Homelessness: The Next Climate Emergency?

I used to think I’d always stay housed. I’m sure many of you reading this feel that way right now. But as the world changes faster and faster, becoming less hospitable, this will increasingly become an issue not just in your backyard, but for you or someone you care about.

Continue reading

Saturday Feb. 10: University of Maryland President to Join Largest-Ever Polar Bear Plunge for the Climate Into the Potomac River at National Harbor

Saturday Feb. 10: University of Maryland President to Join Largest-Ever Polar Bear Plunge for the Climate Into Potomac River at National Harbor

UMD President
Darryll J. Pines

National Harbor, MD — University of Maryland President Darryll J. Pines will join a record crowd of polar bear plungers on the Potomac River this Saturday to draw attention to climate change. Last year was the hottest year on record by a wide margin! And now climate activists are stepping up their efforts like never before. This Saturday, February 10, Chesapeake Climate Action Network (CCAN) will hold its 19th Annual Polar Bear Plunge dedicated to raising awareness and funds to fight climate change. This year’s event at National Harbor, MD, is expected to bring together more than 300 hardy activists and volunteers, making this CCAN’s biggest plunge to date! 

At Saturday’s event, Pines will join climate activists from across the District, Maryland and Virginia (DMV) region in spotlighting the need for climate action. For over 20 years, CCAN has been building a people-powered climate movement and driving transformation to a clean energy future. Just two weeks ago, the Biden administration responded to pressure from CCAN and other climate organizations nationwide by announcing a pause on pending approvals of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) exports. That federal effort is just one of many CCAN campaigns planned for 2024 across the DC, Maryland, and Virginia (DMV) region and beyond. The annual Polar Bear Plunge provides funding that is essential to those campaigns – raising more than one-third of individual donations made to CCAN each year. This year’s Plunge goal is $210,000. 

For more information about the 2024 CCAN Polar Bear Plunge, see below:

WHAT: 19th Annual “Keep Winter Cold” Polar Bear Plunge. For more information, visit www.keepwintercold.org

WHEN: Saturday, February 10, 2024, 10 AM EST

    • 10:00 – 11:00 AM: Arrive and check in at the Capital Canopy! We’ll have action tables, music, games, face painting, warm drinks, and yummy snacks.

    • 11:00 – 11:40 AM: Pre-Plunge rally featuring our guest speakers and costume contest.

                                                                                   *GREAT PHOTO OP*

    • 11:40 – 11:50 AM: March to the Plunge point and get ready to Plunge.

    • 11:50 AM – 12:10 PM: PLUNGE TIME! 

                                                                                    *GREAT PHOTO OP*

    • 12:15 – 2:30 PM: Celebrate at the Capital Canopy with fellow plungers! We’ll have pizza, a hot cocoa bar, and a FREE beer from Denizens Brewery (for Plungers age 21 and over), plus games and music!

WHERE: National Harbor, Oxon Hill, Maryland. 

    • Staging area: National Harbor’s Capital Canopy (on the Pier, near the giant Ferris wheel). 

SPEAKERS:

    • Darryll J. Pines, President, University of Maryland

    • Andreana Lim, Youth Member of the CCAN NoVa New Leafs

    • Andres Jimenez and his daughter Emma; CCAN Board Member, Executive Director of Green 2.0; Fairfax Co. Board of Supervisors

    • Quentin Scott, CCAN Federal Director

SPONSORS:

•  Green 2.0 

•  US Wind

•  Neighborhood Sun 

•  International Brotherhood of  Electrical Workers (IBEW) 

•  MAREC Action 

•  Evergreen Action 

•  Rewiring America 

•  EDF Renewables

Speakers will be available after the rally for interviews. If you would like to coordinate an interview, please contact: KC Chartrand, kc@chesapeakeclimate.org, 240-620-7144; or, Ariel Cassell, ariel@chesapeakeclimate.org, 710-718-6760. 

###

Chesapeake Climate Action Network, is the oldest and largest grassroots organization dedicated exclusively to raising awareness about the impacts and solutions associated with climate change in the Chesapeake Bay region. For more than 20 years, CCAN has been at the center of the fight for clean energy and wise climate policy in Maryland, Virginia, Washington, D.C. and beyond.

Offshore Wind: Up Close and Personal

By Jess Rampulla

On a warm September day, twenty-two CCAN staff members, friends, and supporters boarded a boat in Virginia Beach to see offshore wind turbines, located twenty-seven miles off the coast of Virginia. This once-in-a-lifetime experience was truly remarkable, and I was thrilled to be able to share it with other members of the climate community.

At eight in the morning, our group boarded a boat along with members of Dominion Energy staff and Rudee Tours to begin our five-hour trip. You could feel the excitement from everyone on board, ready for the journey ahead of us. While the first moments driving out proved to be rockier than expected, our CCAN group continued to exclaim how excited they were to be here, with people making jokes about if everyone had taken their dramamine for breakfast. After the water settled, we all loaded into the boat’s inner cabin, just big enough to hold everyone on board, to hear a presentation from a Dominion Energy staff member on what to expect during the trip, and facts about the amount of power wind turbines could produce.

After the presentation, everyone shuffled back out on the deck to enjoy the warm weather and try and catch a glimpse of the turbines. We could just barely see them off in the distance around ten miles offshore. On our journey out, I had conversations with several CCAN donors and supporters on board. Reasons for making the journey varied from “we could never have passed up this opportunity” to “I’m doing this to give my grandchildren a better future.” As the turbines became more visible, people on board began to snap pictures and crowd towards the front of the boat. Everyone wanted proof that they were here today, and to have evidence to share with all their friends and family back home.

Finally, after around two hours, we pulled up just feet from one of the turbines. Enormous doesn’t feel like quite a strong enough word to describe just how big these power sources were:

The thing that shocked me the most from being so up close was just how quiet the turbines were. They made no sound, aside from the whoosh of air as they spun. The boat stopped for around thirty minutes so everyone was able to admire the turbines and get all the photos they wanted. The joy on everyone’s face as they looked up at these huge structures was contagious. We were looking at the future of off-shore wind energy in Virginia. Maryland State Delegate, Lorig Charkoudian was on board and spoke with members of CCAN’s staff about how this was the ultimate goal for Maryland as well. While at the turbines, we had a surprise visit from a school of fish, swimming and feeding around the bottom of the turbines, proving that these structures don’t affect marine life in the area.

After our stop at the turbines, we started the journey back. We spotted a pod of about twenty dolphins swimming next to our boat, happily jumping in and out of the waves. We ate sandwiches and chips and made sure to keep hydrated and reapply sunscreen. The trip back was more subdued, with everyone appearing to process the magnitude of what they saw. As we pulled back into port and walked off the boat, groups of people formed, all sharing their own thoughts from the trip. As people loaded into cars to drive back home or begin a day of canvassing, I felt overwhelmingly grateful for this experience and to have the opportunity to work for a company like CCAN that helps move the Chesapeake region towards cleaner energy and a more sustainable future.

Daily Record Op-ed: Maryland needs to build more offshore wind projects

Op-ed by Jamie DeMarco initially published in The Daily Record.

Offshore wind is bringing union careers to Maryland, lowering utility bills, and improving our health, but the turbines under development today will not be enough to achieve our goals. In 2022, Maryland passed the Climate Solutions Now Act, which requires the state to slash our emissions 60% by 2031. In order to meet this ambitious legal mandate, we must invest in more offshore wind energy and the transmission infrastructure needed to support it.

Offshore wind, Onshore Benefits

Just last year, the Public Service Commission approved applications from Orsted’s Skipjack Wind and US Wind’s Momentum Wind, bringing the total offshore wind market in Maryland to 2 Gigawatts. These projects are on track to be completed and generating energy in 2026. The four projects approved in Maryland (two from US Wind and two from Orsted) have already produced significant economic and workforce benefits to Maryland. Maryland’s Public Service Commission required the two wind companies to invest $115 million in manufacturing facilities and port upgrades in and around Sparrows Point, or a similar port facility, and contribute $6 million to an offshore wind business development fund.

Those offshore wind projects brought union steel jobs back to Maryland. In August of 2021, US Wind announced plans to build a new steel fabrication facility at the Tradepoint Atlantic site in Baltimore County, now called Sparrows Point Steel. With this announcement, they also announced a $77 million investment in a 90-acre port facility and labor agreements with the Baltimore-D.C. Building & Construction trades union and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers to provide union labor to support US Wind’s Maryland projects. Orsted has also invested in the local supply chain and has teamed up with Crystal Steel Fabricators, located in Federalsburg, MD, to supply steel components for wind turbines up and down the East Coast, further establishing Maryland as a supply hub for the offshore wind industry.

Significant investments in offshore wind can also lower energy costs for Marylanders. According to a new report from Gabel Associates, these benefits for ratepayers could be significant. If Maryland builds an additional 6,000 MW of offshore wind in the Central Atlantic it could save Maryland $5.3 billion over the 30-year lifetime of the projects. Setting aside the huge environmental and health benefits that offshore wind will provide; ratepayer benefits could measurably outweigh the cost of building this additional offshore wind capacity. Even in the highest-cost scenario the report models, benefits to Marylanders, including ratepayer, economic, and environmental benefits, outweigh the generation costs associated with 6,000 MW of offshore wind.

Clearly, wind works for Maryland. To bring even greater economic and health benefits to our state, the Maryland General Assembly should pass legislation in 2023 to invest in offshore wind development by setting an offshore wind goal of at least 8.5 GW by 2031, initiating a state process to coordinate transmission infrastructure, and investing in the full build-out of the existing lease areas.

An offshore wind energy goal

Many states, in our region and beyond, have established offshore wind development goals through executive orders or legislation. These goals help signal to the market and regulators on the federal and state level that the state is friendly to offshore wind and has aspirations for investments in the industry. Setting a total of 8.5 GW as our state’s goal will help establish Maryland as an epicenter for additional development.

Transmission

In order for offshore wind to be useful, it must be brought ashore. Unfortunately, offshore wind projects in Maryland face a significant barrier to connecting to the grid. Transmission has been handled in the past on a project-by-project basis; to improve efficiency, experts recommend a more coordinated approach that would reduce congestion of multiple lines, increase carbon reduction potential and minimize environmental impacts. By passing legislation to direct the state to manage a competitive transmission procurement, Maryland could establish a coordinated transmission network that solves the issue of interconnection and builds resilience and reliability on our grid.

