WELCOME TO SAY ANYTHING
YOU WANT, BUT WHAT WE HOPE WE
HEAR FROM YOU ARE CREATIVE IDEAS
RATHER THAN NECESSARILY A
REHASHING OF THINGS THAT THAT WE
MAY HAVE HEARD. BUT LIKE WITH
THE OTHER PANELS, WE WANT TO
GIVE YOU BOTH AN OPPORTUNITY. SO
ONE MINUTE TO CLOSE, MISS LYNN.
THANK YOU, CHAIR BENNETT, MAY I
JUST QUICKLY SAY THAT I DON'T
THINK THREE PILLARS IS A PRICE
SIGNAL. IT'S A COMPLIANCE
REQUIREMENT FOR AN INCENTIVE. A
PRICE SIGNAL IS A DIFFERENT
THING. AND I'M HAPPY TO CHAT
WITH YOU OFFLINE ABOUT THAT. I
WOULD LIKE TO CLOSE BY SHARING
APPRECIATION FOR EVERYBODY IN
THIS ROOM, FOR THIS SELECT
COMMITTEE, I BELIEVE THAT WE ALL
WANT THE SAME GOAL, WHICH IS TO
REDUCE OUR RELIANCE ON FOSSIL
FUELS, TO HAVE GREATER ENERGY
INDEPENDENCE, TO REUSE THE
ABUNDANT RENEWABLE RESOURCES
THAT WE HAVE. AND THIS IS ALL
WITHIN OUR GRASP AND ON THIS
TOPIC OF THREE PILLARS, THERE
ARE REALLY A LOT OF STRONGLY
HELD VIEWS HERE. AND MY
RECOMMENDATION FOR ALL OF US IS
TO STAY OPEN MINDED, TO
LISTENING TO EACH OTHER, AND TO
REALLY MAKE SURE THAT WE LOOK AT
DON'T LOSE THE FOREST THROUGH
THE TREES, RIGHT? KEEPING OUR
EYE ON THE PRIZE IS HOW DO WE
SCALE AN AFFORDABLE, RELIABLE,
RENEWABLE HYDROGEN ECO SYSTEM.
SO WE HAVE AN ALTERNATIVE TO
FOSSIL FUELS. AND THAT GOAL IS
DAUNTING BECAUSE WE USE A LOT OF
FOSSIL FUELS TODAY, AND IT CAN'T
HAPPEN OVERNIGHT. SO THANK YOU
FOR ALL OF YOUR EFFORTS. THANK
YOU EVERYBODY AND YOUR COMMENTS
TODAY, WE'RE SO GRATEFUL TO BE
PART OF THIS CONVERSATION. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. I
WOULD ECHO THE APPRECIATION FOR
THIS HEARING AND CONVERSATION
TODAY AND FOR ALL OF YOUR GREAT
QUESTIONS AND INTEREST, I WOULD
JUST CLOSE BY SAYING YOU KNOW,
I, I THINK WE NEED TO KEEP OUR
EYE ON THE FACT THAT THE THREE
PILLARS IS, IS FUNDAMENTALLY
ABOUT AVOIDING CLIMATE POTENTIAL
CLIMATE DAMAGE FROM HYDROGEN.
AND THAT SHOULD BE OUR
FOUNDATION IS HOW DO WE MAKE
SURE THAT WE ARE NOT CREATING
ANOTHER CLIMATE PROBLEM BY
PRODUCING HYDROGEN. AND SO
THAT'S THAT IS THE IMPORTANCE OF
THE THREE PILLARS. AND THAT LIKE
I SAID, SHOULD BE THE
FOUNDATION. WE ARE IN A UNIQUE
SITUATION IN CALIFORNIA, AND I'M
VERY OPEN TO THINKING ABOUT HOW
THAT, YOU KNOW, HOW WE CAN USE
SOMETHING LIKE OUR ECONOMY WIDE
EMISSIONS CAP TO ENSURE THOSE
SAME OUTCOMES OF NOT INCREASING
GREENHOUSE GAS POLLUTION. THANK
YOU. AND BEFORE I LET YOU GO,
I'M SORRY, BUT I SEE ONE THING
HERE THAT I DEFINITELY WANTED TO
MAKE SURE I GAVE YOU GUYS BOTH A
CHANCE TO RESPOND TO. SO, YOU
KNOW, THERE'S THIS WHOLE ISSUE
OF HOURLY MATCHING THAT THE
SIGNIFICANT BATTLE OVER. BUT MY
UNDERSTANDING AND AGAIN, I'M
TRYING TO GIVE YOU GUYS AN
OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND IS THAT
ON HOURLY MATCHING. ISN'T
CALIFORNIA'S CURRENTLY REQUIRED
TO IMPLEMENT HOURLY MATCHING
ACCORDING TO PUC SECTION 398.6.
AND I'VE GOT THE TEXT HERE, AND
THAT IS BEGINNING JANUARY 1ST,
2028. EVERY RETAIL SUPPLIER THAT
OFFERS AN ELECTRICITY PRODUCT
FOR SALE TO RETAIL CUSTOMERS IN
THE STATE SHALL ANNUALLY REPORT
TO THE ENERGY COMMISSION ALL OF
THE FOLLOWING. THE RETAIL
SUPPLIER SOURCE OF ELECTRICITY
USED TO SERVE LOSS ADJUSTED LOAD
FOR EACH HOUR DURING THE
PREVIOUS CALENDAR YEAR. SO IN
OTHER WORDS, HOURLY MATCHING
ALREADY TO THE EXTENT FEASIBLE,
THE EMISSIONS OF GREENHOUSE
GASES ASSOCIATED WITH EACH OF
THOSE SOURCES OF ELECTRICITY IN
CALCULATING THOSE EMISSIONS OF
GREENHOUSE GASES TO RETAIL
SUPPLIERS SHALL NOT INCLUDE OR
CONSIDER ANY AVOIDED GREENHOUSE
GAS EMISSIONS, AND AN ANNUAL
TOTAL OF GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS AND AN ANNUAL AVERAGE
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
INTENSITY CALCULATED AS THE
ANNUAL TOTAL GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS DIVIDED BY THE RETAIL
SUPPLIERS. NATURAL ANNUAL TOTAL
LOSS ADJUSTED LOAD. BOTTOM LINE
IS THE WAY I HAVE BEEN TOLD THIS
READS IS THAT IT ACTUALLY IS
GOING TO CALL FOR HOURLY
MATCHING BY BECAUSE ONE OF THE
ONE OF THE BIGGEST CONCERNS I
HEAR FROM THE INDUSTRY IS WHY
SHOULD HYDROGEN ONLY HAVE HOURLY
MATCHING IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO
HAVE IT? FOR EVERYBODY ELSE?
