Santa Clara County Community Climate Roadmap 2035

One artificial turf athletic field contains more plastic than According to the Synthetic Turf Council's Recycle & Reuse Guideline [link], “A typical synthetic turf sports field is about 80,000 square feet (7,432 square meters) ... An average field is comprised of 400,000 lbs. of infill (5 lbs./ft2) and 40,000 lbs. of turf (0.5 lbs./ft2). An 80,000 ft2 sports field would translate in volume to ± 400 cubic yards (yd3), or the equivalent of almost fourteen 30 cubic yard dumpsters of infill ... One thousand deconstructed fields represent 80 million square feet of turf weighing 40 million pounds and 400 million pounds of infill.” To that one should add artificial turf (AT) used in landscaping. Then add that amount again every 8-10 years when the fields and landscaping wears out and needs to be replaced. Plus - How to dispose of the worn AT? AT is a complex mixed plastic product as colorants (some with lead) and flammability reducers (some are florinated-carbons, think PFAS), and stabilizers (different benzene rings for different UV light waves), and so on. AT will not recycle cleanly into its separate chemical components. Ultimately it is landfilled, adding both micro plastics and chemical compounds into the soil and watersheds. Plus - as this next week in July it may reach 105°F - plastic will heat up to 80°F hotter than the air temperatures causing localized heat islands while simultaneously killing CO2 sequestering microbes in the soil, removing any CO2 sequestration that might take place using natural grass or plants. Artificial turf is an unnecessary plastic and should be specifically called out in this document as being harmful. It and other unnecessary plastics should cease to be produced and should cease to be used. This document does not go far enough. Consider also that "link link <Lawrence Berkeley National Lab> “By the middle of the century, global emissions from plastic production could triple to account for one-fifth of the Earth’s remaining carbon budget <to keep global average temperatures at 1.5C, a.k.a 2.7F, the report found>, an analysis has found. The stunning new estimates from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, published on Wednesday, provide yet more evidence that the plastic industry is ‘undermining the world’s efforts to address climate change’, said Heather McTeer Toney, executive director of the Bloomberg Philanthropies’ Beyond Petrochemicals campaign, which helped fund the new report.”

Five years seems like a long time in between inventories. Would it be feasible to shorten this timeline?

The adoption of an ordinance prohibiting the installation of new artificial turf fields (which is currently being explored by the County) could be a great fit for this section (or waste). Artificial turf fields generate plastic waste and runoff, make fields dangerous in hot weather, and expose residents to PFAS.

Continued outreach is extremely important, if not the most important action in the suite of building electrification actions (because it makes action possible). Education will be key to collecting the feedback necessary to design effective policies and garner support for adoption. After policies are adopted, people will need resources to understand and navigate these policies, as electrification can be very complicated and there is a lot of climate disinformation floating around! Education should be a major effort with significant resources devoted to it.

Glad to see that ecosystems are mentioned here as a community priority. However, I do not see any ecosystem measures in the plan outside of the scope of farming support. How can the County support ecosystems outside of agriculture?

The County should consider protecting and restoring biodiversity, not only as a carbon sequestration measure, but also as a public health measure to protect residents from climate impacts. Expanding tree canopy cover, for example, can help mitigate the heat island effect and help residents walk and bike more.

GHG reduction is critical. Also: As communities deal with the effects of climate change on their lives, such as extreme temperatures, heat islands, wildfires, and un-healthy air quality, what steps will the County be taking to protect residents? Are these adaptation measures to be covered in a separate County process or document?

How about supporting more plant-based diets, Meatless Mondays, educational campaigns on the fact that most meat comes from factory farms, where animals, workers, and the environment are treated terribly? And partnering with farmers to produce better cared-for, grass fed, local meat, so people eat less meat (but better quality meat). Eating less animal protein will have a positive impact on our health, our farmworkers, and our environment.

Is it possible to standardize what type of take-out containers restaurants use? This might make it easier to recycle. Also, can we standardize recycling rules for the entire county? Right now, it's confusing that residents in Sunnyvale have different recycling rules than residents in San Jose or Mountain View.

This should specifically call out that artificial turf is not a drought-tolerant material (per State Bill 676), and it should encourage the installation of low-water, native plants and grasses. A ban on artificial turf will also support water conversation. It takes a lot of water to manufacture artificial turf; when artificial turf is in the field, it sheds infill and plastic "grass" blades, which contaminate our water supply and ground water; and after it's removed from the field and sent to the landfill, it continues to leach chemicals like PFAS that contaminate our water supply.

There's no mention here of artificial turf. Replacing native plants and grass with plastic artificial turf reduces the amount of living material we have that can support the carbon sequestration goals. Please include a ban on artificial turf in this roadmap - the negative environmental impacts of artificial turf mean that we cannot meet these goals while allowing the installation of artificial turf in our community.

By banning Artificial Turf one would have a lot less toxic, non-recyclable materials in our landfills.

Community outreach/education regarding single use plastics and how bad they are for the environment and how nearly impossible they are to recycle. Best not to use in the first place!