Building out the existing lease areas

Both Orsted and US Wind have existing space in their lease areas for roughly 700 – 800 additional megawatts each but the current policy (largely the Offshore Wind Renewable Energy Credit price cap) does not allow for additional development without impacting rate-payers. However, if additional projects could be built without the cost or risk accruing to ratepayers, Maryland could benefit from up to 1600 MW of additional offshore wind energy. This would be possible by having the state directly purchase the energy through the Department of General Services. This energy would serve the state government’s energy needs and then the surplus could be sold on the energy market for revenue.

Our state has been a leader in addressing the climate crisis and setting ambitious climate pollution reduction and clean energy goals. However, those goals can’t be reached without investments to our transmission infrastructure. We also have an opportunity to work with the White House and leverage federal dollars from the Inflation Reduction Act and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. The Biden/Harris Administration has set a goal of 30 additional gigawatts of domestic offshore wind by 2030. The momentum for offshore wind is undeniable but Maryland legislators must act in 2023 to ensure Maryland sees the benefits of this clean energy revolution.

Jamie DeMarco is Maryland director, Chesapeake Climate Action Network and CCAN Action Fund.

REPORT: DAMAGING METHANE GAS PIPELINE LEAKS HAPPEN EVERY 40 HOURS IN THE U.S.

Frequent gas leaks are resulting in death, injury, and other damage to our health and environment
for Immediate Release

Baltimore, MD – Methane gas – commonly referred to as “natural” gas – has been piped through our communities for heating and cooking for a century, and for just as long, has been subject to dangerous leaks. On Thursday, Maryland PIRG Foundation, Environment Maryland Research and Policy Center and Frontier Group released a new report that finds from 2010 through nearly the end of 2021, almost 2,600  gas pipeline incidents occurred in the United States that were serious enough to require reporting to the federal government. That’s the equivalent to one every 40 hours. 

“For as long as we have used gas to heat and cook, it has posed a risk both to people who use it in their homes and those who live in neighborhoods above gas pipes,” said Maryland PIRG Foundation Director Emily Scarr. “House explosions and leaking pipelines, like we have experienced in Baltimore and across the state, aren’t isolated incidents – they’re the result of an energy system that pipes dangerous, explosive gas through our neighborhoods. It’s time to move away from gas and toward safer, cleaner electrification and renewable energy.” 

In addition to the report, the groups also released a tip guide to provide guidance on what to do if you suspect a gas leak in your community. Of the nearly 2,600 pipeline incidents recorded between 2010 and 2021, 850 resulted in fires and 328 in an explosion. Those incidents killed 122 people and injured more than 600. The total costs to communities from things such as property damage, emergency services, and the value of intentionally and unintentionally released gas, totaled nearly $4 billion. These incidents also resulted in the leakage of 26.6 billion cubic feet of gas, equivalent in its effects on global warming to emissions from over 2.4 million passenger vehicles driven for a year. 

The serious pipeline incidents addressed in the report represent just a fraction of the leaks experienced in the production, transportation and burning of gas. Smaller gas leaks are rife in urban areas, like Baltimore and Montgomery County, while large methane leaks from oil and gas production threaten the climate. A study from 2018 found that leaks from gas lines over the previous two decades had nearly doubled the climate impact of gas. In addition, some serious gas explosions that have caused death or injury in Maryland are not included in the data as they did not occur in the pipeline system.

“Leaks, fires and explosions are reminders that transporting methane gas is dangerous business,” said Tony Dutzik, associate director and senior policy analyst at Frontier Group and lead author of the report. “The incidents included in this report were caused by a wide variety of factors, from operator errors to equipment failures, and excavation damage to natural causes. Fully protecting the public requires us to reduce our dependence on gas.”

The report recommends that the U.S. stop relying on methane gas for home heating and cooking as well as electricity generation. Instead, policy makers should incentivize and accelerate the transition to all-electric buildings and renewable sources of energy, which are cleaner and safer for communities. During the transition, the report recommends that gas infrastructure investments focus on fixing leaks. 

“When rooftop solar panels can power an induction cooktop or electric heat pump, it becomes increasingly unacceptable to saddle society with the risks associated with pumping methane into our homes and throughout our communities,” said Scarr. “It’s time to leave explosive and polluting fossil fuels like methane behind and embrace a future powered by 100% renewable energy.”

####

Reposted from: https://marylandpirg.org/news/mdp/report-damaging-methane-gas-pipeline-leaks-happen-every-40-hours-us

Climate Poll Shows Maryland Residents Ready for Action

Climate Poll Shows Maryland Residents Ready for Action

In this episode, Montgomery county, Maryland declared a climate emergency back in 2017. Yet in the past three years, no meaningful actions have been taken to address the urgent threat. A recent poll commissioned by seeking and Gonzalez polling indicated a striking amount of Montgomery county residents support immediate actions to solve global warming. The following episode is a press conference with CCAN executive director Mike Tidwell, and pollster Patrick Gonzalez, releasing the poll to the public.


Read the full transcript below.


Charles Olsen  0:02  

Hi, my name is Charlie Olsen and this is The Upside Down the podcast from the Chesapeake Climate Action Network. In this episode, Montgomery county, Maryland declared a climate emergency back in 2017. Yet in the past three years, no meaningful actions have been taken to address the urgent threat. A recent poll commissioned by seeking and Gonzalez polling indicated a striking amount of Montgomery county residents support immediate actions to solve global warming. The following episode is a press conference with CCAN executive director Mike Tidwell, and pollster Patrick Gonzalez, releasing the poll to the public.

Mike Tidwell  0:41  

Welcome again, my name is Mike Tidwell. I’m executive director and founder of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network. And we’re going to talk about a poll and as far as I can tell, I googled around and I asked a lot of activists in Montgomery county, no one can remember there ever being a poll done specifically on climate change in Montgomery county before. So we’re proud this may be the first ever I just have never heard of one. And we did it of course, because we know that the impacts of climate change are worsening as we speak. Ellicott City had 2000 year floods and 22 months. Recently, the rains of 2018 alone are devastating red and white oak trees in all of Southern Montgomery county. I mean, it’s just amazing how many trees are dying from the extreme rain of 2018 followed by drought followed by beetle infestation, and it goes on and on and on. And scientists tell us that we have maybe 10 years to cut emissions worldwide in terms of greenhouse gases throttle back on fossil fuels, and in western countries, wealthier countries, we have to cut emissions even more than 50% by the year 2030. And that’s why our county council Montgomery county, I live in Montgomery county, I’ve lived here for 31 years, my son went to Montgomery County Schools. I love this country. We’re diverse, we’re progressive. And I was so proud in 2017, when our county council passed a climate emergency declaration that basically called it what it was an emergency. It was at that time the biggest jurisdiction in North America to make that declaration. And the first to do it in the way that they did it. The Declaration was attended with a goal of 80% reductions in greenhouse gases by 2027 and 100%. By 2035. I mean, those are incredible numbers. And they’re really big promises basically, that the government county council made to the voters and the people in McGorry county and with big promises, obviously come with big expectations. And we’ve had big expectations for the last three years. But unfortunately, the county council has not passed any single major legislation to substantially reduce greenhouse gas emissions in our county or a package of bills that might do that. We’re still waiting on that. And you know, until COVID, carbon emissions really didn’t go down in our county. During the three years after the climate declaration. Yes, they’ve dropped during COVID. But unless we take action, they’re going to go back up. Now. The county executive just yesterday, Marc Elrich released his Climate Action Plan. Some of us have had a chance to look at it, you know, not all of it, but at least look at the 87 recommendations. They’re great recommendations. Unfortunately, we were hoping to see specific legislative recommendations or a package of bills that might actually put us on a path of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. I’m a believer in my organization’s belief that this is a nation of laws. And if you want to change this nation, you have to change the laws. So we’re still waiting on a legislative package for our county council to pass.

So within that context of rising climate impacts, and rising policy expectations, and Montgomery county that the Chesapeake Climate Action Network hired Mr. Patrick Gonzalez. Patrick is an amazing pollster. He’s well known across the state of Maryland. He’s been involved in literally 1000s of polls across the state for years, going back 35 years. He is widely respected by his peers for unbiased surveys in an impartial and even handed manner. I asked Patrick to put a poll in the field that he’s about to talk to you about. Because I’ve worked with him before going all the way back into the early 2000s. And with the Republican and Democratic governors both and I’ve always been been impressed by the accuracy, the impartiality and the professionalism of his polling, and we thought he was the perfect pollster to get at some of the issues so we can figure out where Montgomery County voters on the issue of global warming, and what did they want their elected leaders to do. And that’s the poll that he’s about to tell you about in more detail, but I just want to read to you the first paragraph of the press release that you can just release on this poll. It says a bipartisan majority of Montgomery County voters in Maryland are personally concerned about the rising impacts of climate change, with a whopping 94% of Democrats expressing concern, and a new poll released today. Voters also say they are eager to see the county council keep a 2017 promise by adopting within six months, a plan that will lead to, quote, major pollution cuts. In quote, as a first step, nearly 69% of voters countywide support a bill now before the council to allow a limited number of solar farms on agricultural land in the northern part of the county. So that’s the first paragraph of our press release. I’ve just told you more about Patrick Gonzalez, the esteemed pollster, and I’m now going to turn it over to Patrick, as he speaks, you’re also going to be able to see the PDF pages of the actual polling document that he’s created for us and that we’re releasing now.

