Cabin Creek Biomass Facility Draft EIR. County, P. In volume 97, pages 1–18. 2010. abstract bibtex On December 30, 2009, the California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA) adopted Amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 97 (Statutes of 2007). These amendments, which became effective on March 18, 2010, specifically require that an EIR include an analysis of the proposed project’s GHG impacts. Emissions of GHGs have the potential to adversely affect the environment because such emissions contribute, on a cumulative basis, to global climate change. The proper context for addressing this issue in an EIR is as a discussion of cumulative impacts, because although the emissions of one single project would not cause global climate change, GHG emissions from multiple projects throughout the world could result in a cumulative impact with respect to global climate change. In turn, global climate change has the potential to result in rising sea levels, which could inundate low‐lying areas; to affect rainfall and snowfall, leading to changes in water supply; to affect habitat, leading to adverse effects on biological resources; and to result in other environmental and economic effects. Therefore, the cumulative global climate change analysis presented in this chapter of the Draft EIR estimates and analyzes the GHG emissions associated with construction and operation‐related activities of the proposed project. Because biomass is considered a renewable fuel, this analysis also estimates the levels of GHG emissions that would be avoided by implementation of the proposed project. The potential effects of global climate change on the project are also identified based on available scientific data. Cumulative impacts are the collective impacts of one or more past, present, and future projects that, when combined, result in adverse changes to the environment. In determining the significance of a proposed project’s contribution to anticipated adverse future conditions, a lead agency should generally undertake a two‐step analysis. The first question is whether the combined effects from both the proposed project and other projects would be cumulatively significant. If the agency answers this inquiry in the affirmative, the second question is whether “the proposed project’s incremental effects are cumulatively considerable” and thus significant in and of themselves. The cumulative project list for this issue (climate change) comprises anthropogenic (i.e., humanmade) GHG emissions sources across the globe, and no project alone would reasonably be expected to contribute to a noticeable incremental change to the global climate. However, legislation and executive orders on the subject of climate change in California have established a statewide context and a process for developing an enforceable statewide cap on GHG emissions. Given the nature of environmental consequences from GHGs and global climate change, CEQA requires that lead agencies consider evaluating the cumulative impacts of GHGs, even relatively small additions (on a global basis). Small contributions to this cumulative impact (from which significant effects are occurring and are expected to worsen over time) may be potentially considerable and, therefore, significant. The analysis is presented here, rather than the cumulative impacts chapter of the EIR (Chapter 18.9), because this issue is presented in greater project‐level detail.
@incollection{county_cabin_2010,
title = {Cabin {Creek} {Biomass} {Facility} {Draft} {EIR}},
volume = {97},
abstract = {On December 30, 2009, the California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA) adopted Amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 97 (Statutes of 2007). These amendments, which became effective on March 18, 2010, specifically require that an EIR include an analysis of the proposed project’s GHG impacts. Emissions of GHGs have the potential to adversely affect the environment because such emissions contribute, on a cumulative basis, to global climate change. The proper context for addressing this issue in an EIR is as a discussion of cumulative impacts, because although the emissions of one single project would not cause global climate change, GHG emissions from multiple projects throughout the world could result in a cumulative impact with respect to global climate change. In turn, global climate change has the potential to result in rising sea levels, which could inundate low‐lying areas; to affect rainfall and snowfall, leading to changes in water supply; to affect habitat, leading to adverse effects on biological resources; and to result in other environmental and economic effects. Therefore, the cumulative global climate change analysis presented in this chapter of the Draft EIR estimates and analyzes the GHG emissions associated with construction and operation‐related activities of the proposed project. Because biomass is considered a renewable fuel, this analysis also estimates the levels of GHG emissions that would be avoided by implementation of the proposed project. The potential effects of global climate change on the project are also identified based on available scientific data. Cumulative impacts are the collective impacts of one or more past, present, and future projects that, when combined, result in adverse changes to the environment. In determining the significance of a proposed project’s contribution to anticipated adverse future conditions, a lead agency should generally undertake a two‐step analysis. The first question is whether the combined effects from both the proposed project and other projects would be cumulatively significant. If the agency answers this inquiry in the affirmative, the second question is whether “the proposed project’s incremental effects are cumulatively considerable” and thus significant in and of themselves. The cumulative project list for this issue (climate change) comprises anthropogenic (i.e., humanmade) GHG emissions sources across the globe, and no project alone would reasonably be expected to contribute to a noticeable incremental change to the global climate. However, legislation and executive orders on the subject of climate change in California have established a statewide context and a process for developing an enforceable statewide cap on GHG emissions. Given the nature of environmental consequences from GHGs and global climate change, CEQA requires that lead agencies consider evaluating the cumulative impacts of GHGs, even relatively small additions (on a global basis). Small contributions to this cumulative impact (from which significant effects are occurring and are expected to worsen over time) may be potentially considerable and, therefore, significant. The analysis is presented here, rather than the cumulative impacts chapter of the EIR (Chapter 18.9), because this issue is presented in greater project‐level detail.},
author = {County, Placer},
year = {2010},
pages = {1--18},
