The Bay Area Air Quality Management District Board of Directors (BAAQMD) on Wednesday approved new regulations that will gradually reduce nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from natural gas furnaces and water heaters in the Bay Area.

According to the Air District, natural gas construction equipment is one of the largest emitters of nitrogen oxides of all stationary air pollution sources, producing a similar amount of NOx pollution as passenger vehicles in the Bay Area.

“The Bay Area’s 1.8 million water heaters and furnaces significantly impact our air quality, leading to dozens of early deaths and a variety of health impacts, particularly in communities of color,” said Dr. Philip Fine, Air District Executive Officer. “This groundbreaking regulation will phase out the most polluting devices in homes and businesses to protect Bay Area residents from the harmful air pollution they cause.”

Many illnesses, including cough, wheezing, difficulty breathing, asthma and increased susceptibility to respiratory infections, have been linked to NOx exposure, while asthma and other respiratory diseases, neurological diseases, heart attack, stroke, lung cancer and premature death have been linked to exposure to fine dust.

The new changes will prevent up to $890 million a year in health damage from air pollution.

However, the Air District added that the rule changes apply only to new equipment and do not require the immediate replacement of existing equipment. They also do not apply to appliances used for cooking, such as: B. Gas stoves. The Air District expects the new regulation to reduce NOx emissions by 90% and significantly improve air quality in the Bay Area.

Information for this briefing was obtained from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District Board of Directors, as well as referenced sources and companies. The author has no securities or affiliations with the organizations discussed. No buy or sell recommendation. Always conduct additional research and consult a professional before purchasing any security. The author has no licenses.

The post San Francisco Bay Space to Ban Pure Gasoline Heating Home equipment by 2027 appeared first on Los Gatos News And Events.

SAN FRANCISCO – The Bay Area Air Quality Management District Board of Directors has adopted amendments to Regulation 9, Rules 4 and 6 to eliminate emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) from residential and commercial natural gas furnaces and water heaters in the Bay Area. be free.

Emissions from natural gas building appliances cause a similar amount of NOx pollution to passenger vehicles in the Bay Area. As a group, they are among the largest emitters of nitrogen oxides of all stationary air pollution sources regulated by the Air District.

“The Bay Area’s 1.8 million water heaters and furnaces significantly impact our air quality, leading to dozens of early deaths and a variety of health impacts, particularly in communities of color,” said Dr. Philip Fine, managing director of the air district. “This groundbreaking regulation will phase out the most polluting devices in homes and businesses to protect Bay Area residents from the harmful air pollution they cause.”

The rule changes would only apply to new devices and would not require the immediate replacement of existing devices. They also do not apply to appliances used for cooking, such as: B. Gas stoves. NOx-emitting natural gas furnaces and water heaters will be phased out over time, starting with water heaters in 2027. The rule changes will improve overall regional air quality through outdoor ventilation of these appliances and reduce exposure to particulate matter, particularly in communities They account for up to $890 million per year in health impacts due to exposure to air pollution. NOx emissions affect local and regional air quality and contribute to the formation of ozone and particulate matter (PM2.5).

Exposure to NOx is associated with coughing, wheezing, difficulty breathing, asthma, and increased susceptibility to respiratory infections. Exposure to particulate matter has been linked to asthma and other respiratory diseases, neurological diseases, heart attack, stroke, lung cancer and premature death. The new changes will protect public health from the dangers of these pollutants and prevent an estimated 85 premature deaths and dozens of new asthma cases in the Bay Area each year.

The air district released a draft environmental impact report and sought comments on the proposed rule changes during a 45-day public comment period that ended Feb. 6. Compliance dates are between 2027 and 2031, depending on device type, use and size. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District is the regional agency responsible for protecting air quality and the global climate in the nine-county Bay Area. For more information, visit www.baaqmd.gov/building-appliances.

The post San Francisco Newest Metropolis to Ban Fuel Furnaces appeared first on Los Gatos News And Events.

SAN FRANCISCO — The San Francisco Unified School District will no longer use the word “chief” in job titles because of concerns from Native Americans.