Patrick Gonzalez  6:35  

Mike, excuse me, thank you for the kind words Mike and thank you all for being here with us this afternoon and allowing me to, you know, to talk to you, as Mike said, We Gonzales research work with Mike and Lauren Charlie and CCAN Chesapeake Climate Action Network for many years. And so I think we have, you know, a really good relationship. And I enjoy it. What Mike came to us about, I don’t know, a month or so ago and said, hey, look, we want to get into Montgomery county, we want to look and see a couple of issues. Specifically, the resolution that was passed a couple of years ago, voters concerned about acting on that resolution. And kind of the issue is solar farms. So as with any survey, we conduct, we want to start, we always keep in mind that hey, we got somebody on the phone that’s agreed to do something and they don’t know what’s going on. We do an intro that kind of explains and so we wanted to begin by getting a general sense of where Montgomery County voters are on the issue of global warming. And we said how concerned are you personally about global warming, very concerned, somewhat concerned, not too concerned or not at all concerned. And what we found overall in Montgomery county 83% are concerned 63%, nearly two out of every 360 3% are very concerned. And then and 17%, as you see not concerned, then we look at it by some of the demographics. And as Mike stated in his opening 94% of Democrats, but we found even breaking it down by party that 69% of independents are voters who choose not to affiliate with either party, or concerned and even a majority 51% of Republicans. You look at it by gender, not a huge, huge difference. 86 men, 80 women, and you look at it by age, and I think probably I don’t go into any survey with a real expectation. But I would have thought that the divergence between under 50 and older over 30 would have been a little greater at 84% under 50 a battle like 82% over 50. So we now have an understanding of where Montgomery County voters are on the issue and they 83% express some level of concern. Okay, now we’re going to move into the resolution that was adopted three years ago and we wanted to get a sense of voters’ opinion on that. And we stated kind of the goal we’d not kind of we stated the goal in the question. The question read. In 2017 the Montgomery County Council unanimously passed a resolution declaring a climate change emergency. The council set a county goal of cutting greenhouse gas emissions 80% by 2027. So we’re asking, we’re stating the specific Do you support toward or oppose this climate emergency declaration and goal. And what we found is that 70% of Montgomery County voters support this goal 19% oppose 11% offered no opinion nap, the 70% that supported 51% strongly supported. So for every question we asked, we had intensity. So it’s one thing to say I support something, but to say I strongly support it. And there, we found that the 51% majority of Montgomery County voters strongly support the climate emergency declaration and goal. Now we see a little sharper distinction between parties, we find out 82% of Democrats support it. And among Republicans, that supports drops down to 35. But among independents, unaffiliated, it’s still 58%.

by gender, we see, you know, again, males a little more, a little more heavy, heavier level of support, but not much. And now we see a little sharper variance by age, but under 50 78% 50, and older 65%. So again, we are seeing, you know, sort of a consistent sort of level of support. A, the distinctions are there, as we see, but there’s also sort of a constancy. So it’s not something that’s being driven heavily by one demographic or another, the county, as a whole, is kind of coming together. So now we’ve had,

Mike Tidwell  11:44  

yeah, and I did want to jump in and say, I think we’ve, Laura, you’ve posted in the chat, the link to the actual polling, if you if you want to see the actual wording of the polling questions is toward the end of the survey, so you can just go to the end, and you’ll see the complete wording of the question. But on this one in terms of support for the 2017 declaration and the goals. That’s a key part and the goals. You see these incredible numbers of 82% of Democrats, what struck me on that question was, it’s easy to say yes, thank you elected officials for declaring a policy for declaring a goal of reducing greenhouse gases. But then, to say they also support that 80% by 2027. Mmm, that is it. That’s an amazing number. And we know that that is going to be very, very hard to meet if it’s possible at all. And we weren’t sure if voters were going to see that three years had gone by, you know, from 2017 to 2020. And that 80% by 2027 reduction might strike people as totally unachievable and unrealistic, and therefore, they wouldn’t support their continuation of that goal. But as you see, these numbers are 82% of Democrats support the 2017 declaration and still support the goal of 80% reduction. By 2027. We weren’t sure we were going to get that strong of support. So this is pretty impressive that people are still overwhelmingly bought into extremely aggressive goals.

Patrick Gonzalez  13:22  

Yes, sir. So we start with the general concept of concern over the issue of global warming, and get into the specifics of what happened three years ago. Now we know where we’re at. And now we wanted to kind of get a sense of the voters. appetite voters support for action. So Laura, let’s go to the next question that we asked. And so what we asked was, okay, they passed this resolution in seven in 2017. Do you support or oppose the county council adopting a climate solution plan within the next six months, which will generate major pollution cuts? So now we want to get a sense of okay. They support the concept. They certainly support the general notion. Support definitely is behind the resolution. Now, how about some action and what we find is that 75%, three out of four Montgomery county, Montgomery County voters support the county council adopting a climate solution plan within the next six months. And, and again, when you look at it by party, and unfortunately, I don’t have that here, but just again, it was 85% democrats 39% republicans 70% independence. So again, 80% 85% Democrats. So here we’re at with Democrats, let me just let me just go with this for a sec. We start with global warming. 94% are concerned, we go to the resolution 82% of Democrats support it, we now talk about action within the next six months 85%. So you get the drift. But what struck me most significant, I think, is that I was constructing the report. And I cannot take credit for this wonderful map, my director of marketing, my youngest daughter, that wonderful human being put together the map. And why I got to use this map was the consistency between council districts. So 75% overall in Montgomery county support acting within the next six months. And it varies from 79% in district one, to 70%. In district three, there is a very consistent level of support geographically. And as you see, it goes from 79%, one to 76%, and two to 70%, and three to 72% in District Four, and 77%. In district five, that’s that this is a significant result. That concerns every district over 70%. So now, after we did this question, we wanted to look specifically at the issue of solar farms. So let’s move down to that one. And Mike and I and his team and my team, we went through the wording on this question, and it was rather verbose. So it’s rather a wordy question, but we felt it was necessary. Because what we wanted to do in the question was not design a question to get a specific result, but kind of put the pros and the cons out there. So respondents, Montgomery County voters, would at least be able to respond to something that they’re probably, you know, it’s like anything, we all have lives. So when there are many, I would submit that Montgomery County voters are more in tune than the average bear. But still even that said, Yeah, they kind of understand the issue, but we wanted to give him some specifics. So I’m going to, if I can real quick, read this question, because I think it’s important to understand how we tried to present the information. So we went in and we said one proposal for fighting global warming in Montgomery county is to change county law to allow some farmers in the county’s agricultural reserve to put solar farms of limited size on their land. Critics, including many farmers, say this will harm the rural character of the reserve.

But a county council committee voted in August to support the practice as long as no more than 2% of agricultural land is used. And part of the solar power is reserved for low and moderate income residents, would you support or oppose allowing county farmers to put solar farms on their land, if no more than 2% of Montgomery’s agricultural reserve is used, and part of the solar power created goes to low and moderate income houses. And what we found here was that 69% of voters support allowing county farmers to put solar farms on their land with those conditions. 21% oppose 10% giving no response. And we see it at parties. And once again, we find among Democrats 85% support it by gender, very little distinction. And again, slightly more support as we’d expect under 50. But not not the Great Divergence that you often find, when you break out a vote or group by age. So again, sort of a consistent level of support for the concept and one of the things that we did also and you’ll see it in, in the full report is we broke every question out by every demographic, so every question has party gender, age, and region and council district. So you’ll see within the different council districts the results for each and every question.

Mike Tidwell  19:50  

So I will say yeah, Patrick, I think you gave a good summary of that. You know, it’s easy to have a broad declaration. And broad commitments to solutions. When you start getting into specific solution proposals, then things tend to get more interesting and the debate intensifies. And that’s certainly the case with its compromise proposal to put limited amounts of solar farms in the agricultural reserve. There are strong opinions on both sides, we realize that we tried to capture that. And the question is Patrick said, just to be Climate Action Network is supportive of the compromise, a bill that got out of committee and that has since stalled at the county level, we do think it’s reasonable to cap solar farms at no more than 2% of the ag reserve, and to use the overwhelming share of that solar for low and moderate income community solar purposes. But as Patrick said, you know, we did want to make sure that someone getting a call from from a pollster on a Tuesday night in montgomery county, and is asked about this issue and may not know anything about it, that they heard, as contract said, what the critics say, including it again, it says critics, including many farmers, not some farmers, not you know, a few farmers, it says critics, including many farmers say this will harm the rural character of the reserve, which has been the strongest criticism of this proposal. So he put it in there. And then the results, you can see, I mean, majorities and each district of the council, including, I mean, the highest support is district one, which includes most of the reserve, and district two, which includes a lot of the reserve, really, really high numbers. So you have majorities, robust majorities in all council districts. Frankly, this was the question I was most surprised about. We weren’t, you know, we weren’t sure what we were going to get in terms of results when we presented pros and cons. And I think that this shows really broad political support for a compromise. And, frankly, I think that the council should pass the solar zoning bill as advanced by the committee, and we’ll see about that. Does that cover it all? Patrick? Yeah,

Patrick Gonzalez  22:23  

I think it is. And you know, if Laura has any emailed questions, I’ll stay here all day. I’d love this stuff.

Mike Tidwell  22:33  

And you should have the link to the survey in the chat. We’ll also be emailing around an action alert and press release. And, yeah, if you’re a member of the media, and you have a question, send it to Laura at Chesapeake climate. I have gotten a few questions emailed to me. So Laura, I don’t know if you have anything. I haven’t checked your email. Any questions from reporters? Laura? Ah, not quite yet. But as a reminder, if you want to send a question again, it’s laura@chesapeakeclimate.org Great. And one question that I got for you, Patrick? Is the question about the margin of error. What about the margin of error of 5.5%? Isn’t that high for a poll like this? Or is this normal for a local poll? For a local poll, this

Patrick Gonzalez  23:26  

is fine five and a half percent 325. Where you have issues and you’ve got to be aware, as you’re analyzing the data, the demo that the cells for the different demographics, whether it’s in particular the council district, have to understand that it has to represent sort of the county as a whole. So in an election, Council district three is 20% 19% of the electorate, therefore it needs to be that percentage in the sample. And that is fine. So as for comparative purposes, looking within the districts, it’s great, you wouldn’t want to take and stand on the mount and and preach the Holy Gospel, that this is what’s going on in District Four, as a standalone, okay? And you’ve just got to be aware of that and that but as far as the overall margin of error, plus or minus five and a half percent. If we did 1000. interviews, the margin is going to drop down to three. So it’s a two and a half point game. But so you’re not gaining that much in with even that book, as an overall sample for this type of poll. I am more than comfortable with what we did so keeping in mind this statistical reality.