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"FaMzPou9vPaTPvGiu","bibbaseid":"county-cabincreekbiomassfacilitydrafteir-2010","author_short":["County, P."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"incollection","type":"incollection","title":"Cabin Creek Biomass Facility Draft EIR","volume":"97","abstract":"On December 30, 2009, the California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA) adopted Amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 97 (Statutes of 2007). These amendments, which became effective on March 18, 2010, specifically require that an EIR include an analysis of the proposed project’s GHG impacts. Emissions of GHGs have the potential to adversely affect the environment because such emissions contribute, on a cumulative basis, to global climate change. The proper context for addressing this issue in an EIR is as a discussion of cumulative impacts, because although the emissions of one single project would not cause global climate change, GHG emissions from multiple projects throughout the world could result in a cumulative impact with respect to global climate change. In turn, global climate change has the potential to result in rising sea levels, which could inundate low‐lying areas; to affect rainfall and snowfall, leading to changes in water supply; to affect habitat, leading to adverse effects on biological resources; and to result in other environmental and economic effects. Therefore, the cumulative global climate change analysis presented in this chapter of the Draft EIR estimates and analyzes the GHG emissions associated with construction and operation‐related activities of the proposed project. Because biomass is considered a renewable fuel, this analysis also estimates the levels of GHG emissions that would be avoided by implementation of the proposed project. The potential effects of global climate change on the project are also identified based on available scientific data. Cumulative impacts are the collective impacts of one or more past, present, and future projects that, when combined, result in adverse changes to the environment. In determining the significance of a proposed project’s contribution to anticipated adverse future conditions, a lead agency should generally undertake a two‐step analysis. The first question is whether the combined effects from both the proposed project and other projects would be cumulatively significant. If the agency answers this inquiry in the affirmative, the second question is whether “the proposed project’s incremental effects are cumulatively considerable” and thus significant in and of themselves. The cumulative project list for this issue (climate change) comprises anthropogenic (i.e., humanmade) GHG emissions sources across the globe, and no project alone would reasonably be expected to contribute to a noticeable incremental change to the global climate. However, legislation and executive orders on the subject of climate change in California have established a statewide context and a process for developing an enforceable statewide cap on GHG emissions. Given the nature of environmental consequences from GHGs and global climate change, CEQA requires that lead agencies consider evaluating the cumulative impacts of GHGs, even relatively small additions (on a global basis). Small contributions to this cumulative impact (from which significant effects are occurring and are expected to worsen over time) may be potentially considerable and, therefore, significant. The analysis is presented here, rather than the cumulative impacts chapter of the EIR (Chapter 18.9), because this issue is presented in greater project‐level detail.","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["County"],"firstnames":["Placer"],"suffixes":[]}],"year":"2010","pages":"1–18","bibtex":"@incollection{county_cabin_2010,\n\ttitle = {Cabin {Creek} {Biomass} {Facility} {Draft} {EIR}},\n\tvolume = {97},\n\tabstract = {On December 30, 2009, the California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA) adopted Amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 97 (Statutes of 2007). These amendments, which became effective on March 18, 2010, specifically require that an EIR include an analysis of the proposed project’s GHG impacts. Emissions of GHGs have the potential to adversely affect the environment because such emissions contribute, on a cumulative basis, to global climate change. The proper context for addressing this issue in an EIR is as a discussion of cumulative impacts, because although the emissions of one single project would not cause global climate change, GHG emissions from multiple projects throughout the world could result in a cumulative impact with respect to global climate change. In turn, global climate change has the potential to result in rising sea levels, which could inundate low‐lying areas; to affect rainfall and snowfall, leading to changes in water supply; to affect habitat, leading to adverse effects on biological resources; and to result in other environmental and economic effects. Therefore, the cumulative global climate change analysis presented in this chapter of the Draft EIR estimates and analyzes the GHG emissions associated with construction and operation‐related activities of the proposed project. Because biomass is considered a renewable fuel, this analysis also estimates the levels of GHG emissions that would be avoided by implementation of the proposed project. The potential effects of global climate change on the project are also identified based on available scientific data. Cumulative impacts are the collective impacts of one or more past, present, and future projects that, when combined, result in adverse changes to the environment. In determining the significance of a proposed project’s contribution to anticipated adverse future conditions, a lead agency should generally undertake a two‐step analysis. The first question is whether the combined effects from both the proposed project and other projects would be cumulatively significant. If the agency answers this inquiry in the affirmative, the second question is whether “the proposed project’s incremental effects are cumulatively considerable” and thus significant in and of themselves. The cumulative project list for this issue (climate change) comprises anthropogenic (i.e., humanmade) GHG emissions sources across the globe, and no project alone would reasonably be expected to contribute to a noticeable incremental change to the global climate. However, legislation and executive orders on the subject of climate change in California have established a statewide context and a process for developing an enforceable statewide cap on GHG emissions. Given the nature of environmental consequences from GHGs and global climate change, CEQA requires that lead agencies consider evaluating the cumulative impacts of GHGs, even relatively small additions (on a global basis). Small contributions to this cumulative impact (from which significant effects are occurring and are expected to worsen over time) may be potentially considerable and, therefore, significant. The analysis is presented here, rather than the cumulative impacts chapter of the EIR (Chapter 18.9), because this issue is presented in greater project‐level detail.},\n\tauthor = {County, Placer},\n\tyear = {2010},\n\tpages = {1--18},\n}\n\n\n\n","author_short":["County, P."],"key":"county_cabin_2010","id":"county_cabin_2010","bibbaseid":"county-cabincreekbiomassfacilitydrafteir-2010","role":"author","urls":{},"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}},"downloads":0,"html":""},"bibtype":"incollection","biburl":"https://bibbase.org/zotero/Rsatomi","dataSources":["pdjicKjQfsWiwAuuK"],"keywords":[],"search_terms":["cabin","creek","biomass","facility","draft","eir","county"],"title":"Cabin Creek Biomass Facility Draft EIR","year":2010}