Field of rusted oil pumpjacks under cloudy sky.

Extreme Weather, Disasters, and Health

Building the Evidence Base for Health-Protective Climate and Energy Policy

These research priorities identify critical gaps in climate and clean energy science — from carbon capture and sequestration to cap-and-trade equity and lithium extraction — where stronger evidence is needed to ensure that California's climate solutions do not come at the expense of already overburdened communities.
Explore More Research Priorities

Research Priorities Overview 

Our community stakeholders want to see research that assesses the health impacts of these events as well as of various state policies meant to address them – including both potential benefits and unintended and/or disproportionate harms. There is particular interest in research that assesses the impact of California’s various greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction strategies on adaptation capacity/resilience, equity, and public health. 

The following sections describe a few specific issues of concern to the community stakeholders we work with. 

Background & Policy Context 

The National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences’s current strategic plan states that “extreme weather events including record-breaking heat, storms, and droughts, create increased risk of outcomes including floods, wildfires, and the spread of vector-borne diseases that in turn can compromise human health” . 

The State of California has a wide range of climate-related policies and programs designed to meet its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction targets of 40% below 1990 levels by 2030 and carbon neutrality by 2045. 

The California Department of Public Health works to increase integration between climate and health policies through a range of programs and tools designed to ensure that climate mitigation and adaptation strategies benefit public health overall and do not increase health disparities.  

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) also leverages health protective policy mechanisms in the AB 32 Scoping Plan, which it develops every five years. The Scoping Plan lays out policy options for achieving the state's climate goals, largely by utilizing existing air pollution programs. The Final Draft Scoping Plan was released in December 2022. The Public Health Appendix (Appendix G) explicitly addresses both the health threats associated with extreme weather and the opportunities for improving public health and health equity through climate policy. 

Community groups, academics and policy experts have raised concerns about the 2022 draft. 

These concerns include the adequacy of interim targets as well as some of the mechanisms proposed for meeting those targets, particularly reliance on cap and trade and carbon capture and sequestration (CCS), which rural community groups are concerned could negatively impact the health of already heavily burdened California communities. These concerns were documented in a letter sent to Governor Newsom and the CARB Board Chair on June 22, 2022 and a November 16, 2022 press release. 

References 

  1. National Institute of EnvironmentalHealthSciences:Area6:ProtectingHealthFromtheImpactsofExtreme WeatherandDisasters 

Additional Resource 

(15) CaliforniaDepartmentofPublicHealth:ClimateChange & HealthEquitySection 

 

Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) 

Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) is a relatively new technology that involves capturing carbon either from the air or directly from an emissions source (like an oil refinery, power plant, or biomass conversion facility), using chemicals to dissolve it into a liquid or trap it in a solid material, and storing it deep underground. Public health concerns include CO2 leaks from storage or pipeline infrastructure, as well as risks associated with co-emissions if the technology is used to extend the life of aging oil and gas production facilities. 

Research Needs 

Community advocates would like to see research that supports evidence-based safety regulation and monitoring of CCA facilities and transport systems, including: 

  • Effective monitoring strategies and technologies for real-time detection of CO2 leaks from sequestration facilities, pipelines, and underground storage locations 
  • C02 air-dispersion modeling to support monitoring, health risk assessment, and effective public health response in the event of a CO2 leak 

Background & Policy Context 

The geology of California's Central Valley makes it uniquely capable of carbon storage, though carbon could also be captured in other parts of the state and transported to the Valley by truck, rail, barge, or pipeline. 

CCS can also play a role in enhanced oil recovery, a process in which CO2 injections are used to facilitate extraction in oil wells near the end of their life. In 2022 California passed a bill (SB 1314) that prohibits enhanced oil recovery using CCS in the state. 

CCS Expansion 

CCS is not currently used in California, though there are 66 projects under review and 237 applications for Class VI wells currently pending with the EPA (including sites in Kern, San Joaquin, Fresno, and Sacramento counties). 

California Resources Corporation (CRC) received the first (and currently only) approval to build and operate one of these facilities, Carbon TerraVault 1, in Kern County, in 2024, and is set to start operations in late 2025. 

