Climate change: radiative forcing management climate accounting protocol.
The implementation of SB 682 is expected to significantly influence state law by integrating rigorous climate accountability standards. By requiring the state board to adopt a protocol by January 1, 2021, the bill stipulates actions to be taken to measure and manage the climatic impact of various activities in California. This includes aligning state actions with international standards for climate accountability, thereby enhancing California's role as a leader in climate policy while addressing local environmental concerns regarding health and safety.
Senate Bill No. 682, introduced by Senator Allen in California, focuses on the critical issue of climate change and mandates the establishment of a radiative forcing management climate accounting protocol. This protocol is intended to aid the State Air Resources Board in evaluating proposed climate mitigation and restoration actions that could effectively decrease radiative forcing and excess heat in the atmosphere, with the goal of stabilizing global and regional mean temperatures. The bill builds upon the existing framework set by the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, which recognizes the urgent need for comprehensive strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and pollutants.
The sentiment regarding SB 682 is predominantly supportive among environmental advocates and public health organizations, who view the protocol as a necessary measure to combat the alarming effects of climate change that California faces, such as increased wildfires and health hazards due to air pollution. However, there are also concerns from some stakeholders regarding the potential economic impact on industries reliant on emissions that might be restricted under the new regulations. These polarized perspectives reflect a broader debate on how to balance environmental sustainability with economic growth.
Notable points of contention around SB 682 revolve around the effectiveness and feasibility of the climate accounting protocol it promotes. Critics raise concerns about the administrative burden on businesses needing to comply with new standards and whether the measures can significantly impact climate change. Conversely, proponents argue that without strict regulations and proactive climate actions, California's environmental challenges will only escalate, further threatening public health and safety. The ongoing discussions highlight the complex interplay between economic interests and environmental responsibilities.