THIS IS THE EXPANSION OF HOURLY
MATCHING IN JANUARY 28TH. SO IF
WE'RE GOING TO EXPAND HOURLY
MATCHING IN JANUARY 28TH, IS
THERE A WAY TO MAKE HYDROGEN
PRODUCTION CONSISTENT WITH THIS
REQUIREMENT SO THAT EVERYBODY'S
GOING TO BE TREATED THE SAME?
HYDROGEN SAID. WE DON'T WANT TO
BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY, BUT IF
WE'RE GOING TO START NOW, HAVING
EVERYBODY ELSE HAVE HOURLY
MATCHING, IS THERE IS THERE A
WAY TO HAVE HYDROGEN HAVE HOURLY
MATCHING ALSO RIGHT. THANK YOU
FOR MENTIONING THAT BECAUSE IN
MY COMMENTS, I MENTIONED THAT
THE RULES WE HAVE IN PLACE
ALREADY EMBODY THE SPIRIT OF THE
THREE PILLARS ADDITIONALITY,
DELIVERABILITY AND HOURLY
MATCHING. AND IT'S OUR VIEW THAT
THE LOAD SERVING ENTITIES ARE IN
THE BEST POSITION TO ENSURE THAT
AND ENSURE THAT OUR GRID IS
CLEAN. SO ALL INCREMENTAL ENERGY
THAT'S GOING ON THE GRID, THEY
THERE IS THAT COMPLIANCE
MECHANISM. THANK YOU. YOUR
RESPONSE? I THINK JUST THE ONLY
THING I WOULD ADD IS, IS FROM
OUR PERSPECTIVE, HOURLY MATCHING
IS VERY ACHIEVABLE. BY 2028. WE
ALREADY SEE SOME OF THE NATIONAL
TRACKING SYSTEM OPERATORS.
EXCUSE ME, ENERGY TAG AND
EMIRATES DOING THIS. WE SEE PJM
DOING THIS. I MEAN, THIS IS THIS
IS A YOU KNOW, PEOPLE UNDERSTAND
THIS AND IT CAN BE SCALED TO THE
POINT THAT WE NEED FOR THE
HYDROGEN INDUSTRY BY 2028. YOU
TWO ARE OUTSTANDING, IN TERMS OF
YOUR KNOWLEDGE AND THE WAY YOU
PRESENT YOURSELF. AND I REALLY
MEAN THAT. IT'S JUST THIS HAS
BEEN, WE'VE HAD THREE GREAT
PANELS, AND YOU GUYS ARE JUST
GREAT IN TERMS OF POLISHING THIS
OFF. NOW LET'S SEE IF THE PUBLIC
WILL COMMENT WITH THE SAME SAGE,
CAPABILITY THAT, THAT YOU GUYS
HAVE, RIGHT? MEMBERS OF THE
PUBLIC, TWO MINUTES EACH. THANK
YOU. CAN I GO, CAN I? YOU GOT
THE TIME. GOOD AFTERNOON,
ASSEMBLY MEMBER BENNETT. MY NAME
IS GARCIA. I'M WITH SECA, I WANT
TO SHOUT OUT MY COLLEAGUES WHO
DID AN AMAZING JOB PRESENTING. I
WANT TO ADD ON TO SOMETHING
THAT, ON TOP OF MY COLLEAGUES
REMARKS, IN THE MEETINGS WE'VE
BEEN IN AND THE CONVERSATIONS WE
HAVE, IT'S VERY CLEAR THERE'S
ROBUST CONVERSATION HAPPENING
AROUND ELECTRICITY AND WHERE
WE'RE GOING TO GET OUR
ELECTRICITY USAGE AND, AND HOW
WE'RE GOING TO MANAGE THAT,
SOMETHING WE WE'VE SEEN THAT IS
LACKING IN THE CONVERSATION THAT
SEEMS, GLARING TO US IS WHERE
ARE WE GOING TO GET THE WATER?
THIS IS A VERY WATER INTENSIVE
INDUSTRY, AND THAT IS SOMETHING
THAT WE HAVE NOT HEARD BEEN A
PART OF THE CALCULATIONS,
ESPECIALLY IN A DROUGHT STATE, I
GOT SOME FACTS AND FIGURES FROM
THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN INSTITUTE.
THIS IS SMR STEAM METHANE
REFORMATION USES 4.5KG OF WATER
TO PRODUCE ONE KILOGRAM OF
HYDROGEN. THAT'S SMR
ELECTROLYSIS, WHICH IS THE
DIRECTION WE WANT TO GO TO MAKE
SURE THAT IT IS CLEAN AND NO
FOSSIL FUELS ARE USED IN THAT
PROCESS. IS NINE KILOGRAMS OF
WATER TO CREATE ONE KILOGRAM OF
HYDROGEN AND THAT IS NOT
INCLUDING THE COOLING AND THE
OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDED TO
OPERATE THESE FACILITIES. THAT'S
AN ADDITION TO THESE FACTS AND
FIGURES. SO THAT'S SOMETHING WE
WANT TO BRING INTO THE
CONVERSATION. TALK ABOUT. AND
REALLY HAVE A ROBUST DEBATE AND
CONVERSATION OF WHERE WE'RE
GOING TO GET THIS WATER. I'D
ALSO LIKE TO ENTER INTO THE
ZEITGEIST. AND SO EVERYONE IS
AWARE, COLORADO ALREADY PASSED
THEIR HYDROGEN BILL. AND IT'S
SORRY I WROTE IN MY NOTES.