District officials said they haven’t decided what they will use instead of “chief.” The San Francisco Chronicle first reported the ban on Wednesday.

“While there are many opinions on the matter, our leadership team agreed that, given that Native American members of our community have expressed concerns about the use of the title, we are no longer going to use it,” the district statement said.

“With nearly 10,000 employees, SFUSD is one of the largest employers in San Francisco and in addition to site leaders, we need central leaders who serve all of our 119 schools,” it said.

The statement acknowledged that those positions require significant responsibility and specific expertise.

“By changing how we refer to our division heads we are in no way diminishing the indispensable contributions of our district central service leaders,” it said.

The district’s decision follows such moves as the recent renaming of Northern California’s former Squaw Valley Ski Resort. The word “squaw,” derived from the Algonquin language, has morphed over generations to a misogynist and racist term to disparage Indigenous women.

Thursday, lawmakers in the state Assembly passed a bill that would remove “squaw” from all geographic features and place names in the state. Lawmakers would not say the word while debating the bill. Democratic Assembly member James Ramos, a member of the Serrano/Cahuilla tribe, referred to it as the “s word.”

“This word that is still being used in well over 100 geographical areas in California,” Ramos said. “This word is very derogatory toward Native American women.”

The word “chief,” however, is commonly used to connote leadership and authority — from fire and police chiefs to chief executives, chief scientists and engineers, and a host of other jobs.

According to Webster’s New World dictionary, the origin and development of the word “chief” runs back through Middle English and Old French to Latin.

The post San Francisco colleges ban ‘chief’ from occupational titles appeared first on Los Gatos News And Events.

Jim Hartman

By Jim Hartman

Saturday, June 18, 2022

You can’t make this up: The San Francisco Unified School District is dropping the word “chief” from all job titles (“chief technology officer, “chief of staff,” etc. ) for its 10,000-employee workforce because – you guessed it – the word is associated with Native Americans.
According to spokesperson Gentle Blythe, “While there are many opinions on the matter, our leadership team agreed that, given that Native American members of our community have expressed concerns about use of the title, we are no longer going to use it.”
While the word “chief” can be used in connection with American Indian tribes, it also appears in many phrases that have no connection, including “chief of police,” “chief executive officer” and “sorry about that, chief.”
No substitute for the word has been determined, which suggests how little thought was put into the decision.
Blythe quickly noted dropping the word does not reflect “a downgrade in job status.”
The district didn’t indicate whether it advocates President Joe Biden be called something other than “commander in chief,” or whether John Roberts should renounce being “chief justice.”
What’s particularly amusing in this attempt at progressive sensitivity: While the English language has many words that can be traced to Native Americans, including “chipmunk,” “barbecue” and “hurricane,” they don’t include “chief.”
According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, the word “chief” has no connection to Native American languages. Instead it derives from the Old French word (chef ), meaning “leader” and originally from Latin (capus), meaning “captain.”
The San Francisco school district is still learning, apparently, even after the city’s liberal Democratic voters ousted three school board members in a special recall election in February.
The school district appears to be a parody on “woke” excesses of political correctness. Will they next ban books by Laurence Tribe?
Parents were outraged the school board kept schools shut through the entire 2020 school year based on teacher union demands even as San Francisco Mayor London Breed pressed them to reopen. High school students returned to school for a single day in May 2021 so the school district would qualify for $12 million in state aid.
Many parents had already voted against the board by removing their children from district schools. Enrollment declined by 3,500 during the pandemic.
School board members had also indulged their “woke” progressive obsession by seeking to rename 44 schools with allegedly sexist or racist designations, such as George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein.
The school board recall was a landslide, with Alison Collins (79%), Gabriela Lopez (75%) and Faauuga Moliga (72%) losing overwhelmingly. Successful recalls are rare. It takes real effort to lose by 3-1 margins.
The recall was a populist groundswell supported by fed-up parents and liberals, including Breed.
That’s San Francisco where Republicans are only 6% of the city’s registered voters and where 85% of voters supported Joe Biden in November 2020.
Breed noted “the school board must focus on the essentials of delivering a well-run school system above all else.” Amen.
On June 7, San Francisco voters also sent a national message on crime by recalling the city’s far-left district attorney, Chesa Boudin, in another landslide (60%-40%).
Son of convicted felon Weather Underground domestic terrorist parents, Boudin was elected district attorney in 2019 advocating “decarceration” of jails and ending cash bail. He refused to enforce criminal laws, sharply reducing felony prosecutions.
Crime has taken off. In 2021 homicides in San Francisco were up 36% from 2019 and 222 people were killed by gun violence in the city compared to 137 in 2019. With shoplifting an epidemic, Walgreens closed 11 stores there since 2019.
Homelessness and drug use are rampant on San Francisco streets. There were 640 drug overdose deaths in 2021 — more than COVID deaths.
Recalling Boudin is a start in cleaning up crime in “The City.”
Email Jim Hartman at lawdocman1@aol.com.

