Wine officials raise concerns over county’s climate plan

Developers would need to reduce emissions 38 percent
2012-11-08T18:32:00Z 2012-12-09T18:50:32Z Wine officials raise concerns over county’s climate planPETER JENSEN Napa Valley Register
November 08, 2012 6:32 pm  • 

With the county Board of Supervisors scheduled to vote on the county’s Climate Action Plan next month, wine industry representatives expressed concerns about its potential impacts during a county Planning Commission meeting Wednesday.

The plan would reduce the greenhouse gas emissions in the unincorporated area 15 percent below 2005 levels by 2020, but the way in which it accomplishes this for vineyards and wineries elicited some unease from the industry.

Concerns ranged from whether the plan would be fair to grapegrowers, and whether it was too burdensome on wineries because of the emissions associated with cars driving back and forth for wine tastings and events.

The Planning Commission has already recommended approval of the Climate Action Plan, so Wednesday’s meeting was only informational. The commissioners said they took the concerns seriously, but some felt they could be handled with minor tweaks before the plan goes to the Board of Supervisors on Dec. 11 for a vote on approval.

Seventy percent of the county’s total reduction will be achieved through state government measures such as new fuel-efficiency standards, while another 17 percent reduction will be reached through actions taken by county government, including increased energy efficiency and renewable energy production.

But the final 13 percent of the total reduction will require developers of new buildings, wineries and vineyards to find ways to reduce their emissions 38 percent below their “business as usual” level — what they would emit without any attempt to reduce or mitigate their emissions.

That requires a balancing act for developers to perform. They have to look at ways to prevent emissions from occurring, either through car or vanpooling, or increased energy efficiency, while seeking to reduce emissions from their projects. That could include renewable energy generation on-site, installing electric-vehicle charging stations, or conserving habitat and natural lands.

For those projects that can’t reach 38 percent, county planning staff advocates that they pay a fee, based on a metric ton of carbon emitted, that may go into a local fund to offset the emission through mitigation.

Kirsty Shelton, the county’s Climate Action Plan project manager, said that would be expensive based on the per-ton cost, and it would be cheaper to purchase carbon credits through already existing open markets. The county planning staff’s analysis estimated that it could cost developers $275 to $280 per metric ton.

“That was quite exciting, I think, for the local community — until we saw the cost,” Shelton said.

Jim Lincoln of the Napa County Farm Bureau said he wanted the plan to be as fair as possible to grapegrowers, so that it wouldn’t burden new vineyard projects.

“We just want to make sure it’s fair for our members,” Lincoln said.

Michelle Benvenuto of Winegrowers of Napa County said the Climate Action Plan is now targeting wineries’ visitation and marketing plans for the greenhouse gas emissions associated with car trips to and from the wineries.

That’s making it difficult for some wineries to achieve the reductions they need, said Benvenuto, who requested that an economic impact report be produced on the Climate Action Plan before the vote on adoption.

“The sample projects have exposed issues that need to be resolved on this,” Benvenuto said. “The local offset program has to be competitive or you have to be able to buy credits on the open market.”

Debra Dommen, speaking on behalf of Treasury Wine Estates, said the plan’s 38 percent reduction can be difficult for some, but believes that it needs only a few tweaks to make it more feasible.

“Thirty-eight percent seems to be a lot to be borne for discretionary projects,” Dommen said. “We’re almost there. We just need a little more time to get it right.”

Shelton told the commission that the new fuel-efficiency standards from the state can account for as much as 10 percent of some wineries’ 38 percent, and they also get credit for “good deeds” — actions they’ve taken since 2005 that reduced emissions, such as producing less waste.

Planning Director Hillary Gitelman said the plan has been worked on continuously over the past several months to make it as feasible as possible, and doesn’t believe it unfairly burdens the wine industry. She said that many agricultural projects will be able to get credits by preserving oak trees on their properties.

“We don’t think this CAP (Climate Action Plan) is targeted at the ag community,” Gitelman said.

Still, she acknowledged that some developers will have to pay more to comply with the plan if it’s approved.

“There are costs associated with digging a little deeper to do a little bit more,” Gitelman said.

Gitelman also said the plan, if approved, would be revisited frequently to take into account new science or other new developments.

Commissioner Terry Scott said the plan needed more work.

“I don’t want an unfair burden placed on ag,” Scott said. “Before we send it to the Board of Supervisors we need a little bit more fine-tuning and a little bit more input.”

Commissioner Bob Fiddaman noted that work on the plan has been going on for the past three years, and he would prefer it go to a vote so it could be in place and begin accomplishing its target reductions.

“This is dragging on,” Fiddaman said. “It’s starting to make me nervous. I’d like to see it get done.”