COLORADO BILL ADVANCED THE USE
OF CLEAN HYDROGEN EACH B20
31281. THEY'VE ALREADY DONE IT.
THEY RUSHED THROUGH IT. WATER
WAS NOT A PART OF THEIR
CONVERSATION. I'D LIKE TO POINT
OUT THAT CALIFORNIA GETS 4.4
MILLION ACRE FEET OF WATER FROM
THE COLORADO RIVER. OKAY, WE
HAVE NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT WHAT
THAT ALLOCATION IS GOING TO LOOK
LIKE. WE GET OUR MAJORITY SHARE
OF WATER FROM COLORADO. THANK
YOU. SO WE'D LIKE TO START THAT
CONVERSATION. SO THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. APPRECIATE YOU. MR. BENNET
MEMBERS, MIKE SKVARLA HERE ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
HYDROGEN COALITION, CALIFORNIA
HYDROGEN BUSINESS COUNCIL AND
LADY PLC, I JUST WANT TO ADDRESS
A COUPLE THINGS WERE BROUGHT UP
TODAY, WITH REGARD TO THE KAZE
AND HYDROGEN ENTITIES COMPETING
WITH FOR ELECTRONS. CALIFORNIA
IS A NON COMPETE STATE WHEN IT
COMES TO ELECTRONS. IS, CPUC OR
PUC, THE PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE
454.53, SETS UP PROVISIONS THAT
DON'T ALLOW THAT. IT'S JUST NOT
ALLOWED. WE YOU KNOW, A HYDROGEN
ENTITY CANNOT GO AND STEAL A
CONTRACTED ELECTRONS FROM
ANOTHER ENTITY. YOU KNOW, ALSO
THE BACKLOG ON THE
INTERCONNECTION, CUZ OVER 500GW,
EVEN IF EVERY ELECTRIC, EVEN IF
EVERY MOLECULE OF HYDROGEN WAS
PRODUCED WITH ELECTROLYTIC
HYDROGEN, IT WOULD REPRESENT
LESS THAN 8% OF THE OVERALL
BACKLOG. WE DON'T HAVE AN
ADDITIONALITY PROBLEM IN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA. WE HAVE AN
INTERCONNECTION, A PROBLEM. WE
NEED TO EXPEDITE THAT AS FAST AS
POSSIBLE. AND THAT'S WHERE THE
POLICY SHOULD BE FOCUSED, WITH
REGARD TO I THINK OUR FRIEND
FROM EDF HERE MADE SOME GREAT
POINTS WITH REGARD TO THE
UNIQUENESS OF CALIFORNIA'S
POLICIES. THIS IS WHAT WE'VE
BEEN SAYING THROUGH THIS DEBATE
FOR THE ENTIRE TIME. THE
COMBINATION OF THE CAP AND TRADE
PROGRAM, THE RPS, AND HOW THOSE
INTERPLAY WITH THE IPR AND THE
IRPS WITH REGARD TO PROCUREMENT
PLANS, SET UP A UNIQUE SITUATION
IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA WHERE
WE CAN MANAGE ANY POTENTIAL
INDUCED EMISSIONS AS WE HAVE FOR
OTHER ADDITIONAL LOADS, SUCH AS
CHARGING, DATA CENTERS. SO ON,
LASTLY, KIND OF ON THE LAST
POINT, WITH REGARD TO, THE TIME
MATCHING AND THOSE THINGS, THE
WHAT YOU REFERENCED WAS THE
POWER SOURCE DISCLOSURE
LEGISLATION BY SENATOR BECKER.
THAT'S NOT THE SAME AS HOURLY
TIME MATCHING. THAT'S A POWER
SYSTEM SOURCE DISCLOSURE, WHICH
IS DONE ONCE A YEAR. WE
CURRENTLY DO POWER SOURCE
DISCLOSURE ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.
NOW IT'S CREATING ADDITIONAL
GRANULARITY GRANULARITY FOR THE
HOURLY. IT'S NOT A MATCHING
SYSTEM. IT'S NOT A REC SYSTEM.
IT'S NOT A COMPLIANCE
INSTRUMENT. IT IS JUST SIMPLY
FOR DISCLOSURE. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. HELLO, MELISSA ROMERO WITH
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL VOTERS.
I'D WANT TO START OUT BY JUST
SAYING THAT ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS
ARE IN AGREEMENT THAT HYDROGEN
WILL BE PART OF OUR CLEAN ENERGY
FUTURE, AND WE DO ACTUALLY HAVE
SPECIFICS ABOUT WHAT WE WANT TO
SEE IN TERMS OF DEFINING GREEN
HYDROGEN AND HOW HYDROGEN IS
USED IN ORDER TO ACTUALLY GET
THE BENEFITS THAT WE ALL ARE
TALKING ABOUT HERE. HYDROGEN IS
A VERY ENERGY INTENSIVE AND
WATER INTENSIVE RESOURCE, SO WE
REALLY SHOULD BE ASKING TOUGH
QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW WE'RE GOING
TO DO THIS IN A WAY THAT'S NOT
GOING TO PUT A STRAIN ON OUR
GRID, THAT'S NOT GOING TO USE
LIMITED WATER RESOURCES, THAT'S
NOT GOING TO INCREASE COSTS, AND
THAT'S ALSO GOING TO ACTUALLY
REDUCE EMISSIONS. WE HEAR A LOT
OF PUSHBACK ABOUT THE THREE
PILLARS. AND THE REALITY IS, IS
THAT WITHOUT USING NEW CLEAN
ENERGY TO POWER A HYDROGEN
FACILITY, WITHOUT THOSE
FACILITIES BEING LOCATED
GEOGRAPHICALLY NEAR THAT
FACILITY AND WITHOUT THE CLEAN
ENERGY RUNNING AT THE SAME TIME
THAT THE HYDROGEN FACILITY IS
USING IT, WE WILL INCREASE
EMISSIONS AND THAT DOES NOT
PASS. THE SMELL TEST FOR CLIMATE
ACTION GIVES OAN THE MEMBERSHIP
ROLE THAT CHEVRON AND SHELL HAVE
TO PLAY IN THIS WORK. WE ARE
VERY CONCERNED. WE NEED TO BE
EXPLICIT ABOUT NOT ALLOWING
FOSSIL FUEL PRODUCED HYDROGEN TO
BE CONSIDERED GREEN OR CLEAN
WHEN IT COMES TO OUR CLIMATE
SOLUTIONS. THANK YOU. HI. GOOD
AFTERNOON. SOME MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE I'M RYAN KENNEY WITH
CLEAN ENERGY. GREAT DISCUSSION
TODAY. I JUST WANT TO MENTION MY
COMPANY IS CLEAN ENERGY. I'M
RUNNING ON CLEAN ENERGY AND OUR
COMPANY IS THE NATION'S LARGEST,
LARGEST PROVIDER OF RENEWABLE
NATURAL GAS TRANSPORTATION FUEL.