Mike Tidwell  24:56  

And Patrick, just to my thanks for that answer. To my my opening comment that I have no recollection of a county level environmental poll and montgomery county Can you have you ever done a county level environmental poll and when Governor county

Patrick Gonzalez  25:12  

dude, I’ve been polling in Montgomery County since 1986. Okay. And I know I look incredibly young, so I, you know, marvel at that. I have never known I’ve never been aware of it, and I’m thinking about how I used to have a close relationship with Keith Howler and Potomac. And, and I’m thinking back to what I used to do, you know, constituent stuff with them? I don’t I don’t ever remember even going back that far. But but

Mike Tidwell  25:44  

it could have been this is a novel, this is a novel. Yes. So a question for me is, Why didn’t your question on solar in the agriserve mentioned how solar farms could reduce the ability to move toward more locally based food production? That’s a fair question. Obviously, we couldn’t get every level of the debate encapsulated in one polling question. But the issue of local food production, I mean, the reality is today in the ag reserve, most of what’s grown there, a lot of it is for animals I personally am, I call myself a climateterian. I don’t eat meat, or fish or dairy, because of the impacts on the climate. So the amount of land needed to grow, the diet for me and my family is, is quite small. And I always encourage people to lower on the food chain. So, you know, if we were to just switch to a more sustainable diet in this nation, and hopefully we will one day, we won’t have to use nearly as much land to grow crops for animals and agriserve and elsewhere. But you know, I think there’s a misconception that the agriserve is already a sustainable, you know, carbon neutral agricultural paradise, and it just isn’t, and we want to do better, and we want to move in that direction, and have more sustainable food grown for people and the ag reserve. But I think there’s plenty of room. And voters, I think, agree in this survey, there’s plenty of room to use a limited amount of land, so that farmers can harvest sunlight, so they can harvest more than just corn and soybeans, they can harvest the sun. And frankly, as climate change and extreme weather take more and more of their land out of production, because of flooding and droughts, more and more land will be taken out of production in northern montgomery county, to the detriment of farmers, these same farmers to hang on to their farms and send their kids to college are going to need an additional stream of income, which solar farming appropriately cited can provide. So that’s the long winded answer to that.

Patrick Gonzalez  28:09  

And if I could just real quick it. I mean, it’s certainly a valid question. And it applies to any question we ever asked, which is, you have limitations, you can only, you know, come at it from certain angles. And again, it’s a valid point we tried. I mean, I can only speak from intent. And my intent is always to try to get at something in as straightforward and honest a way as possible. In other words, I don’t play games with my poles. I don’t know, I don’t put something out and pretend that what isn’t or what isn’t, is, we put it out. We did the wording, Mike, you and Laura and Charlie and all this in my gang. We all worked together and tried. Did we hit perfection? No. But we tried to get at it. And those issues are certainly worth exploring in the future and stuff. So I just wanted to acknowledge that the person that asked the question, it’s a valid question. It’s a valid point. So

Mike Tidwell  29:08  

um, another question we got is who paid for the poll? And did solar companies help in drafting the poll? So I can tell you that Chesapeake Climate Action Network paid for this poll entirely. And Chesapeake Climate Action Network crafted the questions about no solar company, no other company period. saw any of these questions changed, added or subtracted a single syllable from anything that you’re seeing. This is entirely generated by Chesapeake Climate Action Network, I will tell you that I did share the language with a couple of well known environmental advocates in Montgomery county, just because I trusted their point of view. And that’s it. So no solar companies, no private industry. paid for it. Nobody crafted the question. So what you see is a document from an environmental climate advocate and not from a profit oriented company. 

Patrick Gonzalez  30:10  

Let me just add to that, Mr. kidwell. Patrick, don’t play that game. Okay. Chesapeake Climate Action Network paid for it. Patrick Gonzalez, ultimately now it was in concert with secant. But I am the one that is solely responsible for the ultimate wording of the question in that. I agreed that Okay, let’s move forward. So again, and I sound defensive. And I don’t mean to because there’s so many sleaze bags and politics these days that I understand it, but I try. But everything Mike said is total luck. When I put out a poll, you want to ask a question. I’ll give you the honest answer and chsp Climate Action Network paid for this poll. Holy.

Mike Tidwell  31:05  

Thank you. Thank you. And back to you, Patrick. Somebody has asked, you know, among all the things that you’ve talked about here, in this, Paul, this novel, first ever, apparently county specific environmental slash climate, Paul, that we’ve released today, if you had to pick one thing, or one or two things, what were some of the biggest surprises that you take away from this, Patrick? Well, I

Patrick Gonzalez  31:30  

Again, as I think, as I mentioned, to get and it’s republicans are what 20% said that they know that it’s a small cell. And, and again, we got to be guarded from, you know, again, it’s when the cells are much more relevant for comparative purposes, in other words, comparing district one to two to three to four as far as its standalone. But I think one of the things that jumped out at me was that 51% of Republicans stated a level of concern over global warming. And, and I think if I had to, you put me on the spot, Mike, and I like that. I like being put on the spot. I think that the overall impression that I was left with was what I touched upon earlier, I think in my little dialogue, which is really kind of the lack of distinction by age. In other words, I would have I think, and I never go into a poll assuming anything, you know, I just don’t think it is what it is. But I think I had to make a guess beforehand. I would have I would have guessed, a sharper, diverge, a sharper variance between under 50 or in over 50. So I guess that is the consistency by age, among all Montgomery county ins, I guess, it surprised me. But so.

Mike Tidwell  33:04  

And just to clarify, I’m not a pollster. I did call up Patrick and say, here, here’s what I want to find out, you know, not not I want this specific answer. Here I want to find out what McGovern County voters are thinking on these issues. And he’s the pollster and these questions are coming from the pollster. The direction of Curiosity was coming from his client just to be Climate Action Network. But the impartiality of the questions, the professionalism of the question. Those are those of the pollsters’ careful hand that we have another question again, on the ag reserve. And the question is, why did the words rural character if you see in the question on the solar and ag reserve, it says, critics say that the solar farms could harm the, quote, rural, rural character of the reserve, and the questioner wants to know, where did that come from? I think it came from us hearing that from critics. Well, I know that that was the weather, it was phrased exactly that way. I think that the expressed concern is that you have an ag reserve, which is agricultural, not urban, agro, you know, rural, not suburban, and agricultural, not industrial, and therefore it has a certain character in line with a rural setting versus an urban setting. So that’s the answer to that question. The other question that we have is, you know, this goes back to I think the second question we asked, and now Do you support or oppose the climate emergency declaration as a counting Council in 2017? And the 80% by 2027 reduction goals? So those are together, do you support the declaration and the reduction goals? Someone has, to your question, about support for 80% reductions by 2027. Is that even possible? Someone asked. And that’s a great question. I mean, maybe it’s not, I mean, I’m just being candid. That would mean we’d have to basically convert probably our entire automobile fleet to electric cars by 2027. We’d have to de-gasify lots and lots of buildings, we’d have to generate a lot of solar and possibly wind power, dramatic improvements in efficiency. So who knows? But that was the question asked, and then a final question, unless someone more or you email me. Another one, is a question that sort of brings us back to the start. And that is, what are we going to do about this issue of climate change? And the dramatic concern that Patrick captured in this poll about a concern about global warming, bipartisan and McGorry County? What are we going to do about it? And someone asked, What do you think of the county executives Climate Action Plan, which was released last night? I think, Charlie, you’re going to put in the chat if you haven’t already. A link to the Climate Action Plan that county executive Marc Elrich released last night. And by the way, tonight at six o’clock, there’s a roundtable that all of you can join. Again, I think Charlie’s gonna post that in the chat, a link of where you can join the roundtable tonight.

If you know, again, as I said earlier, I’ve looked at these 87 recommendations from the county executive, and I believe our county spent, or will have spent a total of about $400,000, I think, on the consultants and the whole process to come up with this plan. I think they’re great recommendations in a general way. But as I said, At the start of this call, we need legislation. You know, as my good friend Reverend Lennox Yearwood likes to quote Martin Martin Luther King, saying that says a demonstration without legislation leads to frustration, so we can demonstrate and protest and have calls like this and raise our voices. But without legislation, eventually, we have frustration. And I’m personally frustrated. I think many of our 5000 members in Montgomery County are frustrated that we don’t have legislation and that’s what we need. So I would just encourage the county executive. And as the poll showed today, a majority of Montgomery County voters would like the county executive and the county council to come up in the next six months with a concrete legislative package that once passed, will trigger major pollution cuts in our county. And so those are my thoughts on the county executives Climate Action Plan. I intend to be at the roundtable tonight and listen to the discussion. But I hope all of you who joined this call will help us broadcast the information about this poll. Again in the chat, you can copy a link to our press release. You can copy a link to the poll narrative itself from Patrick Gonzalez. There’s information about the county executives Climate Action Plan A link to the roundtable tonight, we also at T can are going to send out an email to all 5000 of our members in montgomery county, either later this afternoon or tomorrow, summarizing this poll and encouraging people to stay tuned, stay involved and to take action.

Charles Olsen  38:57  

Thanks for listening to Upside Down. This podcast is produced by me, Charlie Olsen with incredible support from the entire weekend staff. Check out the show notes for links to all the things discussed in this episode. If you want to know more about how you can get involved with seeking in the climate fight, check out our website at chesapeakeclimate.org . If you want to get in touch with us, follow us on instagram and twitter @CCAN. And if you enjoy the work we do, why don’t you share us with your friends. Sharing the show is a super easy way to help spread the word about the work we’re doing in the fight for bold climate actions. Thanks again for listening. We’ll see you next time.

Maryland Legislative Preview

Maryland Legislative Preview

In this episode, CCAN helped pass the most ambitious climate legislation in the American South, the Virginia clean Economy Act. Sadly, we did not fare as well across the Potomac in Maryland. However, advocates in 2021 are optimistic that this is the year that Maryland will pass sweeping climate legislation. This episode is the recording of CCAN’s legislative preview event for Maryland. Our phenomenal organizers were joined by Maryland delegates, Paul Pinsky, Lorig Charkoudian, and David Frasier-Hidalgo, where they outline their goals for 2021.


Read the full transcript below.


Charles Olsen  0:01  

Hi, my name is Charlie Olsen and this is the Upside Down podcast from the Chesapeake Climate Action Network. In this episode in 2020, CCAN helped pass the most ambitious climate legislation in the American South, the Virginia Clean Economy Act. Sadly, we did not fare as well across the Potomac in Maryland. However, advocates in 2021 are optimistic that this is the year that Maryland will pass sweeping climate legislation. This episode is the recording of CCAN’s legislative preview event for Maryland. Our phenomenal organizers were joined by Maryland delegates, Paul Pinsky, Lorig Charkoudian, and David Frasier-Hidalgo, where they outlined their goals for 2021.