Copyright 2015 Napa Valley Register. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

(13) Comments

  1. BennyD
    Report Abuse
    BennyD - November 08, 2012 7:50 pm
    Here's a solution. Enhance tourist transit to the Napa Valley via Ferry from SF, light rail direct to downtown Napa from Vallejo. Provide electric cars as rentals to those who wish to drive around the Valley. Most younger tourists already are enjoying the Valley on bicycles. All this will greatly reduce the carbon footprint of our important tourism, and will actually enhance it.
  2. NapaPaul
    Report Abuse
    NapaPaul - November 08, 2012 8:00 pm
    Napa County officials..Please stop wasting our money on nonsense like this. There is no scientific proof that taxing a winery in Napa for the pollution from their visitors is going to have any impact on global climate change. This is like not talking for 10 seconds to lower the noise pollution in the world. And you'd probably reply, "yes, but if we'd each just be quiet for a few minutes each day, think of the impact we could make.."
  3. gettingreal
    Report Abuse
    gettingreal - November 08, 2012 11:30 pm
    Be prepared for four more years of this Climate Action nonsense along with four more years of high gas prices. You get what you vote for.
  4. calinapavalleycali
    Report Abuse
    calinapavalleycali - November 09, 2012 8:21 am
    38% or NO on "business as usual."
  5. calinapavalleycali
    Report Abuse
    calinapavalleycali - November 09, 2012 8:21 am
    Nonsense?
  6. calinapavalleycali
    Report Abuse
    calinapavalleycali - November 09, 2012 8:24 am
    Great idea. Once it becomes to late-it's too late to fix.
  7. napablogger
    Report Abuse
    napablogger - November 09, 2012 8:48 am
    Car pollution has impacts locally, all that exhaust, you can see the brown in the air from Howell Mountain sometimes. There is a lot more pollution coming from autos than just carbon dioxide.
  8. glenroy
    Report Abuse
    glenroy - November 09, 2012 11:16 am
    .... way behind the curve...this isn’t even the tip of the liberal iceberg….
    The state regulators will soon be calling on restaurants to force them to use microwave or sun ovens to reduce their footprint…or face massive fines even though it helps the vineyards being plant oxygen.

    The cooling has been caused by manmade warming LOL...so we need to reduce the footprints. It is absurd beyond any semblance of common sense, but then that is liberalism at the core.

    The state regulators are ramping up to nail contractors, truckers, parcel service vehicles you name it if its not the latest ‘Flintstone’ model they’re going to fine it for revenue, then they’ll turn on city and county offices/vehicles….liberalism survives by hook and crook, then in the end eating their children...that means fining other government agencies when they've ruined the private sector as they have done so well in this state.

    For the last 30 years we’ve said it was coming and they said they’d never do that...
  9. wishiwasinca
    Report Abuse
    wishiwasinca - November 09, 2012 11:57 am
    Question. Is the proposed measure directed at existing wineries, or is it restricted to new development only?
  10. John Richards
    Report Abuse
    John Richards - November 10, 2012 9:04 am
    Shades of Al Gore peddling his carbon credits! This is the new snake oil. As NapaPaul says, there is no proof that these measures will do anything to slow global warming.
  11. napa333
    Report Abuse
    napa333 - November 10, 2012 10:18 am
    No proof that these measures will make a differance? Are you sure you don't at least want to try something? And you conservatives say you care about your childrens future. Are you sure? Or is this just another Rush Limbaugh/Bill O'Reilly insanely ignorant talking point? How about some critical thinking on your part and instead of sticking your head in the primordial conservative goo come up with something intelligent to say about the problem instead of just saying it's not happening.
  12. napa333
    Report Abuse
    napa333 - November 10, 2012 1:05 pm
    Oh yeah, how many of you are members of the flat earth soceity? Cause that was a pretty well known "fact", (once a upon a time).
  13. vocal-de-local
    Report Abuse
    vocal-de-local - November 11, 2012 11:35 am
    I'm going to throw some ideas out there. Is it possible for vineyards to get credit by planting some of their crops in lower water need/lower maintenance crops? Water takes energy to pump and to redistribute in the case of recycled water.

    Another issue involves the transport of workers throughout the Valley. This is not just a tourist problem. How about giving credit for workers who participate in a park and ride program. When they arrive at the park and ride lot, they provide the name of the winery/vineyard they are working at which then becomes a part of the credit system.

    Wineries could also offer tourist incentives to park and ride.

    I wonder why County Planners are advocating for this solution while concurrently allowing huge housing developments such as Napa Pipe to be constructed. Certainly a higher level of population is going to be a significant and ongoing problem..

    We do need to slow down vineyard and hotel growth.

Add Comment
You must Login to comment.

Click here to get an account it's free and quick