San Carlos has seen approximately a 26% decrease in its greenhouse gas emissions between 2005-23, but still has a way to go to reach its long-term environmental goals, the City Council learned.
The San Carlos City Council received an update at its meeting March 24, on its climate mitigation and adaptation plan that was adopted in 2021. The city’s goal is to reduce 40% of its emissions by 2030, and 80% by 2050 relative to 1990 levels, Assistant City Manager Nil Blackburn said.
Progress in climate mitigation and adaptation has been made in implementing rooftop solar panels, promoting electric vehicles and increasing disaster preparedness information, Blackburn said.
When tracking the city’s greenhouse gas emissions, most come from natural gas and transportation, Emily Saul, a sustainability planner consultant, said. Electricity emissions dropped significantly between 2005-19 after shifting from Pacific Gas and Electric to Peninsula Clean Energy, she said, and road transportation has seen decreases each year as more residents opt for electric vehicles.
To reach the city’s 2030 emission goals, a 23% decrease must be made, Saul said. To do this, the city should focus on building and transportation electrification as those will address the largest sources of emissions in the community.
By providing updated infrastructure such as more EV charging stations at multifamily housing sites and public spaces, residents will feel more inclined to get their own electric vehicles and ultimately contribute to lowering emissions, Saul said.
(1) comment
I’d like to see how this decrease is being measured and whether these numbers are meaningful. If San Carlos imports more and more of their electricity, do they consider it a decrease as they increase greenhouse gas emissions in areas where electricity is being generated? It sounds like they do and as such, does this 26% decrease mean anything? How is this supposed decrease affecting air quality levels or global warming temperatures over San Carlos? Is this decrease something to brag about or is it just a number created for tracking a statistic that sounds meaningful but isn’t? I vote for the latter.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.