WE ALSO HAVE A SUBSIDIARY, A NEW
SUBSIDIARY CALLED VERMEER, WHICH
IS TAKING A CO-PRODUCT, NOT A
BYPRODUCT, A CO-PRODUCT OF
HYDROGEN PRODUCTION CALLED
GRAPHENE. AND THAT IS USED IN
INDUSTRIAL APPLICATIONS TO
DECARBONIZE THE INDUSTRIAL
SECTORS SUCH AS CEMENT. SO THERE
IS A LARGE, GROWING INTEREST IN
MY COMPANY, ESPECIALLY TO USE
HYDROGEN. BUT RIGHT NOW, LARGELY
IT'S COST PROHIBITIVE. AND
POLICIES SUCH AS THE THREE
PILLARS WE BELIEVE ARE GOING TO
LEAD TO CONTINUE, EXCLUSION FROM
COMPANIES LIKE MINE AND MAKING A
DIFFERENCE HERE IN CALIFORNIA TO
MEET OUR CLEAN AIR AND CLEAN,
AND DECARBONIZATION GOALS. I DO
WANT TO JUST MENTION, I KNOW THE
GOAL OF THIS COMMITTEE WAS
LOOKING AT CREATIVE SOLUTIONS,
BUT ONE THING I THOUGHT WAS KIND
OF MISSING IN THE DISCUSSION WAS
REALLY, HOW CAN THE LEGISLATURE
HELP THE INDUSTRY GET OFF THE
GROUND? AND THAT'S REALLY THE
FUNDAMENTAL COMPONENT, I THINK,
OF THIS DISCUSSION. EMISSION
REDUCTIONS ARE IMPORTANT, IN THE
TRANSPORTATION SECTOR, WHERE WE
ARE, 98% OF THE NATURAL GAS USED
IN TRANSPORTATION IS RENEWABLE,
NATURAL GAS. THE LCFS IS DRIVING
THOSE REDUCTIONS. AND RIGHT NOW
THERE'S PATHWAYS IN THE LCFS FOR
NOT JUST LOW NOX TRUCKS FOR
RENEWABLE NATURAL GAS, BUT ALSO
AS FEEDSTOCKS FOR ELECTRIC
VEHICLES AND HYDROGEN. SO WE ARE
DECARBONIZE IN THE
TRANSPORTATION SECTOR, INCLUDING
HYDROGEN, RIGHT NOW THROUGH THE
LCFS. SO I JUST ASK THAT YOU
PLEASE KEEP IN MIND THE IMPACT
TO BUSINESSES IN THE INDUSTRY.
WE WANT TO GET THIS OFF THE
GROUND. WE'RE INTERESTED IN
WORKING WITH THE LEGISLATURE,
BUT THE THREE PILLARS REALLY ARE
PROVIDING A BARRIER TO GETTING
THAT GOING. SO THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. MICHAEL
BOCCADORO WITH WEST COAST
ADVISORS. I THINK AS MOST OF YOU
KNOW, MY ROLE IN CALIFORNIA FOR
THE LAST SEVEN YEARS HAS BEEN
FIGURING OUT HOW TO REDUCE DAIRY
METHANE BY 40. WE WORK WITH
SENATOR LARA ON CREATING A
CONSTRUCTIVE, INCENTIVE BASED
APPROACH. IT'S WORKING VERY WELL
AND AS AS DRAMATIC AS A 40%
REDUCTION IS, WE ARE VERY CLOSE
TO ACHIEVING THE FULL 40%
REDUCTION IN MANURE. METHANE
MANDATED BY 1383. AND WE'LL BE
THERE WITHIN A COUPLE OF YEARS.
AND THAT'S BECAUSE WE'VE HAD AN
INCENTIVE BASED APPROACH THAT
DOESN'T TELL FARMERS HOW TO
FARM, BUT IT WORKS WITH EACH
FARMER IN FINDING A WAY THAT
BEST SUITS THEIR NEEDS. FOR THAT
FARM. TO REDUCE METHANE ON THAT
FARM, I UNDERSTAND THE
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE COMMUNITY
DOESN'T LIKE DIGESTERS, BUT SOME
OF THE IRONY OF THIS IS THAT
WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING DRY
MANURE HANDLING SYSTEMS,
VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO HAVE
WHOLLY DRY MANURE, ONLY HANDLING
ON A DAIRY. AND THE IRONY OF IT
IS IT WILL DRAMATICALLY WORSEN
WATER QUALITY. IT WILL INCREASE
TRUCK TRAFFIC BECAUSE WE'LL HAVE
TO EXPORT MUCH OF THAT MANURE,
BECAUSE WE CAN'T UTILIZE IT ON
OUR OWN FARMS. WET MANURE
SYSTEMS ALLOW US TO BE MUCH MORE
EFFICIENT UTILIZING THE
RESOURCES THAT MR. CARILLO
MENTIONED. PASTURE BASED DAIRY
FARMING WORKS WONDERFUL, AND WE
HAVE A NUMBER OF DAIRIES IN
CALIFORNIA THAT DO THAT ON THE
NORTH COAST. IT WORKS UP THERE
BECAUSE WE HAVE RAINFALL AND WE
HAVE NATURAL PASTURES. BUT
PASTURE BASED DAIRY FARMING IN
THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY LEADS TO
A COUPLE OF PROBLEMS. MORE LAND
USE, MORE WATER, USE MORE DAIRY
COWS TO PRODUCE THE SAME AMOUNT
OF MILK, AND SIGNIFICANTLY MORE
ENTERIC METHANE BECAUSE OF THE
COWS DIET. NOT A EASY SOLUTION
OR A SIMPLE SOLUTION. AND THEN
THEIR PREFERRED OPTION, DIRECT
REGULATION, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE
CURRENTLY SEEING AT THE AIR
RESOURCES BOARD WITH A PETITION
THAT WAS FILED FOR DIRECT
REGULATION, WILL HARM THE VERY
SMALL DAIRIES THEY CLAIM THEY'RE
CONCERNED ABOUT AND LEAD TO
FURTHER CONSOLIDATION OF THE
DAIRY SECTOR. WE'RE ACHIEVING
THE REDUCTIONS BECAUSE WE'VE
DEVELOPED A PROGRAM HERE THAT
WORKS WITH THE FARMS WE HAVE
HERE. DAIRY CONSUMPTION IS
INCREASING ACROSS THE COUNTRY.