Mike Tidwell  0:42  

Thank you, and welcome everybody. Again, I’m Mike Tidwell, director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network and Chesapeake Climate Action Fund, and welcome to this Maryland legislative preview call for the year 2021. And boy, doesn’t that sound good for 2021. Good riddance to the battle year of 2020. But in the year 2021, we can be sure to expect two things. One is that climate impacts will continue, we’re going to continue to see more rain bombs, the kind of rainstorms that we’re seeing to entertain events are almost routine. Now, in the DC area, more sea level rise, more heat waves are in our futures. So the climate impacts are not going to go away even as the calendar year turns over to 2021. The other thing that is going to continue is that Maryland can and must continue its leadership on clean energy policies to combat climate change, even during the challenges of the pandemic. And I’ve been really proud for the last 18 years as a Marylander. To work with the delegates and senator you’re going to hear tonight with members of the General Assembly who’ve passed amazing legislation in the last two decades, to clean up our coal plants to ban fracking to incentivize and mandate solar energy and offshore wind. And you’ll hear more of that. We need to do more. We’ve pushed the planet outside its comfort zone. And now we have to push ourselves outside our own comfort zones in terms of what is politically possible and what we’re willing to do as activists and volunteers. So I’m looking forward to it. So I want to begin tonight by thanking the legislative champions who you’re going to hear tonight. In a moment you’ll hear from Senator Paul Pinsky of District 22 in Prince George’s County, he and delegate Dana Stein of District 11 in Baltimore County are sponsoring one as he can action funds, top priorities, and Tony. And that’s the climate solutions now Act, which you’ll hear more about shortly. Then you’ll hear from my dear friend, delegate David Fraser Hidalgo of District 15. In Montgomery County who is sponsoring Senator Ben Kramer District 19. Also in Montgomery, the climate crisis in Education Act, a bill that I think is one of the most fascinating pieces of legislation and perhaps one of the most timely bills, both in terms of climate, and in terms of the budget health of our state. And I’m looking forward to hearing David talk about that. Then finally, you’ll hear from my state delegate, Laurie Turkuaz, of District 21, garment county about her excellent and long overdue bill called the Public Service Commission, climate and labor tests. She’s also sponsoring that bill with Ben Kramer, Senator Ben Kramer of District 19. All of these leaders are climate hawks, they go the extra mile. They’re obsessed and committed to climate change, just like all of us on this call, and where would we be without these legislative leaders? So I want to thank them in advance. But it’s going to be a tough year. We all know that. COVID is here. We’re in a recession. There’s budget issues. It’s hard. It’s hard time to push forward on these bills. But we can do it. I know we can. But we can’t do it alone. One nonprofit and legislative leaders can’t do it. You on this call you the voters, us the citizens, you the activists are that link to get us over the top. I just want to say one quick thing about COVID and all the challenges that we’re going to face. I was on a call earlier today where a member of the city council of Ann Arbor, Michigan, said all of the following in Ann Arbor, Michigan in November 2019, that city declared a climate emergency. Then COVID came and they still stuck to their guns. And they came up with a climate action plan on March 30. As the stock market was falling and unemployment was going up, they came up with a Climate Action Plan proposing a billion dollars in investments to fight climate change over the next 10 years. And then in May 2020, the Ann Arbor City Council passed a bill that authorizes these investments during again code Good time, so it can be done. There are inspiring stories out there. And I know that Maryland is going to do the same in 2021, while simultaneously working with the new Biden administration. So the goal tonight, hopefully is to give you some facts you didn’t know, hopefully to inspire you a little bit. But ultimately, the goal tonight is to move you to help us pass the bills. You’re going to hear about turnout tonight, help us get ready, get ready to make calls, get ready to send emails, attend virtual lobby days. And I would finally issue the last issue, I would be remiss if I didn’t encourage you to join the 16th annual sea cam polar bear plunge on February 13. That’s my last plug. Go to keep winter cold. org, we’re going to do it virtually a climate Bucket Challenge. It’s going to be great, keep winter cold.org. And now I’m going to hand it over to our Maryland policy director Jamie DeMarco.

Jamie DeMarco  5:52  

Thank you, Mike. And I am going to introduce the incredible Chairman Paul Pinsky, who is part of the very origin story of climate policy in Maryland, from the very beginning, he has been are one of our strongest champions, and we are so grateful to have a leader like him, as the chair of the education health and Environmental Affairs Committee. Chairman Paul Pinsky was instrumental at the hip to passing the Healthy Air Act years ago. And that remains one of if not the strongest legislation of its kind. And he voted for the original renewable portfolio standard in Maryland. And in the year since there’s not been a single climate bill that’s passed without tremendous support from Chairman Paul Pinsky. And we are now incredibly thrilled that he is our sponsor for the climate solutions now act. I’m going to turn it over to Chairman Paul Pinsky.

Paul Pinsky  6:44  

Thank you, Jamie. And thank you, Mike. For the last four or five years, Mike and I have served on the Maryland climate commission. But I have to tell you, we’ve done it with a great deal of frustration. We have heard a lot of talk, but very little action. The administration has prepared a plan, which is so ephemeral, you couldn’t figure out what the plan is. And that’s actually helped drive the climate solutions now

Paul Pinsky  7:11  

And I want to thank CCAN for helping shape this bill. There are a lot of groups and grassroots groups working on it. But see, Ken has been instrumental in helping shape the many aspects of it, let me very briefly talk about the bill. It calls for a 60% reduction in greenhouse gas by 2030. That means in the next nine years, it calls for us being carbon neutral by 2045. And besides those broad 30,000 feet things, it wants to hold the administration’s feet to the fire. You know, they’ve talked about doing this and doing that, but they haven’t done it. The bill calls for planting 5 million trees by 2030. And we know how they capture carbon dioxide. It calls for the whole state fleet of cars to become zero emissions vehicles. You know, they’ve used money to talk about infrastructure and charging stations, but they haven’t spent $1 on leading by example. And we think by 2030 every automobile under the state auspices should have zero emissions there. You know, energy efficiency, we know it can save a lot of money, a lot of energy. We upped that number by 50% from 2% to 3% in energy efficiency. We’ve also learned Mike talked about inspiring stories. The Empire State Building is an amazing inspiring story of the greening of the Empire State Building. They put a multi million dollar effort. And some great thinkers, environmentalist said we will recapture your money in five or seven years. If you do this, now, they have increased energy efficiency by 40%. Their new elevators create energy. We can do that here in Maryland. So we actually are calling for new building standards for large renovation for office buildings, residential and for new construction, and not just for the state for the private sector as well. If they aren’t willing to do these efforts, and it won’t be a loss of money, it’ll actually be a savings to the business community. They don’t build, you know, they have to show energy efficiency and energy savings. You know, we have to encourage fuel switching to clean energy. You know, the governor’s plan says that road widening will reduce greenhouse gases. I mean, that’s nuts. You know, they say if you expand roads, cars will idle less, but we know there’ll be 1020 50,000 additional cars. So they are, you know, their effort is very misguided. But this legislation in front of us does a lot of things. It changes how we look at nothing. They said it to me 100 year life cycle, we say because of work of scientists and Mike and other people see can it could be a 20 year horizon. You know, they measure methane coming from landfills. Well, we now have airplanes that can capture atmosphere that are much more accurate. We are going to transform the state, but we need you. as Mike said, It’s a unique session, we’re going to have virtual hearings, people won’t be allowed in the building. So we need a massive upsurge. We need hundreds upon hundreds of people to confront every legislator to say, Are you on board? You know, there shouldn’t be a time when you have a conversation and send an email, can we count on your vote, because you won’t be there to see them in the hallway, we have to put pressure, we have to make people a little uncomfortable, but also to show them this benefits and state. You know, Mike mentioned a lot of the issues that the flooding etc. The biggest problem that’s starting to develop is saltwater intrusion. I mean, it is really our farms on the eastern shore, who are creating foodstuffs. So we have new additional allies, we think in the farming community. So we have to bring everyone together to do this. But we need you and again, I want to thank all of your staff for their great contribution. But this isn’t going to happen from a great speech on the floor by Paul Pinsky. It’s going to happen by hundreds and 1000s of people demanding a change. I think we can do it. We’re counting on you. Thank you.

Jamie DeMarco  11:32  

Thank you very much, Chairman. We really appreciate that. Next, we’re going to hear from delegate David Fraser-Hidalgo and let me tell you, there is no one in Annapolis who speaks about climate change with more passion than delegate David Frasier doggo. I think that’s a big statement. But I think it’s true. I mean, a lot of us when you talk about climate, we talk about co-benefits. We talked about all these other benefits that are going to come with climate action. When delegate David Frazier, it also talks about climate change. He reminds us that we are in a visceral existential fight for our lives. And in order to survive, we need to mobilize all we have to reduce emissions as quickly as humanly possible. He stood up for the clean energy jobs act when no one else would. And without him that legislation would not have passed. And delegate David Fraser Hidalgo, channels, all of that ambition into this bill, the climate crisis and Education Act. I’ll let him talk about it more.

