• 2000 levels by 2010 (11 percent below business as usual [BAU]).
• 1990 levels by 2020 (25 percent below BAU).
• 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.

Added to that mix was state Attorney General Jerry Brown’s 2007 announcement that environmental impact reports (EIRs) must evaluate GHG emissions and climate change.

Challenges for the Project Proponent
Lead agencies must evaluate a project’s potential impacts due to GHG emissions and broader climate change issues pursuant to CEQA to reduce or possibly prevent litigation and project delays.

With climate change effects now routinely considered in EIRs, project proponents and CEQA practitioners must address the following key issues:

• Establish baseline emissions inventory. Including the inventory in the environmental document is the first step in responding to AB 32 and the Attorney General’s direction. Emissions categories to be considered include energy use associated with project operations (residential, commercial, or institutional uses), energy embodied in water consumption (source and conveyance, treatment, distribution, end use, and wastewater treatment), and transportation and construction emissions. Considering carbon capture associated with the project site’s existing and planned vegetation and landscaping is allowed.
• Establish CEQA significance threshold. The threshold may be left to the lead agency’s discretion. Examples include:
• No threshold.
• A “carbon neutral” threshold, meaning that even a one-molecule increase in GHG emissions constitutes a significant impact.
• An AB 32-related threshold suggesting that a project interfering with the state’s ability to achieve AB 32 goals constitutes a significant impact.

No official guidance is yet available regarding use of a threshold.

• Characterize project effects. Based on the emissions inventory, project effects can be quantified and reported either for informational purposes if no significance threshold has been established or for comparison against an established threshold. Typically, EIRs need to consider if the impact is “cumulatively considerable” regardless of whether a significance threshold has been identified.
• Identify project design features. This step may be important both for characterizing project effects and for determining whether impacts are significant or cumulatively considerable.

Project design features may include items related to the built or natural environment such as water and energy efficiency, green build initiatives, and landscape and forestry measures. They may also include items related to neighborhood design such as smart land use and intelligent transportation systems.

Reductions from BAU associated with project design features can be quantified and used to provide information or to draw conclusions regarding project effects.

What Does It All Mean?
As with much of “CEQA sense” addressing climate change and global warming issues in EIRs, it can be challenging. It can be very frustrating to a project proponent whose goal is to build quality projects and get through the process as efficiently as possible.

“Official guidance is not yet available on this issue,” said June Collins, Dudek’s vice president and environmental services manager. “From our experience with these issues on client projects, we’ve drawn four general conclusions on reasonable ways to proceed.”

Collins said Dudek CEQA practitioners recommend that:

• The cautious approach is not to ignore the issue in EIRs.
• Case law has not yet been established.
• Discretion remains with lead agencies on how to address the issue in EIRs.
• At a minimum, EIRs should demonstrate the issue was considered, and the rationale for the approach selected should be explained.