WE NEED TO FIND SOLUTIONS. THANK
YOU. MR. CHAIRMAN, MR. HART,
MIKE MONAHAN, ON BEHALF OF THE
STATE BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION
TRADES COUNCIL, I'M NOT SO SURE
MY MESSAGE IS GOING TO BE
CREATIVE, BUT IT'S GOING TO BE
SIMPLE ONE PUT A PAUSE ON
LEGISLATION IN THIS SPACE TO
ALLOW WASHINGTON, DC RULE MAKERS
TO DO THEIR JOB. THREE THAT WILL
ALLOW THE FUNDS THE $1.2 BILLION
ALLOCATED TO COME TO CALIFORNIA
FOR PROJECTS, ESPECIALLY AS MR.
CARRILLO POINTED OUT, THERE ARE
SHOVEL READY PROJECTS NOW THAT
ARE JUST WAITING FOR THE SIGNAL.
THE LAST, LAST PART OF THIS IS
THAT THE BUILDING TRADES THE
500,000 MEN AND WOMEN IN OUR
INDUSTRY ARE PREPARED TO GO TO
WORK AND BUILD THESE PROJECTS,
JUST AS WE'VE BUILT POWER PLANTS
FOR DECADES. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND
MR. HART, JASON ACTING ON BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL
UTILITIES ASSOCIATION. KI¾M UA.
SO KI¾M UA REPRESENTS THE
STATE'S PUBLICLY OWNED ELECTRIC
UTILITIES, AND THEY'RE SERVING
ABOUT 25% OF THE STATE'S
POPULATION. AND MY MESSAGE IS
SIMPLE, LIKE MR. MONAHAN'S AND
ACTUALLY QUITE ALIGNED WITH IT.
CMU MEMBERS HAVE A GOOD TRACK
RECORD WHEN IT COMES TO
AFFORDABILITY, RELIABILITY AND
DECARBONIZATION OF THE ELECTRIC
SECTOR. AND BUILDING OUT,
HYDROGEN INFRASTRUCTURE IS GOING
TO BE AN ESSENTIAL PART OF
CONTINUING THAT TREND. SO WE'RE
VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THAT. BUT AS
MR. MONAHAN JUST POINTED OUT,
THERE ARE LITERALLY BILLIONS OF
DOLLARS ON THE TABLE AT THE
FEDERAL LEVEL. THERE IS AN
ACTIVE EFFORT BEING MADE TO
DETERMINE WHAT PROJECTS AND
INFRASTRUCTURE ARE GOING TO BE
ELIGIBLE FOR THAT FUNDING. AND
SO THERE IS A REAL RISK OF THE
LEGISLATURE GETTING AHEAD OF
THAT EFFORT AND PRECLUDING US
FROM BECOMING THE HYDROGEN HUB
THAT WE CAN IN CALIFORNIA. AND
SO IN THAT SENSE, YOU KNOW, WE
URGE, AT LEAST AT THE MOMENT, A
REJECTION OF THE THREE PILLARS,
BECAUSE WE DO NOT WANT TO GET TO
A POINT WHERE WE PRECLUDE
OURSELVES FROM BEING ABLE TO
RECEIVE THOSE FUNDS. SO THANK
YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK
TODAY. AND, AGAIN, PERHAPS NOT
CREATIVE, BUT IT'S CLEAR AND
SIMPLE. THANK YOU. HELLO. GOOD
AFTERNOON. SO ASSEMBLYMEMBER
HART, OTHERS NICOLE RICE,
CALIFORNIA RENEWABLE
TRANSPORTATION ALLIANCE, AND
THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY
TO MAKE THESE COMMENTS REAL
QUICKLY, FIRST OF ALL, I JUST
WANT TO THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR
EXPANDING THE SPEAKERS AND
PRESENTATIONS TODAY TO BE ABLE
TO HAVE ADDITIONAL VOICES AS
PART OF THIS DISCUSSION. I THINK
THIS IS HOW WE'RE GOING TO GET
TO A GOOD BALANCE FOR THE PROPER
POLICY. WANT TO ALIGN MY
COMMENTS AND OUR ORGANIZATION
WITH THE COMMENTS OF THE
SPEAKERS WHO WERE ON THE FIRST
PANEL AS IT RELATES TO THE USE
OF BIOFUELS UNDER THIS
DISCUSSION, I DO WANT TO
EMPHASIZE THAT WE DO HAVE ALL OF
US IN THIS ROOM A SIMILAR GOAL,
AND THAT IS TO DECARBONIZE,
CALIFORNIA TO IMPROVE OUR
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, TO
PROVIDE ADDITIONAL BENEFITS TO
COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE BEEN
DISADVANTAGED BY POLLUTION IN
CALIFORNIA AND TO REACH THAT
ULTIMATE GOAL, IN 2024. I THINK
IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE, THOUGH,
THAT THERE'S A LOT OF
CONVERSATION TODAY ABOUT FOSSIL
FUEL AND MOVING AWAY FROM FOSSIL
FUELS. SOMETHING, AGAIN, THAT
CRT AGREES WITH, BUT RENEWABLE
NATURAL GAS THAT IS PRODUCED
FROM BIOMETHANE IS NOT A FOSSIL
FUEL. AS LONG AS WE CONTINUE TO
HAVE SOCIETAL ORGANIC WASTE,
WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO DO
SOMETHING WITH THE THAT WASTE
AND THE METHANE THAT AND OTHER
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS THAT ARE
PRODUCED FROM THAT WASTE. AND SO
THE USE OF RENEWABLE NATURAL GAS
AND CREATING A MARKET AND MAKING
SURE THAT THAT FUEL HAS
SOMEWHERE TO GO IN THE MARKET
FOR THE INVESTMENTS THAT HAVE
BEEN MADE THUS FAR, IS VERY
IMPORTANT, EVEN THE AIR
RESOURCES BOARD HAS IDENTIFIED A
THE CRITICAL ROLE THAT RNG CAN
PLAY, BOTH IN TRANSPORTATION AS
WE CONTINUE TO HAVE COMBUSTION
ON THE ROADS AS WE GET CLOSER TO
2045. BUT ALSO IN THOSE HARD TO
DECARBONIZE SECTORS. AND SO THE
USE OF THAT FUEL THROUGHOUT THE
ECONOMY WILL HELP US AGAIN
ACHIEVE OUR DECARBONIZATION
GOALS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
CHRISTINA SCARINGE WITH THE
CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
WITH THANKS TO THE CHAIR AND THE
COMMITTEE, BIOGENIC SOURCES
AREN'T CLEAN AND SHOULD PLAY NO
ROLE IN HYDROGEN PRODUCTION.
