Implementation of AB 32 on Global Warming Would Be More Difficult Under Proposed Exemption of Methane Gas from Market Cap

• By allowing carbon offsets to be allocated for landfill gas, the landfill operator will have a direct monetary benefit to producing more landfill gas.

• Since the additional fugitive emissions from landfills would not be included in the cap, this would likely result in an increased demand for organics at landfills and subsequently a lower tipping fee for greenwaste at landfills.

• Lower tip fees at landfills will divert additional organics away from compost facilities. Composting is a significant greenhouse gas emission mitigation measure because it results in greater carbon sequestration in crop biomass, a decrease in the need for Green House Gas-releasing fertilizers and pesticides, and a decline in energy-intensive irrigation.

• A net increase in GHG emissions may result because landfill gas capture systems only capture a fraction of the landfill gas generated. The IPPCC estimates that lifetime efficiencies are as low as 20% for landfills.

• Most landfills are already required to capture and destroy their fugitive emissions. Giving offset credits for these systems would violate the additionally requirements of a market system. Companies should not be able to sell credits for something that they are legally required to do because it would not result in any further greenhouse gas reductions.

• The adoption of these recommendations directly conflicts with existing state waste reduction and recycling programs and policies. The Integrated Waste Management Act states that recycling and composting are to be prioritized over landfill disposal and that the state should maximize recycling and composting. These recommendations would take us a step backwards in waste reduction and composting.

Offsets from landfill gas to energy should not be supported until the ARB establishes that the offsets are additional and would result in a net decrease of GHG emissions from landfills and provide an overall environmental benefit to California.

Scott Smithline joined Californians Against Waste as a Policy Analyst in 2003. Scott is responsible for coordinating relationships with California Waste Board and other state and local agencies and he represents CAW on the California Compost Quality Council. In addition, Scott researches policy issues and helps develop CAW's policy positions and is also the editor of CAW's newsletter, the Recycling Advocate. Before joining CAW Scott practiced law as part of the Golden Gate University Environmental Law & Justice Clinic and Lawyers for Clean Water.

Founded in 1977, Californians Against Waste is a non-profit environmental research and advocacy organization that identifies, develops, promotes and monitors policy solutions to pollution and conservation problems posing a threat to public health and the environment. Californians Against Waste’s history has demonstrated it to be the nation’s oldest, largest and most effective non-profit environmental organization advocating for the implementation of waste reduction and recycling policies and programs.