The post Jim Hartman: San Francisco colleges ban the phrase ‘chief’ appeared first on Los Gatos News And Events.

SAN FRANCISCO — A California appeals court ruled against an effort by San Francisco to ban four suspected drug dealers from a 50-square-block area in a city neighborhood rife with drug dealing and drug use.

The ruling issued Friday is part of a case that started in 2020 when San Francisco south 28 alleged drug dealers who frequent the Tenderloin and South of Market neighborhoods to try and clean up the area that has seen the city’s largest number of overdose deaths. Then San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera said the lawsuits, if approved in California Superior Court, would prevent the alleged dealers from entering that area of ​​downtown.

The state’s First District Court of Appeal said a local government may be entitled to issue narrowly targeted stay-away orders to wrongdoers in some circumstances, but not one that is so broad, the San Francisco Chronicle reported Monday.

The city’s first attempt to enforce the ban against four of the 28 alleged drug dealers was blocked last May by a state judge in San Francisco who said state law did not appear to authorize a court to prohibit someone from entering a geographic area — but even if it did, the proposed order was so broad that it would violate the constitutional right to travel.

“We are mindful of, and sympathetic to, the challenges faced by the city in addressing the issues of illegal drug sales, drug use, and the drug-related health crisis and its effects on the people who live and work in the neighborhood,” Justice Marla Miller wrote in Friday’s 3-0 ruling.

Miller said, however, that “although the city contends these defendants have no reason to ever even be in the 50-square-block Tenderloin neighborhood except to sell drugs there was evidence that many community resources and government agencies are located in the Tenderloin.”

She said the San Francisco judge was entitled to believe the four people’s statements “that they were interested in taking advantage of the employment, treatment, housing, and health services available in the 50-square-block neighborhood.”

San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu’s spokesperson, Jen Kwart, said Monday the office was disappointed by the ruling and had not decided whether to appeal.

The post San Francisco can’t ban suspected drug sellers appeared first on Los Gatos News And Events.

A California First District Court of Appeal decision released on Monday ruled that a ban against four drug dealers from a 50-block area of ​​the Tenderloin and South of Market neighborhoods is illegal, upholding earlier rulings on the matter.

The case, The People v. Padilla-Martel, stemmed from an action by former San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera and the City of San Francisco two years ago. In 2020, authorities had a hard time culling rampant drug use in the Tenderloin area of ​​the city. Needing a new way to keep out a few dozen drug dealers who were responsible for a large percentage of drug dealing in the area, Herrera sued 28 of them that September from entering a 50-block area of ​​the city. As most had several drug dealing priors, and all but one living outside the city, the city thought it had a strong case for public safety. The tenderloin still is an epicenter of drug dealing and overdose deaths in the city.

However, the matter was quickly challenged by the dealers as violating their constitutional right to travel and not having a local or state law to back the widespread ban. In May 2021, the San Francisco Superior Court ruled it unconstitutional. The city quickly appealed to the ruling, where it was soon heard again in the California First District Court of Appeal.