David Fraser-Hidalgo  12:31  

Well, thank you. Thank you, Jamie. I will try to do you justice. So the carbon pricing bill that I have, I have it along with Senator Ben Kramer, we’ve had it for three years now. And before I get into the meat of the bill, but I want to kind of talk a little bit about what Senator Pinsky alluded to, and that is, we are going to have a session. Last session was crazy the way just kind of imploded in the end. And now this session, we have a little bit better idea of what it’s going to look like on the House side, we’re going to be broken up into two sections, the annex section, which is going to be in the house office building, and then the general state house, we’ll have the other half of the Maryland State delegates, and we’re going to go in on January 13 for a few hours to get session going and then everybody will be home. You know, Senator Pinsky, myself delegate Chuck Cooney, and all of the delegates and senators will be, most of them will be working from home they will be. So exactly what that and what Jamie said earlier, it’s going to be a little harder to get a hold of people. So you’re going to have to be really creative. And you’re going to have to be diligent and you’re going to have to work really hard because we can’t and I can’t tell you how much we need your help. So on the carbon bill itself, as most of the people on this call know that there is approximately $100 billion, depending on how you define it, that are given away every year to the fossil fuel industry in the form of grants and tax credits and incentives for them to go out and dig holes in the ground to pull up dead dinosaurs. So what what this bill does is it says okay, well, if you’re going to burn all those dinosaurs, if we’re going to to burn all those fossil fuels, and pollute the earth and cause global warming and cause climate change, and do all the things that one of the things that are Pinsky said about the rising sea levels out on the eastern shore, that doesn’t, that doesn’t even take into consideration all the the whole west coast of this country burning to the ground or, you know, the violent storms that we have. Now, if that’s not enough for you. Just think about all of those costs for burning fossil fuels, all those costs, that doesn’t include the kids going into the emergency room for asthmatic attacks or premature births, or any of those things. So the totality and extra totality of all of those things together need to be paid for and they shouldn’t be just paid for by US citizens and the taxpayers. They should be paid for when you do business. So if you’re going to buy a gallon of gas and burn it, you shouldn’t be paying two bucks per gallon. You should be paying a lot more than that. If you’re new You’re paying a lot more than that you’re paying two to three times that. And for generations for over 100 years, we really haven’t been to security, the oil industry hasn’t really been paying the total cost of doing business. And so when we talk about leveling the playing field, which is what they often say, when we talk about electric vehicle tax credits, when we talk about solar tax credits, when we talk about wind turbines and generating renewable energy, when they, when they talk about that, they said, We just want a level playing field we’re against, it shouldn’t be any tax credits. And then my comment to them is okay, well then give back your 100 million dollar $100 billion a year, every year, the tax credits that will have a lengthy playing field, I usually add a couple of adjectives in my head, but I hold those back. I don’t say them publicly. And so that’s essentially what this bill does. I mean, the carbon bill, which I’ve been working on, Pete’s on the call, he has been working for years with Climate Exchange. And, and, and when she can, and Mike and everybody, it’s just a bit of big effort. Last year, we had the best hearing we’ve ever had, it was a really good hearing, we had, I think close to 70. co sponsors 65, or six co sponsors, we had a great bill hearing on the House side last year, and then kind of, you know, as the hearing was going on delegate recruiting I was talking with her earlier today. And she has, you do know that as you are in the middle of your hearing, the governor was shutting everything down, everything was shutting down in the middle of your hearing. So with COVID, we had a great bill hearing that brought a lot of great advocates to the table. And we hope to do that again this year. I don’t know what is going to happen this year with COVID, I think that there’s going to be a small number of bills that have to do with balancing the budget that get passed. And some of the bigger lifts, I don’t know how leadership is going to look at them, because they don’t want a lot of Florida debate. Everybody’s worried about COVID. So anything that’s controversial, that’s going to get a lot of Florida bait is going to be harder, it’s just going to be harder this year.

But with that said, it’s a great opportunity for us to push forward on this bill. And one of the great things about this bill is it generates hundreds of millions of dollars to the state and that and the big part of the bill makes sure that those people and lower income earners get rebated and get made home. So we don’t worry about necessarily the low income earners, this is really going after those folks that can afford to pay for it. And to some degree, it’s going to be put back on the backs of the fossil fuel industry. So depending on how the final bill comes out, it’s a 47 page bill, it’s very complicated, and there are so many things that can change in the middle of it. But that’s that’s it, I mean, it’s just really an attempt to kind of level the playing field. So people know what when they stick that pump, you know, into their car, and they pump gasoline in or when they burn natural gas at home or methane at home. Or when they, you know, turn on their heat they’re actually thinking about a little bit where that electricity is coming from, we just really have to, we really have to transition yesterday as quickly as you possibly can toward the electrification of the grid through renewables. And we can do that. And that’s what this bill really helps to do. And I think that’s the big part of it is it just gets people thinking about what they’re doing. And there’s really not a, there’s really not a downside to it. So with that, I will stop and let us go the rest of the way. And then I’m happy to answer any questions at the end if anybody has any. Thank you very much.

Emily Frias  18:36  

Yeah. So we kind of jumbled our order a little bit. And we skipped going to ask Senator Pinsky. And then we will do a question for delegate Fraser Hidalgo. So Senator Pinsky. The question I have is, so in your recent op ed, you mentioned the need to center black and brown communities and our conversation about climate change. Can you speak a little bit more about how the climate solutions bill will address those points?

Paul Pinsky  19:08  

Thank you for that question. And as soon as I finish trying to cover the bill, there’s so many parts to it. I realized I didn’t talk about environmental justice. Yes, I’ve been an environmental justice commission for 10 years or more. But I have to tell you, it’s more that IT has been ignored. It’s been dismissed, and the Department of Environment has not paid any attention to it. Now, we’re told the administration is going to reinvigorate it and pay more attention. Well, we think people have to be accountable. So actually, in our bill and the climate solutions now act, we set up 345 charges to the new revamped commission. We say they have to define disproportionately affected communities, these poor black and brown communities, they have to talk about how much spending is going on there or not. and develop a tool to start using a lens To see how policy actually affects those communities, we also require the new commission to look at spending in those communities to make up for the lack of effort, the lack of focus over the many, you know, in urban areas, it’s been a total dismissal and it has to change. We think it can’t just be swept under the carpet, you know, we do some other things we say, of the 5 million trees 10% have to be in urban communities to, to have tree cover to capture carbon dioxide. But more than that, we have to use a lens every day, in every issue on the environment and beyond the environment. So as much as we can, and there’ll be other environmental justice bills, there’s a workforce that will come up with a restructuring of the condition, but we think they can’t dance anymore, they have to do something concrete. So we have a large section of the bill that will hold them accountable. Because it’s been way too long. It’s been over time where there has to be a better focus. You know, asthma, and other illnesses are affecting the black and brown community in Baltimore, Prince George’s and other areas. There’s been a lot of the facilities, the coal fired power plants have been around Baltimore, Baltimore County, North Adelanto County, and those communities have been affected, you know, and their cumulative effects as well. So it is a major part of our bill, I’m glad you asked that question. I was on the phone today on a zoom call with Dr. Jacoby Wilson, who’s a professor at Maryland, and has done a lot of work on this. So we’re going to ensure that no one is left behind. And in fact, those that have been left behind addressed first.

Emily Frias  21:52  

Thank you so much for your answer. All right. Our next question is for delegate Fraser Hidalgo. And the question is, can you speak to the fiscal note for the climate crisis in Education Act? Just what is that looking like? Has it changed from last year? What do you expect to see?

David Fraser-Hidalgo  22:13  

So we don’t have the fiscal note back, it’s probably going to be similar to that of what it was last year, and I’m not particularly concerned with the fiscal note, because it’s very, very positive for the state. So it’s not like the state has to lay out tons of money or, you know, millions of dollars in order to make sure this goes in the staff set. It’s just going to be so much. I mean, the benefit of the bill is that there’s going to be, you know, three to $500 million that starts to come in within a few years. So the, the issue with the bill isn’t the fiscal note is as much as it is, it is convincing leadership that the climate crisis is not now the climate crisis isn’t tomorrow, the climate crisis has been going on for, you know, 50 years or 40 years, at least, the oil companies very well know, their scientists very well knew, by the 1970s, what was going on, and they continue to do things anyway. So it’s just really getting people up to speed on this is real, and we can’t wait. And we have to elevate crisis issues, the climate crisis issues to the same level that we talk about when we talk about education. So there are big things that Annapolis we talk about, that are the big drivers in Annapolis education, public health care, public safety, those kinds of things. And quite frankly, the environment needs to be up on that same level not below not an afterthought. It needs to be on the same level as the other things if, if not higher, and the a lot of environmental justice is addressed in in my villas, as well and delegate Stein was on a briefing call that we did the latino caucus in the black caucus in the Asian American Pacific Islander caucus did a briefing a few about a month and a half ago. And it was only on environmental justice. It was a great, great briefing.

Jamie DeMarco  24:01  

Thank you delegate. Next we’re going to hear from delegate Charkoudian and delegate Charkoudian, as I think most of us on this call know is a force in this world like nothing I have ever encountered before. When the Maryland clean energy jobs act was on the ropes in 2019. We weren’t sure if it was going to pass. She was rightfully chosen to represent it on the floor and her brilliant defense of the bill ensured that it was passed. Just in her first term as a state delegate. She has built a reputation and positioned herself at the very center. She is sort of the center node of climate policy. in Annapolis. There’s some legislators who love to dive into the details of policy, some who love the politics of policy. delegates are comedians and are the rare legislator who masters both and I can’t speak enough about her reputation, not just today. I was talking to a delegate, who said when delegates are kuhnian brings me a bill and asks for my co sponsorship. I don’t have Have you read it, I just signed up, because I know that she only brings good bills. And that’s the kind of reputation she’s built for herself. And I think that is represented in the bill. She’s sponsoring the Public Service Commission climate test, Bill, and I’ll let her talk about it more.

Lorig Charkoudian  25:17  

Wow, that is what my mother wrote for you, Jamie, thank you, I am honored to be here. I’m honored to be here with ckn, who I have so much respect for and and with all of you and I see faces and names that I know are crucial to really getting good climate legislation through in Annapolis. And, I’ll just give a shout out. Also, before I get started, for the polar bear point, I gotta think of something really creative. Mike, I don’t know what we’re gonna do this year. But my daughter and I have done the polar bear plunge for like the last nine years together. So we’re good. So I can’t recommend it enough. And I’m sorry, we can’t do it together. So my bill this year is for the Public Service Commission to have to consider climate and labor in their decision making. And what’s wild about this bill is as I talked to people about it, if you don’t know the Public Service Commission makes decisions related to and regulating the utilities in the state. So this includes making decisions about new energy generation facilities. It also includes decisions about rate setting and rate making, mergers, pipelines, so all kinds of energy decisions and regulatory decisions related to energy are made by the Public Service Commission. And when I tell people that the Public Service Commission is required to consider things like localized environmental issues, they’re required to consider the economy of the state at reasonable rates. But they are not required to consider climate in their decision making. People are stunned. And it is wild to me that in 2020, with the crisis that we’re in, we somehow still are at a place where our Public Service Commission doesn’t have to consider climate and their decision making. And in case anyone was wondering if maybe we didn’t have it in statute, but they believed and understood that they were supposed to consider it in their decision making. We had a chance two years ago to find out that No, in fact, in a decision, and many of you, I see some Howard County folks on here, who were active in the in the fight on the the transition of the crane plant, to natural gas facility, and in the complaint made the case that actually climate change would affect the plant itself. So it wasn’t that the plant would affect climate change, although that was true as well, but the climate change would affect the plant. And the judge ruled and the commission backed up explicitly that the Commission is not required to consider climate change in their decision making. So in case we had any doubts about it, now we know for sure, so that led to us putting this bill together. And what the bill says is, basically they have to consider climate change. And there’s a couple of different places where this is important. I think it’s important, certainly in the cpcm process, which is the certificate for public CPC convenience in need, which is the decision making around the placement and the rules around the actual generation facility. So that’s considering climate change in deciding to authorize a new natural gas plant, or considering climate change in the decision making around a utility scale solar project. And so in both of those you want climate to be considered in one case, it would be sort of a reason to slow down or have to mitigate a project and the other it would be a reason to move it and move it faster along.