Lots of mention of carbon sequestration and keeping tree canopy but no where is there mention of the negative impact installations of Artificial Turf ground cover is causing nor any way to address this.

Love that SJ garbage trucks run on Hydrogen! More efficient and sustainable than electric vehicles! Should plan more things/trucks, buses to run on hydrogen!

There needs to be stricter county regulations against restaurants using disposables in Dine In settings. We see too many Chinese BBQ restaurants for example that only offer disposables for Dine In.

Challenge with this metric is many commute into Santa Clara County from other counties who contribute to the passenger vehicle emissions problem. Consider a county wide approach as an alliance across the Bay Area.

Although these are helplful goals from a vision of "need", it would be helpful to highlight what are the barriers for each to achieve. Perhaps consider listing shorter term milestones that will enable us to get there.

Protection of urban landscapes as well as rural landscapes and their inherent carbon sequestration, cooling, as well as a myriad benefit of ecosystem benefits will require the beneficial uses of water. It is imperative that the 2014 passage of Proposition 1 for the construction of water infrastructure be completed with the least cost method in order to deliver and maintain a habitable California. This obviously includes the once fertile and bountiful production of the 'Valley of Hearts Delight.' Time is wasting.

Applause! :)

CS-4 Continuing to encourage farmers and ranchers adopting regenerative land management practices that build relationships between people, lands, waterbodies, livestock, wildlife, and microbial life in soil.

I am glad to see that maintaining working farm and ranch lands is named as a mitigation to the county's climate change. The agricultural sector is an important ally in this endeavor and should continue to be supported.

Agreed, this is a high-priority topic for Acterra and many other community-based organizations working to promote local, sustainable, resilient food production through 1) expansion of community garden infrastructure and 2) support for garden / food education both for youth and community members.

Offering materials in a wider variety of non-English languages would be better reflective of the County's diverse population. Specifically: the addition of Chinese and Vietnamese.

Happy to see Santa Clara County supporting an initiative for a roadmap to combat climate change but disappointed that food is not mentioned as a way to combat this. Animal agriculture is responsible for MORE greenhouse gasses than our entire transportation system combined. An Oxford study concluded that the best thing an individual can do to help combat climate change is to go vegan or drastically reduce the amount of animals you eat and drink from. Please include plant based education in your road map. Thanks. link

I would add making it more sanitary and not allowing unhoused individuals or others to solicit riders for money or to sleep on the vehicles - that is essential for improved comfort

The most effective way to reduce water use is to reduce livestock production

Yeah, this is unrealistic until you expand public transportation, make it more reliable and efficient, clean it up (e.g. not allow unhoused individuals to sleep there - not their fault but it does make it feel less safe for single women traveling alone), keep it clean and sanitary, and enforce clear laws and rules around behavior, payment, and security. Otherwise, I personally do not feel safe to take public transportation and at this rate even if I were, it would take me 2 hours to get to work one way. You need to expand BART and make it more sanitary and safe.

An additional sector titled Sustainable Food Systems should be added here with the goal of reducing meat and dairy purchasing by 25%. There are effective and economical ways to do this that also promote health and food equity and improve public health. Please email me for specifics I am happy to volunteer my time and expertise to assist you!

Plant-based education for the community and businesses and restaurants can be provided by volunteers and volunteer organizations and can be held at libraries for no cost to the city or county and may even reduce costs due to plant foods being more economical that animal-based foods.

Plant-forward diets and foods are the number one most effective way to support ecosystems and biodiversity

Promoting plant-forward eating such as increasing plant-based options on menus, adopting Green/Meatless Mondays, and providing free plant-based nutrition and cooking education at local libraries are low-cost and effective ways to make health and nutrition more equitable and promote public health by preventing and even treating chronic illnesses caused by climate change

Increasing produce and plants is not only sustainable, it promotes health and food equity and inclusion, for example many cultures and religions do not consume meat or dairy.

Reduce purchasing of meat and dairy by 25% (which can help reduce water usage, directly reduce GHG emissions, promote health equity and food equity, support local farmers, and build resilience)

This inventory should include a consumption-based method which according to UC Berkeley (link) results in about 35% higher GHG emissions than the traditional territorial approach for the region, largely due to higher emissions from imported food and goods.

More CA legislation to drive residents and businesses out of state. Total virtue signaling. Farming will become impossible. Look at the farmers revolts in Europe over this nonsense.

A warmer climate is a safer climate than a colder one. CA has had hot spells forever and always will. Your hubris that you can control the temperature has no basis in science.

More climate cherry picking.

The level of CO2 is dangerously low. More CO2=more green plants=more food.

No forced government mandates on how we can heat, cool, cook in our homes. You are forcing more and more load to the grid which you propose being powered by unreliable, disparate, unstable, non-dispatchable sources. This is idiocy.

More woke statement with 0 value

More waste of time paid for by the tax payers.

We voted for more reservoirs to be built, none have been. The state is incapable of building projects. Gee, look to high speed rail.

Worthless suggestion, waste goes to landfill, end of story.

No way, no how, the grid will die along with us.