This led to a 3-0 ruling issued on Friday and released on Monday by the Court, in which it upheld the Superior Court ruling and said that while stay-away orders were usually legal in some circumstances in small areas, a broad 50-block ban for dozens of people was simply unconstitutional.

“We are mindful of, and sympathetic to, the challenges faced by the city in addressing the issues of illegal drug sales, drug use, and the drug-related health crisis and its effects on the people who live and work in the neighborhood,” Justice Marla Miller said in the court’s ruling. “Although the city contends these defendants have no reason to ever even be in the 50-square-block Tenderloin neighborhood except to sell drugs there was evidence that many community resources and government agencies are located in the Tenderloin.”

“The court finds it credible that the suspects were interested in taking advantage of the employment, treatment, housing, and health services available in the 50-square-block neighborhood. The SFPD declarations did not show that any of the defendants has been convicted of selling drugs, possessing drugs for sale, or violating any pretrial stay-away orders.”

Reaction to the ruling

The ruling led to a generally negative reaction in San Francisco on Monday and Tuesday. A spokesman for current San Francisco Attorney David Chiu said that the office was disappointed by the ruling. Others were worried what this would mean for crime in the city.

“Right now we’re still in [San Francisco District Attorney] Chesa Boudin’s San Francisco, where most of these guys get off anyway,” one San Francisco police officer said to the Globe on condition of anonymity on Tuesday. “Now we can’t even keep these guys away. Drug dealers certainly are taking advantage of the tenderloin, but you can bet it’s not for treatment or housing services or anything else the court listed. Well, except employment, but you have to sell drugs somewhere.”

“I’m not a lawyer, so maybe it did violate their right to travel or whatever, but these people are hurting people and making the lives of residents worse. We arrest them, they’re out soon enough. We try and force them out, court puts them back in. People try and clean up the area, and you have their cars and homes broken into. The judges obviously never had to respond to a call at 2 AM to find another person dead because of an overdose and then pass by on the way to the morgue a known dealer. We have to uphold the law, but let me tell you, it can be trying some days.”

“This is the San Francisco we have now in the Tenderloin. And these judges just stopped one of the few things left we can do to try and bring it back.”

As of Tuesday, the San Francisco City Attorney’s office is deciding whether or not to appeal the case to a higher court.

The post CA Appeals Courtroom Guidelines San Francisco Can’t Ban Tenderloin Drug Sellers appeared first on Los Gatos News And Events.

The grim toll of drug dealing in San Francisco’s Tenderloin does not give the city legal authority to ban four suspected dealers from a 50-square-block area of ​​the neighborhood, says a state appeals court.

Then-City Attorney Dennis Herrera filed suit in September 2020 seeking stay-away orders against 28 people from a large area of ​​the Tenderloin, the center of the narcotics trade in San Francisco. Police said there were 600 drug-dealing arrests in the Tenderloin in 2020 and crime rates there were three times the city’s overall rate. Out of 699 drug overdose deaths in San Francisco in 2020, more than 40% were in the Tenderloin and South of Market, officials said.

The injunction would prohibit the named individuals from entering the area except while passing through by bus or subway, or walking a short distance to a court hearing. Violations would be punishable by fines of up to $8,500.

The city’s first attempt to enforce the ban, against four Oakland residents who had been separately arrested on suspicion of illegal possession and sale of drugs, was blocked last May by San Francisco Superior Court Judge Ethan Schulman. He said state law did not appear to authorize a court to prohibit someone from entering a geographic area — but even if it did, the proposed order was so broad that it would violate the constitutional right to travel.

On Friday, the state’s First District Court of Appeal said a local government may be entitled to issue narrowly targeted stay-away orders to wrongdoers in some circumstances, but not one that was this broad.

“We do not minimize the serious and pervasive harm caused by the flood of street-level drug sales in the Tenderloin,” Justice Marla Miller wrote in the 3-0 ruling. “We are mindful of, and sympathetic to, the challenges faced by the city in addressing the issues of illegal drug sales, drug use, and the drug-related health crisis and its effects on the people who live and work in the neighborhood.”