The current California Scoping Plan includes investment in CCS projects. These projects are currently eligible to receive Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) credits, but are otherwise not yet able to participate in California's climate programs, including the cap-and-trade program. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is working to change this in order to allow public incentives to support CCS infrastructure development. 

Health Impact Concerns 

Both due to CCS's geologic requirements and its connection to oil production, CCS projects, in particular the carbon storage components, are likely to be overwhelmingly located in communities already overburdened with environmental hazards and with limited access to mitigations and health care. 

The primary public health risks associated with CCS projects are CO 2 leaks, including from pipeline infrastructure, and induced seismicity. Though CO 2 typically disperses rapidly in air, it is dangerous at high concentrations. In addition, elevated CO 2 in soil and aquifers can harm plants and degrade water quality by increasing acidity and metal concentrations. Seismic activity can be triggered if sites do not manage pressure appropriately. 

Community groups also question the viability and effectiveness of CCS based on its track record in other locations and its potential to extend fossil fuels use and divert investments from cleaner energy solutions. In response to some of these concerns, California passed SB 1314, which helps ensure that CCS doesn’t promote continued reliance on fossil fuels by prohibiting the use of extracted carbon for enhanced oil recovery.  

Additional Resources 

  1. Center for Biological Diversity’s Map of Proposed CCS Projects in California Compared to CalEnviroScreen scores 
  2. California Air Resources Board’s Carbon Capture and Sequestration Program: 2016 Progress and Future Plans   

 

Cap and Trade & REDD+ 

Cap-and-trade is a market-based system that allows companies to buy and sell permits to emit greenhouse gases, while REDD+ allows countries or organizations to earn credits for preserving forests that absorb carbon. While these programs aim to reduce global emissions, they can increase pollution in already overburdened communities when companies buy offsets instead of reducing their own emissions. Associated public health concerns include worsened air quality near participating industrial sites and negative health and social impacts in communities where REDD+ projects lead to displacement or environmental disruption. 

Research Questions 

What health impacts may be faced by communities located near industrial emitters that increase emissions under cap-and-trade by purchasing offsets of credits? 

  • How do emissions permitted through California’s cap-and-trade program correlate with asthma rates, cardiovascular outcomes, and other environmental health indicators in nearby communities? 
  • How do these emissions contribute to the overall / cumulative environmental burden in these communities? 

What are the environmental health impacts of REDD+ projects on displaced or land-tenure-insecure populations in offset-producing countries (i.e. forest-dependent or Indigenous communities)? 

  • Are REDD+ activities (e.g. monoculture replanting or forced displacement) associated with increased vector-borne disease risk, worsening nutrition, or adverse mental health outcomes in affected communities? 

Background & Policy Context 

The Kyoto Protocol, which was initiated in 1997 and went into effect in 2005, establishes global greenhouse gas (GHG) emission targets and market-based mechanisms for meeting them. One of these mechanisms is emissions trading, often called "cap-and-trade," in which a government sets a limit ("cap") on GHG emissions and then allows the largest emitters to trade allocations within that limit among themselves in the form of credits. Emissions markets can also include offsets, or verified emission reductions, which companies can purchase in addition to unused credits to increase their allowed emissions. 

California's Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) established GHG emissions targets for the state and includes its own cap-and-trade program as part of its Scoping Plan. 

CARB has considered expanding California’s Offset Program to include international sector-based offsets, including those within the UN's Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD+) framework. 

REDD+ was designed to incentivize the reduction of carbon emissions in developing countries from deforestation and forest degradation, which accounts for 11% of overall GHG emissions, by allowing them to sell emissions offsets for forest conservation and restoration. 

Critiques 

One critique of cap-and-trade is the potential for increasing local environmental health risks when a company buys credits or offsets that allow it to increase its own emissions. Emission sources are often located in or near communities that already experience disproportionate pollution and health burdens, and the concentration of these impacts via cap-and-trade redistribution can exacerbate these disparities. 

With REDD+ there are additional concerns raised about the political, social, economic, and health impacts on communities where offsets are being sold, as well as technical concerns about the equivalence of trades in the forest sector (i.e. carbon emissions are permanent, but living trees are not, and carbon stored in trees is not sequestered long enough to be comparable to fossil carbon, which is stored on the geologic time scale) and difficulties in calculating and verifying offsets. 