But also in every decision that’s made, and that’s really important, because for example, there was a merger, folks may be aware that the Washington gas Alta gas merger that occurred a couple years ago, the Public Service Commission approved the merger, and the Hogan administration and the Maryland energy administration asked that part of that merger be that 30 million $30 million be set aside for a natural gas expansion fund. Yes, in 2018, a natural gas expansion fund that is now being used to promote natural gas and this pipeline on the eastern shore. And the Public Service Commission authorizes that. And so again, it’s one of those things where in every decision they make that means in mergers, also they need to consider climate change. And so again, it would be a case where, where people too, and people did push against that particular merger decision. But that component of state statute would have required that the Public Service Commission consider that in a merger. So those are just a few very specific examples. But when we look at all of the decisions the Public Service Commission makes, it’s really important that climate is front and center. The other thing that this bill does is it requires that the Public Service Commission consider labor and I think folks know that we really need to be if we’re going to have a green sustainable, healthy, just future, equitable future. We’ve got To do that with environmentalists and labor unions working hand in hand with environmental justice communities, and really keeping labor, family sustaining wages, environmental justice, equity, and reduction of greenhouse gases, making sure we’re building policies where all of those are intertwined and linked. And so it’s really important that when we’re looking at the institutions that are going to build this green future, that they are considering climate, and that they’re considering labor and labor standards. And so this bill really gives us a chance to put those together in the same bill highlight and work in partnership with C can is a lead on this year, a club is supporting this, and laina labor union. This is one of their priority bills this year, as well. And so, it’s a really important partnership. And it’s, you know, we’re not always on the same page. But whenever we can be on the same page, and the more we can work together to build that green, sustainable family sustaining wages, economy, we need to be doing that. And this bill is a great opportunity to highlight that. So I’m really excited to be bringing this bill, I look forward to working with all of you in Annapolis, even if it’s virtually in Annapolis, and then hopefully celebrating together in person over the summer, or fall next year.

Emily Frias  31:22  

Great, thank you so much. So we have some good questions here. If this bill is passed in this upcoming session, might it have an impact on the Del Mar pipeline and the Chesapeake utilities project?

Lorig Charkoudian  31:41  

I think the short answer is, is it Yes, I suspect it would in some ways. I don’t know that it would stop it. Just because that’s the approvals have kind of come through already through a variety of sources. And people know that that’s been an obscure kind of and run around the state’s climate policy. But I think that there will be some decisions related to that project that will have to go to the Public Service Commission. And so it could influence to some extent how that plays out.

Mike Tidwell  32:16  

I also want to give a plug to another bill that we’re not talking about a lot tonight, that Lord’s gonna be sponsoring and that’s the Community Choice energy bill that would allow our county Montgomery County as a pilot to basically control its electric electrical destiny by taking control of our grid. And it’s the top priority of our county of 1.1 million people to meet his climate reduction goals, which are frankly beyond even what Maryland’s doing. And so I want everyone to keep a lookout for Lawrenceville Community Choice energy, a really, really important paradigm shifting bill, so we want to support that as well.

Jamie DeMarco  33:00  

I want to thank our three sponsors, I know that your time is really valuable. So thanks for answering questions each and don’t feel like you need to stay on if you feel like you need to drop off. Anthony, if you could share a screen, I’m just gonna run through the bills we just heard about and go over the provisions in them one more time to make sure it sticks. So climate solutions now. It requires us to reduce our emissions 60% by 2030, and net zero emissions by 2045. It requires that a certain percentage of all state funds going forward be spent on climate change, and go to underserved frontline communities. And that percentage will be decided by the Commission on Environmental Justice and sustainable communities. This is a pivotal piece of the bill. This is going to make it illegal not to invest in underserved frontline communities. This is modeled off of the New York bill, the New York climate leadership and community Protection Act, which is widely considered the gold standard of environmental justice policies around the country at the state level. This also creates a workgroup to protect fossil fuel workers and enact a series of policies that will reduce emissions immediately like planting 5 million trees. And two thirds of all the funds that go to plant those trees will be spent in urban communities that have been historically redlined. We know when these oppressive heat waves come they’re killing people. And they’re killing people and heating islands where there are no trees disproportionately. Also zero emission vehicles, reductions in existing buildings, everything. Chairman Pinsky talked about the public service Service Commission climate test that’s a lorex bill, this is not in the order of sponsors. So it’s just keeping you on your toes, making sure you’re paying attention, and it requires the Public Service Commission to consider climate change when deciding whether to approve a project or merger. Just consider that that’s all it does, and also requires companies applying for energy prices. At the Public Service Commission to disclose the benefits they would give to their workers. This is a key place where we are building an ally ship with labor. When we’re with labor, we’re strong when we’re against labor, we lose. And so we need to find every opportunity we can to work alongside labor. And the climate crisis and Education Act invests hundreds of millions of dollars every year into clean energy, climate resiliency, and just transition. It also puts $350 million a year into public education. Because we know this is an intersectional fight between public education, and disparities and public education are one of the greatest drivers of racial disparities across the board. It also raises these funds directly from shareholders while protecting consumers and giving every marylander a rebate. And that is our quick summary. I’m going to turn it over to Anthony to talk about our pipeline work. Great,

Anthony Field  35:54  

Thank you so much, Jamie. And again, thank you to the three legislators that were able to join us again. We understand your time is valuable and very appreciative to have three leaders here on the call on discussing such important pieces of legislation tonight. So for those of you don’t know me, my name is Anthony field I use he him his pronouns, and I am the campaign lead for C. Cannes no new fossil fuels campaign, working on issues such as advocating for stronger landfill methane regulations, making sure methane is adequately evaluated within our state, stopping retiring coal fired plants from converting the gas fighting gas infrastructure and brand new wind on the eastern shore and other possibly proposed infrastructure as they come up a number of things that were talked about by all three legislators on the call today, and I’ll have parts within the pieces of legislation that we’re discussing. But today, I want to touch on one specific issue. And that is the issue of the Eastern Shore pipelines and where we’re at on that front. So for those of you who do not know, there are two proposed pipelines on the eastern shore, the Del Mar pipeline, seven miles of pipelines shown on the left image here in yellow, and 11 miles of pipeline, called the Chesapeake utilities project, shown in red here on the right. Both of these pipelines cross multiple wetlands and waterways, both will impact air quality to the communities and threaten the land that they live on. Both will saddle already overburdened communities with a pipeline we know that the state should not be advocating for in light of our climate commitments and our emission goals. Both are being pushed through as part of Governor Hogan’s plan to invest millions into expanding fracked gas, which is what delegate lorig was referring to with the 30 over $30 million. It is worth noting that when requesting applications for energy sources, the state only requested applications from gas companies, only one company applied, that was Chesapeake utilities. They were selected. And then the Maryland environmental service stated that the process was both exhaustive and competitive. We obviously know that that was not true. If nothing else, taking away the community’s opportunity of a thorough vetting of alternatives is a grave injustice. So take one more look at this map and the path here. And on this screen, you are seeing the census tracks from a spatial analysis that was conducted, showing that the project will run through majority minority and low income communities. on this call. We’ve already talked about the issue of environmental justice multiple times. And here we are seeing, again, a specific example of environmental justice concerns when we’re talking about climate, but also fossil fuel infrastructure. Specifically, there are only four of the 41 mile study area tracks within this area that are not ej eligible. ej eligible means that more than 30% of the residents are minorities, and or 20%, or more live in poverty. Make no mistake, this pipeline will further burden these communities by endangering their water, land, air quality and health. And this pipeline is an environmental justice issue. On December 2, the Maryland Board of Public Works chose to ignore the many and justices in approving a key permit for the Del Mar pipeline, which is again one of two pipelines.

Leading up to that vote a lot happened in the recent months and I want to cover some of the things here. So as mentioned just now a commission study uncovered troubling environmental justice issues. The Maryland State NAACP chapter added the pipeline’s to their list of environmental justice priorities and local chapters took a stance in opposition. CCAN with the help from our partners with the Maryland chapter of Sierra Club and the local Wicomico environmental trust released a white paper outlining concerns about the economics of these pipelines. We know that investing in pipelines and gas infrastructure is a gamble at best with multiple companies facing bankruptcy and pipeline projects failing all across the nation. Something new that we discovered was that the Acting Director of the Maryland environmental service stated that therefore the decision to forego applications from renewable energy sources was based on a 2012 Request for Information report, where almost a decade ago they determined that renewables wouldn’t be adequate. But a lot has changed in the years since that, and I think it’s absolutely ridiculous that the decision to forego alternatives was based on such an old report. Additionally, the Maryland climate commission or the Commission on climate change, released their 2020 report calling for the state to reach net zero emissions by 2045. And for the state government to consider environmental justice impacts during project planning. I hope you’re seeing a trend here. There is a lot of talk about environmental justice, and that’s because it’s largely been ignored and underappreciated in the past. Additionally, over 700 letters were sent by Eastern Shore residents urging the Maryland Board of Public Works to reject the pipeline’s that’s over 700, specifically from people that are from the communities that this pipeline will impact. So as mentioned, on December 2, the Board of Public Works held a hearing where they voted three to zero to approve a key permit for the Del Mar pipeline. What does this mean? Well, it means that the Board of Public Works ultimately ignored the multiple issues raised by CCAN partner organizations around the state and most importantly, they ignored concerns from residents of the local communities I call the shore home, it means that this fight is not over. And we know that we will not give up. See, Ken will continue to fight and organize against the pipeline, including the upcoming vote for the Chesapeake utilities portion, which is expected to come in the early months of January. I anticipate around March or so we will do everything we can to stand with the local communities and amplify their voices. This is their land, their health on the line. And we want to be sure that we are doing everything we can to advocate for them. It was clear since the beginning that this would be a fight. And I NRC can in the hundreds of concerns Eastern Shore residents will stop fighting. I think it’s worth mentioning that at this hearing many supporters of the pipeline, including the Lieutenant Governor Rutherford, who chaired the hearing, had the talking point that only western shore elitists and big green organizations were posted this pipeline, and we were trying to keep and take away the choice of these communities to use gas. And I think that is a grave. That is willfully ignoring the hundreds of Eastern Shore residents and locals that have put their blood sweat and tears into fighting this pipeline, and who are just very concerned about the health and well being of their communities and their land. And I think the Lieutenant Governor stating that and the supporters of the pipeline stating that was entirely disrespectful to those members. And I also want to mention that there were a number of people in line to comment at that Board of Public Works hearing, including elected officials that were not called upon to speak on behalf of the eastern shore. And I can’t tell you enough how disappointed I am in the way the state has been conducting themselves with regards to the process of this energy infrastructure and the approval process and the hearing process of these pipelines. And I think the eastern shore has been given the cold shoulder often in the past and they deserve better. So what’s next, and how can you get involved? So I only touched on one major issue this evening. And that was Eastern Shore pipeline. But there are many important things that we are working on simultaneously within our new fossil fuels campaign. And I urge everyone to follow a link in the chat that I’m about to put in to sign up for one of the action teams listed here. There’s five major action teams focusing on different issues across the state, methane, the eastern shore pipelines, the Potomac pipeline and the rockwool power plant, public health and environmental justice and of course, no new fossil fuels legislation, which is including the climate crisis and Education Act and the PSE climate test. joining these teams will allow you to keep up to date on everything that’s going on within those issues, but also provides you with opportunities to