Miller said, however, that “although the city contends these defendants have no reason to ever even be in the 50-square-block Tenderloin neighborhood except to sell drugs there was evidence that many community resources and government agencies are located in the Tenderloin.” She said Schulman was entitled to believe the four people’s statements “that they were interested in taking advantage of the employment, treatment, housing, and health services available in the 50-square-block neighborhood.”

The city’s lawyers cited a ruling by the state Supreme Court in 2016 upholding a judge’s order requiring a defendant who had been convicted of robbing a Home Depot store to stay away from all of the appliance chain’s outlets in California. But Miller said the order did not interfere with the right to travel because the defendant was still allowed to go anywhere else in the area.

In this case, she said, each of the four defendants was accused of crimes in a relatively small area, and one has two daughters who live in the tenderloin.

Herrera left the city attorney’s office in November to become head of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission and was succeeded by David Chiu, a former state assembly member. Chiu’s spokesperson, Jen Kwart, said Monday the office was disappointed by the ruling and had not decided whether to appeal.

Still, “we are pleased the Court of Appeal agreed that we can continue to pursue creative remedies in similar public nuisance cases,” Kwart said, referring to the state law against private actions that harm public health. “We are currently evaluating potential next steps, and we will continue to look for ways to use civil law to promote and increase public safety in the Tenderloin.”

But Chessie Thacher of the American Civil Liberties Union, a lawyer for the four defendants, noted the court’s observation that, under the law, “human beings do not constitute nuisances in themselves.”

“The city should pursue remedies, but not on the backs of these individuals,” Thacher said.

Bob Egelko is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: begelko@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @BobEgelko

The post San Francisco can’t ban suspected drug sellers from Tenderloin, court docket guidelines appeared first on Los Gatos News And Events.

SONOMA (CBS SF) — Sonoma County this weekend comes under a new ban on mass gatherings and a request that people stay home. It’s just another disheartening setback for an area that depends on visitors.

“My first thought was I wouldn’t worry too much because I read it and saw that it wouldn’t affect restaurants,” says Sam Morphy, owner of The Red Grape. “The big blow came when the recommendation was to just stay at home.”

CONTINUE READING: French bulldog stolen at gunpoint leaves owner heartbroken

The Red Grape celebrated its 20th birthday today. Morphy says he couldn’t have survived the past two years without eating plenty of roadside food, and he’s already doing more after the health order was issued on Monday.

“It’s always a bad time when they tell people to stay home,” he says.

“Yes, it’s definitely a here we go again feeling,” says Mark Bodenhamer of the Sonoma Valley Chamber of Commerce.

Wine boxes have been replaced by mask boxes in the chamber offices.

“So we have quite a few N95s. And we have a second batch of KN95 and hand sanitizer that the state Department of Emergency Services sent to us,” Bodenhamer says, pointing to the supply.

CONTINUE READING: Lunar New Year street festival in San Francisco’s Chinatown canceled due to COVID-19 Omicron Surge; Parade up for now

The board says the real frustration is that the announcement came so suddenly — particularly for groups hosting large events.

“With these things, it would be really nice if we knew even a week in advance that a shutdown or restrictions were coming,” says Bodenhamer.

January is already a slow month here. The hope is that after the order expires, some normality will not be far behind.

“So we’re content to sit it out,” explains Bodenhamer. “We really hope that by spring we’ll be ready to get back into business.”

“The Omicron seems to be going away quickly,” Morphy hopes. “We just hope there’s nothing behind it. We are looking forward to a good spring summer and of course a good summer. We just hope that doesn’t take anything away from us.”

MORE NEWS: 49er Faithful invade Dallas ahead of Sunday’s wild card game

As in restaurants, the health regulation does not apply to workplaces, shopping centers or schools. It lasts until February 11th.

The post New Ban on Mass Gatherings In Impact in Sonoma County – CBS San Francisco appeared first on Los Gatos News And Events.

SAN FRANCISCO (CBS SF / AP) – Foiled by a federal court backlash, Governor Gavin Newsom ordered staff to use Texas’s successful legal arguments in the Supreme Court to defend its ban on abortion to draft law that it would prohibit possession of assault weapons in California.