In addition, bringing forests into carbon markets increases their value to those who own/control them. This dynamic can lead to land grabs and displacement of forest-dependent and indigenous peoples, particularly in countries with already weak political and social infrastructure. In some cases REDD+ may even incentivize deforestation in advance of project development (so that it can be replanted for credit), and/or the replacement of old growth forests with monoculture plantations. 

 

Lithium 

Lithium is a key component in batteries that power electric vehicles and store renewable energy, but its extraction can come with environmental and public health risks. In California, efforts are underway to extract lithium from geothermal brine in the Salton Sea region, an area already facing severe air and water quality challenges due to legacy pollution and a shrinking, toxic lakebed. As lithium production expands, research is needed to ensure that new extraction technologies protect community health, reduce exposure to harmful byproducts, and support ongoing public health efforts in the region. 

Research Needs 

Research that supports health-protective policy and investments in the development of a California lithium industry, such as: 

  • Research on potential environmental health and equity concerns related to the emerging lithium extraction industry in the Salton Sea 
  • Research on effective strategies for reducing exposures to toxic byproducts of Lithium extraction, and improving health outcomes in the Salton Sea region 

Background & Policy Context 

Lithium Use & Current Sourcing 

Lithium-ion rechargeable batteries power electric vehicles and support the integration of renewable energy sources into the electric grid. However, the extraction and processing of lithium and other mineral resources critical to low carbon technologies can also be a source of environmental degradation and human rights abuses. 

Currently, Lithium is primarily mined in Argentina, Chile, China, and Australia. Argentina and Chile using a lengthy and water intensive extraction method in which pools of brine evaporate in the sun, leaving minerals (including lithium) behind. In China and Australia lithium is extracted from open pit mines and acids, a highly energy-intensive process. Rising demand for lithium has led to dramatic price increases over the past year and raised concerns about the ability of supply chains to keep up. 

Lithium in California 

In 2020, the Lithium Valley Commission (was appointed under AB1657 to bring together government, industry, and community stakeholders to assess the feasibility, benefits, and impacts of extracting lithium from the geothermal brines in the Salton Sea region. The final report of the Blue Ribbon Commission on Lithium Extraction in California and related docketed documents are available on the California Energy Commission website. 

The Salton Sea is California's largest lake, located in Imperial and Riverside Counties near the US-Mexico border. Though the region has experienced periodic flooding throughout its history, what we know today as the Salton Sea was formed in 1905 when a series of canals failed and diverted the entire flow of the Colorado River into the Salton Basin for almost two years. It is currently maintained primarily by agricultural runoff from the Imperial and Coachella Valleys and has become one of the most important wetlands resources for birds in North America, though rising salinity levels and toxic contamination threaten the wildlife that have come to depend on it. 

The Salton Sea is more than twice as salty as the ocean and heavily polluted with pesticides and heavy metals. It has also been receding since the 1990s in the face of hotter, more arid conditions and reduced inflow due to agricultural water conservation practices. Decreasing water levels have exposed large areas of former lakebed, producing toxic dust and fumes that threaten the health of nearby communities, many of which are already burdened by some of the worst air quality levels in the state.

The Salton Sea also sits on top of substantial lithium reserves in the form of highly concentrated geothermal brine. A 2020 report by the California Energy Commission estimates that the Salton Sea could generate more than 600,000 tons of lithium annually, more than all other global sources combined. There are currently 11 geothermal energy plants in the Salton Sea region that already bring this underground brine to the surface to produce electricity. Normally the cooled brine would be re-injected into the ground, but new technologies are being developed to extract lithium first. 

While this new type of lithium extraction is still an emerging technology, the combination of increasing global demand, large underground reserves, and the potential for new cost effective and environmentally friendly extraction technologies is positioning California to take a large and lucrative role in the future of lithium. 

Community-based organizations in the Salton Sea are working to ensure that local residents are involved in shaping that future, and that any resources that come with this new industry include investments in the work they have been doing for decades to clean up the Salton Sea and protect the health of local communities. 

Additional Resources