CALIFORNIA INCORRECTLY TREATS
FOREST FEEDSTOCKS AS CARBON
NEUTRAL. THE THOROUGHLY REFUTED
BY THE IPCC, EPA AND OTHERS.
GREENHOUSE GAS LIFE CYCLE
ASSESSMENT SHOW COMBUSTION OR
GASIFICATION OF FOREST MATERIAL
TO MAKE ENERGY LEADS TO A NET
INCREASE OF CARBON EMISSIONS FOR
DECADES TO CENTURIES. BIOMASS
GASIFICATION AND PYROLYSIS TO
PRODUCE HYDROGEN PRODUCE LARGE
AMOUNTS OF CO2 AND HEALTH
HARMING POLLUTANTS, INCLUDING
METHANE, CARBON MONOXIDE, LIQUID
HYDROCARBONS, SOLID CHAR AND ASH
RESIDUES, TARZAN, SOOT, FINE
PARTICULATE MATTER, NITROGEN
OXIDE, SULFUR OXIDE, BENZENE,
TOLUENE, XYLENES, AND PERSISTENT
ORGANIC POLLUTANTS SUCH AS
POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC
HYDROCARBONS, FINE PARTICULATE
MATTERS CAN PENETRATE DEEPLY
INTO THE LUNGS AND BLOODSTREAM.
IT'S LINKED TO HIGHER RISK OF
PREMATURE DEATH, HEART DISEASE,
STROKE, AND AGGRAVATED ASTHMA.
NOX DAMAGES THE RESPIRATORY
SYSTEM AND CONTRIBUTES TO ACID
RAIN. BENZENE IS A KNOWN
CARCINOGEN. TOLUENE AND XYLENES
DAMAGE THE BRAIN AND NERVOUS
SYSTEM, RESPIRATORY SYSTEM,
KIDNEYS AND LIVER. CLEANING. TAR
BUILDUP ON EQUIPMENT CREATES
LARGE AMOUNTS OF TOXIC
WASTEWATER. CS HAS FOR YEARS
SHOWN TO BE INEFFECTIVE, UNSAFE,
AND VERY ENERGY INTENSIVE,
TYPICALLY USING 15 TO 25% MORE
ENERGY, AND IT DOESN'T RESOLVE
THE SIGNIFICANT CLIMATE AND
POLLUTION, THE AIR POLLUTION OF
BIOMASS PROCESSES. THESE
PROCESSES DON'T REDUCE METHANE
EMISSIONS AS CLAIMED. BIOENERGY
GENERATES SUBSTANTIAL METHANE
EMISSIONS THAT ARE FAR LESS
LIKELY IF WE JUST LEFT IT IN THE
FOREST, ESPECIALLY WHERE
CHIPPED, LOPPED AND SCATTERED ON
THE FLOOR. BIOMASS FACILITIES
HARM COMMUNITIES WITH AIR, WATER
AND NOISE POLLUTION. CO2 LEAKAGE
OR EARTHQUAKE RISK AND ECOSYSTEM
DAMAGE TO REDUCE EMISSIONS FROM
WASTE, WE SHOULD REDUCE WASTE,
NOT CREATE A PROFITABLE MARKET
FOR WASTE BASED SOURCES, WHERE
INCENTIVES WILL LIKELY INCREASE
PRODUCTION AND POLLUTION. THANK
YOU, THANK YOU, JUST REFER TO MY
WRITTEN COMMENTS AS WELL. THANK
YOU, MR. CHAIR MEMBERS, MY NAME
IS HUNTER STERN. I'M WITH IBEW
LOCAL 1245. I'M ALSO THE CHAIR
OF THE COALITION OF CALIFORNIA
UTILITY EMPLOYEES. IT'S ABOUT
60,000 UTILITY WORKERS WORKING
FOR OUR, WHAT WE CALL PLUS
MUNICIPAL UTILITIES. AS WELL AS
IOUS, WE HAVE VERY STRONG
INTEREST IN CLEAN HYDROGEN.
GREEN HYDROGEN. WE HAVE PROJECTS
WITH THE MUNIS THAT WE'RE
WORKING ON THEM VERY CLOSELY,
THESE ARE IMPORTANT AND CLEAR
OPPORTUNITIES. I DO WANT TO
POINT OUT THAT WHILE YOU'RE, AND
I ONLY HEARD THE THIRD PANEL,
THE OTHER TWO I MISSED, I
APOLOGIZE, THEY LOOK VERY GOOD
IN TERMS OF THE PEOPLE INVOLVED,
BUT NO COMMENTS FROM LABOR,
CHRIS HANNON OF THE STATE
BUILDING TRADES WAS A LEADER IN
CREATING THE HYDROGEN HUB AND
THE AND THE PROGRAM THAT'S
BEFORE US NOW, WE ARE VERY
INTERESTED IN THE JOBS THAT COME
ALONG WITH THESE PROJECTS, THEY
ARE CLEAN AND GREEN PROJECTS.