In a statement released Saturday night, Newsom expressed outrage over the Supreme Court’s decision on the Texas case.

CONTINUE READING: UPDATE: Storm System Shifts Towards Central Coast; Evacuation warnings issued

“I am outraged by yesterday’s Supreme Court ruling allowing the ban on most abortion services in Texas to be upheld, and I broadly support Texas’s plan to amend its Roe v. Basic Protection Act. Isolate Wade, ”he said. “But if states can now protect their laws from scrutiny by federal courts that liken assault weapons to Swiss Army knives, then California will use that authority to protect people’s lives while Texas has used them to put women at risk. “

“I have directed my associates to work with the Legislature and Attorney General on a bill that will create a right of action that allows individuals to seek injunctive relief and legal damages of at least $ 10,000 per violation, plus costs and attorney’s fees assert anyone. ”Who manufactures, distributes or sells an assault weapon or ghost gun kit or parts thereof in the US state of California. If the most efficient way to keep these devastating weapons off our streets is to add the threat of private lawsuits, that’s exactly what we should be doing. “

California has banned the manufacture and sale of many assault weapons for decades. A federal judge lifted the ban in June, ruling it unconstitutional and drew the wrath of the state’s democratic leaders by comparing the popular AR-15 rifle to a Swiss Army knife as “good for home and combat”.

The state ban remained in place while the verdict is being appealed.

Meanwhile, Republican lawmakers in Texas passed law earlier this year banning abortion after a fetal heartbeat is detected, which usually occurs about six weeks after pregnancy. Texas law allows private individuals to enforce the ban and gives them the power to sue abortion clinics and anyone else who “helps and assists” with the process.

On Friday, the US Supreme Court allowed Texas law to remain in effect while abortion clinics block it.

CONTINUE READING: California grocers and restaurateurs are calling for the new bacon law to be delayed

The Texas Abortion Act litigation has centered on its unusual structure and whether it inappropriately limits the ability to challenge the law in court. Texan lawmakers left responsibility for enforcing the law to private individuals, not state officials.

The case raised a complex set of questions about who, if any, can sue in federal court, the typical avenue for contesting abortion restrictions.

Newsom’s gun proposal would have to pass California lawmakers before it could become law. The legislature is currently not in session and is due to meet again in January. It usually takes around eight months for new bills to pass through lawmakers, unless there are special circumstances.

Senator Brian Dahle, a Republican from Bieber, would oppose the plan but predicted it could likely pass California’s Democrat-dominated legislature. He said the proposal was most likely a stunt for Newsom to attract its progressive electorate ahead of a possible future presidential run.

“The right to bear arms is different from the right to have an abortion. The right to abortion is not a constitutional change. So I think he’s far from the base, ”said Dahle. “I think he’s just using it as an opportunity to be in the stands.”

But Newsom’s Saturday night statement is a fulfilled prophecy for some gun rights groups who had predicted that progressive states would try to use Texas’ abortion law to restrict access to guns. Because of this, the Firearms Policy Coalition, a nonprofit group that campaigns for gun rights, has filed a lawsuit against Texas law in the US Supreme Court.

MORE NEWS: Berkeley Animal Rights Group plans to demonstrate horse deaths in Golden Gate Fields

“If Texas is successful in its move here, New York, California, New Jersey and others will not be far behind making equally aggressive moves to not only deter but to freeze the right to keep and carry weapons,” Lawyer Erik Jaffe wrote on behalf of the Arms Policy Coalition.

The post Authorized Door Opened By Texas Abortion Regulation Will Be Used To Ban Assault Weapons – CBS San Francisco appeared first on Los Gatos News And Events.

San Francisco this week was the last, and perhaps largest, city in the US to ban natural gas in new buildings.

In a meeting on Tuesday, the city’s board of directors passed a law that stipulates the construction of new residential and commercial buildings for the exclusive use of electrical energy, starting with projects that submit permits in the next year. This ordinance will cover about 60% of the city’s current development pipeline to reduce the city’s carbon footprint and tackle climate change, District 8 supervisor Rafael Mandelman said at the meeting.

