Virginia Regulatory Town Hall
Department of Environmental Quality
Air Pollution Control Board
Regulation for Emissions Trading [9 VAC 5 ‑ 140]
Action Repeal CO 2 Budget Trading Program as required by Executive Order 9 (Revision A22)
Stage Proposed
Comment Period Ended on 3/31/2023
Previous Comment     Next Comment     Back to List of Comments
3/31/23  3:07 pm
Commenter: John B. Reeves P.E.

Virginia MUST stay on the Strategic course and remain in RGGI

Pulling Va. from this successful program (12 States and getting stronger) would necessitate finding many other ways to reduce our carbon emissions from electricity generating systems that very probably would be less effective plus more costly to manage.

The Va. allotted funds gained from RGGI CO2 auctions fund:

1- Critical, nature-based *Resilience projects- from durable living shorelines to flood prevention measures to expanding protective wetlands- all essential projects.  These funded projects slow erosion of valuable land and reduce the flow of sediment, nutrients and toxins into the Chesapeake Bay and her many tributaries.

2- Energy conservation (i.e.- "Negawatt") efforts- lowering difficult utility bills for many homeowners/ renters with lower incomes.  Reducing carbon emissions (+ associated air and water pollution), power bills and stress on the generation/Grid systems are *important benefits from "Negawatt"HN projects. Yes, Virginia could allocate enough funds into Va. biennial Budget to gain such useful benefits; but really, will that happen?

3- Practical steps toward slowing the approaching (& devasting) impacts of anthropogenic climate change.  Folks making RGGI decisions in Va. MUST review the recent reports from the IPPC, especially the March 20, 2023 "Synthesis Report", ending their 6th assessment cycle (with thousands of inputs and properly-peer reviewed papers world-wide).

I urge you--Keep the Commonwealth of Virginia in this important RGGI program.

CommentID: 216152