THE ONES THAT ARE MEMBERS ARE
UTILITIES ARE ENGAGED IN WE WANT
TO EXECUTE THOSE, AND WE'RE
LOOKING FORWARD TO THE
OPPORTUNITY. WE I AGREE WITH MR.
MONAHAN'S PREVIOUS COMMENTS. WE
DON'T WANT TO GET SOMETHING IN
FRONT OF THE FEDERAL WORK AND
FEDERAL ACTION. WE NEED ACCESS
TO THOSE FUNDS TO MAKE THIS
WORK. IT'S NOT JUST THE 1.2
BILLION THAT THE FEDS HAVE
COMMITTED TO CALIFORNIA. IT'S
SEED MONEY. THERE'S ANOTHER 8 TO
9 BILLION ON TOP OF IT FROM A
PRIVATE COMPANIES THAT ARE
WILLING TO INVEST IN THESE
PROJECTS. WE'RE WE'RE KEEN ON
THAT, I THERE WAS A COUPLE OF
THINGS THAT I HEARD THE, THE
PANEL THE LAST PANEL THAT DID
CONCERN US. ONE OF THE MOST
SUCCESSFUL POINTS OF OUR CLEAN
ENERGY REVOLUTION IN THIS STATE
IS KEEPING JOBS HERE. WE'VE
CREATED TENS OF THOUSANDS OF
JOBS BUILDING SOLAR AND WIND
PROJECTS, HEARING THAT WE WANT
TO IMPORT WIND ENERGY FROM
WYOMING, SORT OF OUTSIDE OF THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, THAT'S
THANK YOU. THAT'S SUBSIDIZING,
THAT'S USING ELECTRIC CUSTOMERS
TO SUBSIDIZE THIS. SO WE WANT
THE PROJECTS HERE. WE'RE KEEN ON
THOSE WORK. AND WE LOOK FORWARD
TO WORKING WITH YOU TO MAKE IT
HAPPEN. THANK YOU. I DO WANT TO
LET YOU KNOW WE HAD, WE HAD
LABOR AND ARCHES AT OUR FIRST
SELECT COMMITTEE HEARING. I
WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THAT. SO
WE GENERALLY DID NOT. GO AHEAD.
YES THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND
MEMBERS. KRISTIN OLSEN OF
CALIFORNIA STRATEGIES HERE TODAY
ON BEHALF OF MONARCH BIOENERGY.
WANT TO ALIGN MY COMMENTS WITH
THOSE OF JULI 11 AND SAM WADE
FROM THE FIRST PANEL AND TALKING
ABOUT CREATIVE SOLUTIONS? I JUST
WANTED TO COMPLIMENT THE CHAIR
AND THE MEMBERS WHO WERE HERE
TODAY, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S
THESE KIND OF HEARINGS THAT ARE
GOING TO LEAD TO THE CREATIVE
SOLUTIONS THAT CAN MAKE SURE
CALIFORNIA IS A LEADER IN THIS
HYDROGEN SPACE. WE BELIEVE IN A
BOTH AND ALL APPROACH TO MEETING
OUR CLEAN ENERGY GOALS. IF WE
HAVE ANY HOPE OF GETTING THERE
AND SO THAT'S OUR GOAL TODAY, IS
TO MAKE SURE WE'RE USING ALL OF
THE APPROACHES TO MAKE SURE THAT
WE'RE ABLE TO DELIVER ON THOSE
AMBITIOUS CALIFORNIA IMPORTANT
CLEAN ENERGY GOALS. BUT I JUST
WANT TO SAY, AS A FORMER MEMBER
MYSELF AND AS NOW A MEMBER OF
THE CAPITAL COMMUNITY AT LARGE,
IT'S RARE THAT WE SEE HEARINGS
LIKE THIS. WHEN YOU'RE REALLY
DIVING DEEP INTO THE QUESTIONS
THAT MATTER SO MUCH ABOUT HOW
THIS IS ULTIMATELY GOING TO
MATERIALIZE. SO, AS I SAID, I
JUST WANT TO COMPLIMENT YOU ON
HOLDING THESE HEARINGS THE WAY
YOU'VE ORGANIZED THE HEARINGS,
THE PANELISTS YOU'VE BROUGHT TO
THE HEARINGS. I LOOK FORWARD TO
HOPEFULLY SEEING MORE OF THAT
THROUGHOUT THE LEGISLATIVE
PROCESS ON A NUMBER OF TOPICS,
BUT IT IS RARE. SO I WANTED TO
TAKE, A REAL POINT AT JUST
COMPLIMENTING YOU ON THAT,
BECAUSE I THINK IT SHOWS REAL
LEADERSHIP IN MOVING IMPORTANT
POLICY FORWARD. AND LASTLY, AS
YOU KNOW, I ALSO REPRESENT
SEMPRA ENERGY, AND WE ARE VERY
INVOLVED IN THE HYDROGEN SPACE,
AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, AND A
NUMBER OF DIFFERENT ARENAS. AND
WE HAVE A INNOVATION,
INNOVATION, INNOVATION, A SEMPRA
INNOVATION CENTER THAT I KNOW
ASSEMBLYMEMBER BRIAN HAS BEEN TO
NEAR LONG BEACH. AND IT'S A
FASCINATING PLACE TO LEARN MORE
ABOUT WHAT'S POSSIBLE IN THIS
SPACE. AND SO WE WOULD WANT TO
INVITE ANY AND ALL OF YOU TO
ATTEND AS YOUR SCHEDULES ALLOW.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MR. CHAIR
AND MEMBERS, GREG COOK,
REPRESENTING THE NORTHERN
CALIFORNIA POWER AGENCY WITH
REGARD TO TODAY'S HEARING AND
MORE SPECIFICALLY, THE LAST
PANEL THAT YOU JUST HAD TO
DISCUSS THE POLICY SOLUTIONS TO
ACHIEVE THE THREE PILLARS GOALS.