act and support our fights for those issues. So please stay engaged, stay informed, and continue helping us advocate for fossil fuel free, Maryland. Thank you very much, everybody. And now I’m going to go ahead and hand it over to Emily.

Emily Frias  44:45  

Thank you so much, Anthony. And go ahead and put that link in the chat for the new fossil fuels teams. Definitely a really important way to fight to stay engaged. Alright, so I’m going to Keep my slides very short so that we have time to get to several questions. I’m just going to go over quickly, how you can stay involved. So we have a number of events lined up for the legislative session that you should mark your calendars for right now. The next one is going to be next Tuesday. That’ll be our letter writing party for climate solutions. Now, we will be watching, we’ll be writing letters and watching a year without a Santa Claus, which is about characters, you’re not familiar with the stop motion animation film from the 70s. And it is about an unseasonably warm Christmas. So very fitting for climate activists, then on the world holiday break, and then well, we’ll, we’ll all have very little time, after the holidays before the legislative session starts on January 13, that Wednesday, is the first day of session. So really coming up quickly. So throughout the session, what we’d like you to do is call email and tag legislators regularly. But especially before the vote, we will be sending you actions. So please make sure that you’re paying attention to your inbox, as well as communicating with us through our smaller channels to make sure that you’re staying aware of when it’s time to really reach out to your legislators. Then, on the week of the 25th, we will be having our lobby week for the climate crisis in Education Act, which is working with our partners on that campaign. So lobby week is obviously going to be a little different this year, we would normally have this one Bobby day. But this year, we’re putting an emphasis on having virtual meetings. So we’ll be walking you through that process, the more that we learn, and hopefully, we’ll have a lot of success in reaching out to our legislators. And then the week of the 22nd of February, we’ll be having our lobby week for the climate solutions bill and the PSC climate test. So the reason that we’ve split up these two lobby weeks is that both the climate crisis and Education Act is a very complicated bill. So is the credit solutions bill. So we wanted to give both bills and equal shots of really, really showcasing what they have to offer in our lobby meeting. So that is why we made that decision. Hopefully, there’s enough time in between that you’ll be able to attend both. And then at the end of March and early April, if our bill has still not moved, our bills have still not moved, we are planning to have some safe in person actions. But we are, you know, we’re it’s hard to plan too far ahead on those things. So we will keep you informed. Okay, so how to stay involved. Stay in touch with Anthony and the no new fossil fuels kit campaign by signing up for an action team, we just sent you that link, you can stay in touch with me and the climate solutions campaign by joining our slack workspace, which I will share in the chat link to join. Or you can email me directly at Emily at Chesapeake comet.org to be added to our smaller Google group. And if you need help with Slack, if you’re new to slack, it is a tool that is used by so many and has been used successfully by so many political campaigns during the elections. And it’s a great way to stay in touch instantaneously with other concerned citizens and concerned volunteers. And if you’re not as familiar, we have done training on slack. We have great training on our website, visit our volunteer resource page. Or honestly, if you have a lot of questions and you really, really want to use a tool, please email me directly. I do occasionally have office hours to be able to explain these tools to folks.

Unknown Speaker  49:03  

Okay.

Emily Frias  49:05  

So with that, we are going to take a few questions. I hope that wasn’t too quick. I’m also going to share our event and our link to our climate solutions slack. And while folks go ahead and join that, I’m going to ask myself to read out a question that we got earlier. So this question was about the carbon pricing bill. And the question was, does this still have any elements? That would be a non-starter for republicans? And how do we address that?

Jamie DeMarco  49:52  

Anthony, do you want to take that ticket?

Anthony Field  49:55  

Oh, feel free Jamie.

Jamie DeMarco  49:57  

Um, you know, Republican In Maryland have a tendency to surprise us. Governor Hogan surprised us when he expressed his strong support for the fracking ban even when democratic leadership wasn’t there yet. And, you know, last year, when we passed the climate solutions act out of committee, two republicans surprised us by voting for it. And that really surprised us there, too. We think this is a really good bill. I don’t think there’s anything in it that will make all republicans flee from it. I think a lot of the extreme ones are not going to be gravitated towards this. But we don’t give up on republicans but at CCAN we’re not necessarily counting on them to vote for this bill. Luckily, we’ve got super majorities of Democrats in both the House and the Senate. We do want Governor Hogan to sign it. So if this bill passes, then if any of these bill pass, then you should be making sure you should be looking after the calling campaign to Governor Hogan to make sure that he doesn’t veto it. Great question. Mike, did you want anything? Anything? 

Emily Frias  51:13  

Okay. The next question is about the PSC climate test. Does the climate and labor test have binding language? Or is it just to consider these things? Like what? What is it that they’re going to be bound to do by the skill?

Jamie DeMarco  51:37  

The labor piece is really binding. If you’re applying, you have to fill this out. This is information that has not been disclosed in the past, and has to be disclosed now under this law. So that’s really finding the climate peace is a considered peace. It’s not saying you have to reject every single pipeline, or every single fossil fuel project. But it’s saying consider climate change. And we know that if we can consider climate change there, then we can win on the merits. We lose right now at the Public Service Commission, because they say we explicitly do not consider climate change. We’re like, it’s gonna destroy the climate. And they’re like, the legislature has not asked us to consider climate change among the list of things that they have asked us to consider. So we are not going to consider that. So this is getting into the debate. And then we are going to have to win the debate at the Public Service Commission.

Emily Frias  52:31  

Great, thank you. And then the final question on the climate solutions now, Bill. So what is different about this bill there, there was a bill last year the climate solutions act, what is different this year? That wasn’t in the bill last year.

Jamie DeMarco  52:53  

This bill is very similar to the bill last year, one of the biggest differences is the tree portion. Last year, we introduced a bill and just said to plant 5 million trees. This year, we said it’s not enough to just plant trees, we need to plant trees, where they’re needed most in communities that don’t have access to green space, and are hurt because of that. And so we added this environmental justice provision making sure that two thirds of all the money spent planting these trees is planted in urban underserved areas that have been historically redlined. That’s one of the biggest differences. A lot of the other provisions are the same. There’s some other pieces like it that require new large buildings with lots of roof space to be solar ready. And that wasn’t in there before. And obviously, a lot of the years have been changed, because we’re one year later now. But for the most part, it’s the same bill. Jamie, if I could add, Yes, Senator,

Paul Pinsky  53:51  

Among the people who helped shape the bill, we call on the architects. And they played a very good role progressive architects across the state. So a lot of the language around either new construction or large renovation or building in schools is more nuanced. And we brought in the experts. So you know, sometimes you take language from another bill, or you do a 30,000 foot statement. But we actually got some of the experts who’ve done some kind of visionary activity. So there are a number of pieces of Bill where it’s more subtle, it’s more nuanced, that we think can apply to the state of Maryland, and really move our environment forward. And at the same time, in many cases, the business community should benefit not lose. So look, well, some of them oppose the bill. Absolutely. But we think we can also make an argument that a strong dynamic environment is also good for the business community. So we touch the trees that Jamie said, ensuring that some percentage goes to the urban area. So, you know, the other fact is that we continued working on the bill in the mid February last year. As someone who was responsible, it probably wasn’t ready for primetime. We spent the summer in the fall with a lot of environmental experts trying to get this right. We think it’s a great bill, we can go put us in the top tier nationally in the top three, or maybe five bills in the country in terms of the omnibus approach to the bill. So a lot of the same, some changes.

Emily Frias  55:37  

Thank you so much. There’s one we don’t have time for many more questions. There’s one that’s very easy to answer that I see in the chat. There’s a 60% emissions reductions goal including only electricity or all emissions, I believe it is all emissions.

Emily Frias  55:57  

And with that, we are right at eight, eight o’clock. So thank you so much to everyone who joined. We had a wonderful turnout for this event and are always honored as the organizer to see that. So thank you, thank you, also to our legislators, and to everybody who joined, we really hope that you stay in touch with us and we can end the session with a number of wins. So thank you, and have a wonderful night.

Charles Olsen  56:31  

Thanks for listening to Upside down. This podcast is produced by me, Charlie Olsen. with incredible support from the entire CCAN staff. Check out the show notes for links to all the things discussed in this episode. If you want to know more about how you can get involved with CCAN and the climate fight, check out our website at chesapeakeclimate.org. If you want to get in touch with us, follow us on instagram and twitter @CCAN. And if you enjoy the work we do, why don’t you share it with your friends. Sharing the show is a super easy way to help spread the word about the work we’re doing in the fight for bold climate actions. Thanks again for listening. We’ll see you next time.