“San Francisco has long been taking climate change seriously, and today – after another catastrophic fire season, record streak of unhealthy days, extreme heat waves, and even a day when the sun didn’t rise – we San Franciscans have the opportunity to do another incremental but important step to take to save our planet, “he told his colleagues at the meeting.

The board’s unanimous vote concludes nearly a year of deliberations with the Zero Emissions Building Taskforce, said Mandelman, which brought together affordable housing and mixed-use developers, architects and engineers, labor and construction trades and community officials to draft the legislation. It complements the approval of the city’s electrical preference ordinance passed last fall, which calls for higher energy efficiency standards for natural gas buildings, and an ordinance passed earlier this year mandating the all-electric construction of new municipal projects.

The vote also adds San Francisco to the growing list of nearly 40 California cities to enact such ordinances since Berkeley’s historic ban on natural gas infrastructure in July 2019. Experts say San Francisco’s move could carry enough weight to overturn similar laws from cities like Los Angeles, and could even push Governor Gavin Newsom, D, into nationwide action.

The California Energy Commission (CEC) is currently considering updates to its Title 24 building energy efficiency standards, Earthjustice Staff Attorney Matt Vespa said. As a former mayor, Newsom has a very special relationship with San Francisco, which could inspire him to follow suit with the city, Vespa said.

“We really expect the governor’s leadership on this issue,” said Vespa. “Hopefully San Francisco is signaling that San Francisco is doing this, the governor, that the time has come to really address this issue as part of their climate agenda.”

Arguments for fully electric construction in California

Residential and commercial buildings are responsible for approximately 25% of California’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, according to the California Air Resources Board. Senate Bill 32 requires California to cut its statewide greenhouse gas emissions to 40% below 1990 levels over the next 10 years, and some argue that the building sector should be the primary target of those efforts.

Part of this argument is based on the flammability of natural gas. In an opinion piece for the San Francisco Chronicle, Mandelman and retired fire chief Joanne Hayes-White said there are more than 75 gas leaks or emergencies reported every hour in California, an incredible risk in a state that has seen some of the hottest temperatures.

“Firefighters and first responders know the incredible amount of effort it takes to contain even a relatively small incident. As we face a number of historic forest fires and heat waves, and on top of a global pandemic that is already weighing on our emergency response measures, the last thing we need to be is to add to the threats we face, “it says the contribution.

Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), the utility that supplies almost the entire state of California, is helping the move to all-electric new builds. In a June letter to the CEC, a PG&E executive said the utility “welcomes the opportunity to avoid investing in new gas facilities that may later prove underutilized as local governments and the state work together to set long-term decarbonization goals reach”.

With the CEC considering embedding an all-electric construction mandate in its 2022 update, Mandelman hopes San Francisco can serve as a model to overcome inevitable obstacles such as the transition of plumbers and pipe fitters in the gas industry. Mandelman said he worked closely with Local 38, the regional plumbers and pipeline builders union, to outline a just transition for these workers amid the San Francisco ordinance.

“This commitment will ensure our workforce can look forward to a future in which ongoing environmental initiatives are coupled with opportunities for good union jobs in San Francisco,” he said at the board meeting.

Mandelman also stressed how a move to all-electric building can be gradual to ensure industries don’t become overloaded. The San Francisco ordinance contains two provisions that specifically address concerns about the city’s gastronomy, which is particularly challenged at this time of “extraordinary uncertainty,” he said. These regulations allow projects, including a commercial kitchen space, to submit mixed-fuel building permits by 2022. The regulation also provides for an “ongoing waiver process” for new restaurant buildings where gas is essential or electrical alternatives are not feasible.

“I believe this limited restaurant waiver will allow the continued use of gas in new buildings in the future where appropriate and necessary for a particular restaurant, while ensuring that we are clear and determined about the move in San Francisco start with natural gas. ”said Mandelmann.

The post San Francisco’s fuel ban on new buildings might immediate statewide motion appeared first on Los Gatos News And Events.