WE HAVE REAL CONCERN ABOUT THE
COMMITTEE GETTING TERRIBLY
INVOLVED IN THAT QUESTION. THIS
IS A MATTER THAT IS BEING
DISCUSSED AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL
TODAY. ANY RECOMMENDATION FROM
CALIFORNIA FOR THAT WOULD BE
CONTRARY TO WHAT THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT GUIDELINES ARE, WOULD
BE PREMATURE AND POSSIBLY
JEOPARDIZE CALIFORNIA DÍAS
PARTICIPATION IN THE $1.2
BILLION ARCHES PROGRAM, OF WHICH
WE HAVE A PROJECT THAT'S IN THE
FIRST TIER. ONCE AGAIN, MR.
CHAIR, I'M GOING TO INVITE YOU
AND YOUR COMMITTEE MEMBERS TO
VISIT OUR FACILITY IN LODI, 40
MILES DOWN THE ROAD. AND YOU CAN
SEE WHAT CAN POSSIBLY HAPPEN IN
CALIFORNIA TODAY TO INCREASE AND
IMPROVE ELECTRICITY RELIABILITY.
AT THE SAME TIME, TAKE ADVANTAGE
, TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE
WONDERFUL NATURAL RESOURCES THAT
WE HAVE THROUGH OUR CLEAN ENERGY
PROGRAMS AND AT THE SAME TIME,
HOPEFULLY REDUCE ELECTRICITY
COSTS. I THINK THIS IS A
DISCUSSION THAT I ENCOURAGE YOU
TO CONTINUE, AND I WOULD HOPE
THAT IN A FUTURE HEARING, YOU'LL
INVITE NCPA TO COME TO THE
COMMITTEE AND PRESENT FORMALLY
THE PROPOSAL THAT WE HAVE FOR
YOUR CONSIDERATION. AGAIN, I
URGE NO FORMAL ACTION AS IT
RELATES TO THREE PILLARS UNTIL
SUCH TIME AS WE HAVE
CLARIFICATION FROM THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR.
CHAIR, AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS ALFREDO
AND I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF A
COMPANY CALLED H CYCLE. THEY'RE
A RENEWABLE HYDROGEN DEVELOPER
FOCUSED ON TAKING ORGANIC WASTE
AND CONVERTING THAT TO HYDROGEN
WITH THE FACILITY TO BE
DEVELOPED IN THE BAY AREA. WITH
THE GROUNDBREAKING, HOPEFULLY
LATER THIS YEAR. I'LL BE BRIEF.
I THINK I'LL WANTED TO REVISIT A
TOPIC THAT WAS BROACHED BY THE
LAST PANEL, WHICH IS FOCUSING ON
EXISTING PROGRAMS THAT WORK
REALLY WELL, LIKE THE LOW CARBON
FUEL STANDARD AND ONE OF THE KEY
TENETS OF THAT PROGRAM. AND NOW,
ONE OF THE KEY TENETS OF 45 IS A
STANDARD THAT FOCUSES ON CARBON
INTENSITY. SO THEY SAY, IN MY
OWN WORDS, IF YOU WANT TO BE, IF
YOU WANT TO BE WELCOMED INTO THE
PARTY, YOU HAVE TO SHOW YOUR
MATH, SHOW YOUR WORK, AND IF YOU
CAN ACHIEVE A CARBON INTENSITY
LOWER THAN WHAT THE STANDARD IS
SETTING AND IT'S A DECLINING
STANDARD IN THE LCFS AT THAT,
THEN THEN YOU CAN PARTICIPATE.
AND THE INCENTIVE THEN IS IF YOU
CAN GET LOWER OR EVEN NEGATIVE,
YOU GET THE BEST REWARD AT THE
PARTY. AND SO WITH THAT, I JUST
WANTED TO REMIND FOLKS THAT I
THINK THAT THERE ARE SOME OTHER
KEY COMPONENTS THAT HAVEN'T
NECESSARILY BEEN DISCUSSED AT
LENGTH, INCLUDING THE CARBON
INTENSITY ASPECT OF LCFS AND 45
VÆ. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. I THINK WE'RE AT THE END,
UNLESS THE GENTLEMAN'S THERE.
RIGHT. AND SO JUST NOT QUITE 2.5
HOURS FOR THIS PRESENTATION.
REALLY APPRECIATE IT. I WANT TO
WELCOME ASSEMBLY MEMBER BRIAN
HERE AND, ASSEMBLY MEMBER
CHOLERA, SO, IT WAS I THINK,
APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS OF, MISS
OLSON, KATE, WHO APPRECIATED THE
HEARING, FELT LIKE IT WENT WELL.
IS THERE ANYTHING YOU WANT?
GENTLEMEN? WANT TO ADD OR
COMMENT ON BEFORE WE ADJOURN
THIS MEETING? NO, I JUST WANT TO
THANK YOU, CHAIR, AGAIN, FOR
CONTINUING TO PUSH THIS WORK
FORWARD. EVEN DURING THE BUSY,
AND OVERLAPPING COMMITTEE
SCHEDULE, YOUR COMMITMENT TO
THIS ISSUE AND TO CONVENING
IMPORTANT STAKEHOLDERS ACROSS
ALL PERSPECTIVES ON THIS ISSUE.
IS THE WAY POLICY MAKING SHOULD
BE. SO THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
THANK YOU. I SECOND THAT AND
I'LL THIRD IT TOO. AND I
APPRECIATE THE PANELIST. AND THE
PUBLIC COMMENT TOO IS VERY
VALUABLE. THIS IS A DENSE TOPIC
THAT REQUIRES A LOT OF CAREFUL
CONSIDERATION AND APPRECIATE
THIS VENUE AND THE LEADERSHIP
THAT YOU'VE SHOWN TO PULL US ALL
TOGETHER. REALLY ARTICULATE
PANELISTS TODAY. SO APPRECIATE
IT ALL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU.
BUT.
THANK YOU.
FOR HAVING